In article <[log in to unmask]>, "Neva J. Smith"
<[log in to unmask]> writes:
> To expand on Anita's comment:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 1995, Anita Cohen-Williams wrote:
>
>> A library is definitely NOT a book museum. Books in a library, for the most
>> part, circulate, while museum artifacts do not. You can handle most of the
>> books in a library, but cannot touch the items in a museum.


Our specimens (bird skins, skeletons, and whole "pickled" carcasses) do, in
fact "circulate".  We lend them on regular bases for standardized periods of
time.  We may be more critical than a book museum about who qualifies for this
lending practice, but our research collection, and even our specimens on
exhibit, can be handled by any qualified patron (any scientist or grad student
studying them, any school teacher, and many artists).

>
> A patron/client may enter (virtually or physically) to obtain and use
> information and items not held by that library. In many situations, the
> library user need not return the information item used- as in the case of
> articles faxed to the patron, or electronic documents obtained via the
> library Internet gateway.


When we send data on our specimens to a patron, we do not ask for its return.
We rarely fax such data, but do send it hard-mail or e-mail.  So, other than
being somewhat more selective in its patronage, I don't see how a museum
differs from a library.  As for the selectivity, that's because there are a lot
more people interested in using books, and more people know how to handle a
book, and books are easier to replace, and books don't have the governmental
regulation that natural history specimens have.

Robin Panza
Section of Birds
Carnegie Museum of Natural History
[log in to unmask]