Paper vs Microfilm (County Records), fwd

[Richard Boyden <richard.boyden@sanbruno.nara.gov>]

Greetings

Here is a inquiry from the RECMGMT listserv regarding a topic the ties
together two big interests, local govt records and disaster recovery.  If
you already get this list, my apologies.  Of course it is distressing to learn
that so many records were damaged or lost in the Dakotas in last year's
floods

Date:    Thu, 27 Aug 1998 15:21:00 -0400
From:    Peggy Cochran <pnikk@UVSINC.COM>
Subject: Paper vs Microfilm (County Records)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

Hi everyone,
I am Peggy Cochran and have been lurking in the background for several
months now. I am the Records Mgmt Administrator for Underground
Vaults & Storage. I really enjoy this listserve--both the good and the
ugly--and I always enjoy the humor.

Anyway, I now have a request. A gentleman involved with the Disaster
Recovery of the N. Dakota counties from the floods would like to know if
there is any documentation/case studies/justification on keeping the
paper or microfilming land records for counties. These go back to the
beginning of time (well, at least a ways back).  His problem is that
attorneys/historians like the fuzzy warm feeling of using  the paper.
However, the microfilming is more space efficient for storage and very
inactive records. The flooding caught many county Register of Deeds off
guard.  A lot of the paper/books were damaged and no backups.

I know this thread has been discussed before but I didn't save any of
that because I didn't believe I would need it.  Any help any of you can
give me would greatly appreciated. You may respond to me privately if
you wish. 

Thanks!

Peggy Cochran
pnikk@uvsinc.com
316-662-6769
fax 316-662-8871
__________________________________________________________________________
This message was posted through the Stanford campus mailing list
server.  If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the
message body of "unsubscribe bap" to majordomo@lists.stanford.edu