Destruction of records

[Gillg]

It seems that records of various kinds, but particularly ones which would interest family history searchers, re being destroyed, apparently "to save space", e.g. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj4wn00pz48o
Do the authorities who decide to destroy these records not know that paper documents can be scanned and stored for later reference? 
A project I worked on some time ago required applicants to submit a paper form and attach additional information, also in paper form.  This information was entered onto a computer, but the actual paperwork was then physically stored in a vault.  In the end there were many more documents in the vault than had been expected, when the project grew exponentially, and the solution was to have them all scanned, which reduced the amount of storage to a very small space.  A firm was brought in to do the job and the paper copies were finally destroyed. 

[Kerrill]

Tragic 

[RJ_Paton]

It is tragic - especially for those in the particular case highlighted.

Realistically though who would pay for the digitisation of these records or even for additional storage space if it was decided to keep the papers.

As far as the suggestion to digitise and dispose of the originals to create space , this was proposed by the Government for some archives and there was a huge outcry against it.

[MollyC]

We had this saga a little while ago about original wills from 1858 onwards.  What people are not doing is operating a Modern Records Management system, with staff who are qualified similarly to archivists.  The retention period for a class of records is decided at the start, but when it is nearly expired they are assessed and it should be decided if they are of archival value, and if so, where they should go.  This is what The National Archives does on behalf of the Government, and there are laws about disposal of government papers, the Public Records Acts.

You may remember a dept. in the Library of Congress raising complaints about Donald Trump taking government records to Florida, because it was illegal, and they were not afraid to say so!

There is always the risk that digitisation misses a page.  Just last week I emailed TNA to ask if one page from a free download could be rescanned because it is out of focus.  This is the reply, very professional.

"The image is poor, and we have requested that it be re-filmed as well as re-scanned. I am sure you will appreciate that this is a long and delicate process and will take a minimum of 25 working days to complete. We will send the new document to you via e-mail, as soon as the process is complete."

South Yorkshire Police has admitted recently destroying papers relating to the Battle of Orgreave, now there is an enquiry in prospect.  Heads should roll.  They clearly got bitten by the Hillsborough disaster enquiry, but there is apparently no-one there whose job it is to say NO.  Any business or charity or society should use the expertise of their local archives service to ask for free advice.  It is a little known duty of the services to visit private collections and do just that.

[Andrew Tarr]

It's a lovely idea to imagine digitising old records so we could all see them online, but while doing that we should remember the long-term cost of that, mainly in server space and the surplus heat that generates, adding marginally to the threat of global warming.  It's so easy to imagine that keeping more stuff online costs nothing !

[MollyC]

I should have said local archives will also offer free storage in cases where the archive is of local importance, or advise about another collection which may accept it.  There is a long term cost to providing storage.  There are ways of reducing the volume that actually needs to be kept and packaging it to occupy the least space.  However, once an archive has been destroyed there is no going back.

[RJ_Paton]

where the archive is of local importance

And there lies the crux of many problems - who decides what is important.

It is entirely possible that what I consider important differs from what others consider to be important especially if they have no or little interest in Family History.
It is not always possible to preserve every record or every piece of information and in many cases privacy regulations could prohibit their retention and in the case of private businesses who cease trading who should pick up the bill ?

[MollyC]

All archives operate closure periods in the same way as The National Archives.  This can be at the request of a private depositor, or following the legislation.  They are not prohibited from retaining anything, only from making it immediately available.  TNA delegates the retention of local public records (health and courts) to local archives under the same rules.

So far, the bill is picked up by the local authority.  There is a danger this service may suffer in the present financial climate but the expenditure is probably of more lasting benefit than many local authority functions.  They are capable of selecting records which should be kept, bearing in mind possible interests which may arise, family history or otherwise.  Archives hold many collections from local businesses or other organisations, which may have survived by luck, or because they were invited to view the accumulation of records and make informed decisions about it.  If an archive hears that a significant business is about to closed or be sold, a letter will be sent suggesting they may be able to help.