In a message dated 8/25/2004 11:45:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Chris Flynn <[log in to unmask]> writes:

>They had uncovered a treasure trove of old
>records. By volume he estimated a full 16% of the records held by the county
>were permanent historical records.

apples and oranges. I suspect most RMs would say that less than 5% of the identified records series are of permanent historical value. Now as to the volume that those records occupied they could very well take up a large amount of space.

In the case you cite the permanent historical records may represent 16% by volume, but only (for arguments sake) 4% of the identified records series.

Peter A. Kurilecz CRM, CA
Richmond, Va
[log in to unmask]

List archives at
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance