In a message dated 96-05-29 20:30:12 EDT, [log in to unmask] (Hank Burchard)
writes:

>     Point of order here. If you feed a zoo's rabbit to the zoo's fox, can
>that be called deaccessioning? Isn't that just internal downsizing?
>
>

I was waiting for someone to bring this up. I know that the term deaccession
is a museum specific word (and does not exist elsewhere), but internal
downsizing? Could that term be applied to corporate America when
low-man-on-the-totem-pole employees are suddenly MIA and executives are seen
to be smacking their lips? I would need an example of internal downsizing as
applied to a museum collection to make the comparison in order to draw the
conclusion. It is my belief that  collections which are eaten by other
collections are in fact deaccessioned (the natural follow-up to
accessioning). But it brings to mind another humorous story:

After being hermetically (supposedly) sealed for about 40 years, an exhibit
case in a Nat. Hist. museum was opened so that conservators could inspect the
artifacts (mostly textile). They had with them a hand drawing of the layout
of the case, complete with a numbering system which identified each object in
the case. Much to their dismay, one of the pieces was not there! Assuming
illegal activity, an ivestigation was begun. After careful research and the
application of museum specific knowledge (no doubt acquired at GWU), it was
determined that over time, and apparently without notice, the textile object
had been eaten by bugs! The question put forth by the registrar was a
straight-faced "so what do you want me to say? Was it deaccessioned or
stolen?"

- Adrienne