[NHCOLL-L:2333] Re: (no subject)

[Susan Woodward]

I would agree completely with Jean.  I manage a mammal collection.  We
organize the collection systematically by -Order, Family - and and
alphabetically -Subfamily (Rodents only), Country, Province/State,
County, where appropriate-.  I have developed a few wayfinding documents
and diagrams to assist people using the collection.  The most valuable
of these is a database to the Genus level with the cabinet number or
number range in which each Genus is found.  Sorted lists by cabinet or
genus provide all the info anyone needs to find material in the
collection, assuming they know their alphabet!  To document organization
to any finer level is simply a make-work project.

Good luck,
Susan Woodward


Susan M. Woodward
Assistant Curator
Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation
     Biology - Mammals
Royal Ontario Museum
100 Queens Park
Toronto, ON
M5S 2C6

Phone      416 / 586-5768
                 (internally dial 5084)
FAX          416 / 586-7921
E-mail       susanw @ rom.on.ca  

>>> "Mark McNamara" <MarkM at cctexas.com> 6/17/2004 10:39:13 AM >>>
We have a multidiscplinary collection consisting of 44,000 catologed
specimens divided into Herbarium, Malacology, Geology, Paleontology,
Ornithology, Herpetology, Entomology, Mammalogy, etc.  

We have traditionally recorded the location of the specimens in the
database down to the drawer or shelf in most cases.  This is both
wonderful when you are looking for a specific item and tediuos when
things are disorganized.

I feel that it is essential to know the exact location down to the
drawer, but a co-worker disagrees.

Should we continue this level of organization or would it be
acceptable
to just know what cabinet specimens are located in?

What is the most common/best practice?  Any thoughts?



Your Friend,

Mark McNamara
Natural History Collection Manager
Corpus Christi Museum of Science and History
1900 N. Chaparral Street
Corpus Christi, Texas 78401
Email: MarkM at CCTexas.com 
Web Page: www.CCMuseum.com