Message-ID: <001001c8ccf8$32e3e150$0301a8c0@Jensen> From: "Don Jensen" <dnjkenosha@wi.rr.com> Subject: Re: Collections Policies Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:52:55 -0500
I think the point was missed here. Of course, deaccessioning is a
necessary part of
maintaining a collection. The ONLY issue was whether is is wise or
unwise to auction or sell deaccessioned items locally because of the
possible public relations and image problems.
I think that has now been thoroughly discussed and the means and sources
for obtaining more information have been offered by the professionals in
our midst. No one was "jumping on" any institution for its decisions.
But if THIS is not the place to discuss serious questions about
museumkeeping, what is? It seems to me that we are all big boys and
girls and are capable of an adult discussion from which we might all --
including, most assuredly, me -- can learn something.
--Don Jensen
----- Original Message -----
From: Destinee Swanson
To: localhistory@listserve.uwec.edu
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 11:50 AM
Subject: RE: Collections Policies
Dear All,
I am the Curator of the Sauk County Historical Society, and, although
I have a Master's Degree in History and Museum Studies, I am new to the
field and so I usually abstain from offering my greenhorn opinion on the
listserve discussions.
But I have to say that this particular thread (concerning the case of
auctioning off surplus items to the public) has gotten a little bit
pretentious on some parts. Specifically, I feel bad about the trunk
people being so jumped upon when we haven't even asked them their
reasoning behind this issue.
I agree that, in most cases, it sends somewhat of a mixed signal to
the public if an institution sells items from their permanent
collection--BUT, I also strongly feel that deaccessioning is a vital
part of keeping a healthy collection. And as was mentioned, it is not
always possible to find another home for your deaccessioned artifacts
(or, as is more likely, it is not time- or money-wise to spend, say, 3
hours making 47 phone calls to find an "appropriate" home for, say, your
stack of antique postcards).
I currently feel (and perhaps my views may change with time) that if
an institution is perfectly clear in their reasoning and intentions it
is OK to dispose of artifacts by both selling duplicate items or items
unrelated to the current mission, and "retiring" items that are no
longer viable. (By "retiring" I here delicately refer to discreetly
throwing away/disposing of those things that are either hazardous or
just beyond any functional use [even educational endeavors].)
Even the American Association of Museum's 2004 Code of Ethics does not
rule out the possibility of non-profits selling deaccessioned items.
This Code states that the "disposal of collections through sale, trade,
or research activities is solely for the advancement of the museum's
mission. Proceeds from the sale of nonliving collections are to be used
consistent with the established standards of the museum's discipline,
but in no event shall they be used for anything other than acquisition
or direct care of collections."
I would say that the most important things to remember when making the
serious decision to sell a deaccessioned item is:
(1) Check, doublecheck, and re-check that the artifact has no attached
restrictions (even from long ago) specifically stating that the
institution would NEVER part with it. (In fact, I think I remember from
one of my museum classes some recommendation that the institution might
want to run an ad in the local papers related to the artifact stating
its original donors--if they are known--and asking that if any
descendants--who can legally prove their lineage from said donor--are
interested in claiming the item before its sale, they may do so within
30 days, or some other stipulated amount of time. This could really
cover you later in the event of such a descendant popping up.) AND
(2) Ensure that the deaccession process has been thoroughly carried
out and that they item to be sold is no longer within the institution's
permanent collection--this means to careful and methodical track of ALL
paperwork associated with the deaccession process.
I would also encourage the institution to sell the item through a
third party, and make sure that any buyers have no connection to your
institution (these measures will, to a certain extent, shield your
institution from any "conflict of interest" accusations).
If it is decided to sell the items to the public locally, either
through a live auction, online auction, through the newspaper etc., it
would seem very wise to stress the reason for the item's deaccession and
sale (i.e. the item in no way supports the current mission; the item is
one of several similar already held by the organization; the item was
specifically donated for the purpose of fundraising; etc.), both in
advertising the sale and in the item description (if it is being sold
online or through a newspaper, or at the beginning of the public
auction, etc). At this time, it should also be stressed that the
proceeds will go directly back into caring for the rest of the
collection (and I do agree that this is the only thing that such monies
should go toward. In fact, I would suggest stating this in your
Collections Policy. This will avoid any tendencies or chance that your
institution may rely on such sales to cover budget shortfalls, fund
flashy projects, etc.).
Basically, I am not opposed to selling certain artifacts (under the
right circumstances) because it is better than the alternative--which is
to (1) let them sit unknown, unused, and decaying within your own
collection or (2) end up having to secretly dispose of the item some
other way just to get rid of it when they are perfectly viable and
valuable objects (at least to someone out there).
Sorry if this message is convoluted and confusing! Writing a
persuasive essay on the spot is not my strong suit.
Thanks for everyone's opinions and viewpoints! It makes me feel a lot
better knowing that every other museum/nonprofit has their own issues
and concern--and not just ours.
Destinee K Swanson
P.S. I feel it necessary to state that my opinion is in no way
reflective of the Sauk County Historical Society's Board of Directors,
its members, or its other staff.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
From: dnjkenosha@wi.rr.com
To: localhistory@listserve.uwec.edu
Subject: Re: Collections Policies
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:39:35 -0500
Having initiated the discussion regarding how and where an
institution should dispose of deaccessioned items, I would, of course,
agree that a museum ought to develop and follow written policy covering
the entire aspect of building and managing its collection. And the
manual referred to is a good start to developing such a written policy.
However, I was quite disappointed in reading through it to note that
there is very little in the way of specifics. We are told it is proper
and necessary to deaccession items from time to time. But what are
acceptable ways to do so? Other than the preferred, but not always
possible, route of transferring them to another, more appropriate
institution, we are offered no advice at all.
Happily, the manual said monetary appraisals are not considered
ethical. That is useful, professional guidance. But that's another
matter. The manual is entirely silent on the issue that some of us have
been discussing.
Yes, of course, there should be a policy to deaccession items. BUT
where is the discussion of HOW to do it. It should be obvious that it
is unethical to sell items from the collection to, say, an individual
collector. Yet, I know of instances where small institutions with no
professionally trained staff have done just that! Our discussion
pertained to the wisdom of auctioning deaccessioned items locally, which
is not a matter of ethics but of image and public relations. I have
noted that our professional staff has advised our board against that.
I am disappointed that other museum professionals who are part of
this list have not chimed in on whether they agree or disagree, on
whether they see it as good or bad museum practice to auction, raffle,
sell or trade deaccessioned items locally. Come on, folks, we
non-professionals look to you for sound advice!
Don Jensen
BoD, Kenosha History Center
----- Origainal Message -----
From: Seymour, Janet I - WHS
To: localhistory@listserve.uwec.edu
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 10:52 AM
Subject: Collections Policies
List Serve Members,
Many of you shared comments and ideas regarding the sale of
de-accessioned artifacts. I am sure the discussion was helpful to many.
We at WHS encourage local organizations to develop a collections
policy to help you manage your collection and to maintain consistent
methods for accessioning and deaccessioning artifacts. You can find a
helpful workbook at the link below. It covers how to develop a
collections policy for historical records, but the basic principles of
how the policy should work apply to three dimensional collections as
well.
You can contact me directly if you have further questions about
collections policies, or if you would like to receive a copy by mail.
Thanks,
Janet
http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/libraryarchives/whrab/wclh.pdf
Janet Seymour
Field Services Representative - Northern Region
Wisconsin Historical Society
c/o Department of History, UW-Eau Claire
105 Garfield Avenue
Eau Claire WI 54701
Voice: 715-836-2250
Web: www.wisconsinhistory.org
To subscribe to the local history list serve, send an email to:
localhistory-request@listserve.uwec.edu and type subscribe in the body
of the email.
Post messages, questions, or event notices by sending an email to
localhistory@listserve.uwec.edu.
Review past messages at: http://listserve.uwec.edu/localhistory.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Enjoy 5 GB of free, password-protected online storage. Get Windows
Live SkyDrive.