I was presuming that:

1)  there is a HUGE volume of paper records involved, and
2)  there is just no way of guessing what will be of interest to future 
researchers.





>From: Steven Whitaker <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [RM] Does anyone still use Microfilm?
>Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:21:29 -0700
>
>Microfilm is not cheap to reference information.
>
>I would also not consider it cost-effective way to transmit
>information.
>
>
>Best regards, Steve
>Steven D. Whitaker, CRM
>Records Systems Manager; City of Reno
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 08/15 6:45 PM >>>
>Microfilm is cheap, relatively speaking.
><snip>
>
>List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
>Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance