From: "1GDW" <>
>
> I am requesting feedback to questions regarding bird sound
> recordings that would be submitted and subsequently stored with the
> Iowa Ornithologists' Union records committee. At present there are
> no archived sound files of the states birds. I am requesting
> comments that would helpful in establishing guidelines for the
> recordists and committee members. The guideline for the recordist
> could help identify pertinent information about the sound. I
> realize that no one can foresee the future but I think the financial
> and technical resources of the committee will dictate storage
> options. Should the committee only except files in a digital
> format? I think I am asking, should there be a minimal requirement
> for excepting/archiving the data. I am aware of the storage medium
> problems at this time, i.e.: CD life expectancy, optical disks, etc..
> 1GDW
There are several aspects about this.
First off, and extremely critical:
There should be accurate location information with the sample. Ideally,
all samples would be submitted with a GPS reading. That may not be
practical as there could still be people without GPS, so a alternative
of latitude and longitude read off a Topo or such like might be
substituted. What was done in the Georgia Herp Atlas was that the
location submitted was pinned down in a computer map program (Street
Atlas). That program will read out the latitude and longitude. In the
end every report has the equivalent of a GPS reading.
In the Herp Atlas nothing else was reliable. Street names could be
different on each map, if there even was a name. Even official maps
differed from the signage in the field.
Obviously the more field data with each recording the better. How much
you can get from a variety of recordists, many of which are not
scientists, is something to decide.
Avoid a system that's based on some sort of limited statistical
requirements. I've seen far too many field surveys that are very poor
because of limitations placed in the name of pretty statistics.
I believe the collection should standardize to a common digital format,
it's easier to maintain. Right now I'd think audio CD would be it. But,
they should accept recordings in any reasonable format and be prepared
to convert them. They should have the ability to take in at least
reel-reel, cassette, DAT, minidisc and so on. They should be able to
work with the standard audio file formats of both Mac and Windows, ie
.wav and aiff at least. Considering the equipment that's available they
may get mp3 submissions too. None of that precludes suggesting audio CD
as the submission format. Just limiting the submission format will limit
how much is submitted.
Optical disks would be more reliable than audio CD, but more prone to
being abandoned as a format. I currently archive my collection in both
formats. For the same reason I'd not suggest that they archive in any
computer file format alone. Computer formats are not trustworthy to be
here long term.
In any case, they have to maintain the archive, recopy everything on a
regular schedule and so on. No medium is infinitely trustworthy. This
maintenance needs to be understood from the start.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|