"...scads of inquirers and inquiries invade a town clerk's office...." Scads? In all the county clerk's offices we have ever been in we have never seen "scads" of genealogists!!!! Let's keep this in perspective! It seems most other states in the union do not need an excuse to stiff out-of-state visitors with fees. Specifically, when those visitors are only searching for ancient documents the county clerks don't even use anymore. In the vast majority of county clerk's offices we have visited the office personnel have always been accommodating, even actively assisting us in some cases. But never have we met hands out in response to our queries. Nor have we been dunned for fees other than for photocopies. We are fully aware that all county employees have more important duties than waiting on people indulging in a hobby. We are always willing to wait for any assistance, but not with big fees attached! WDA and LEA end ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry H. Browning" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 9:44 AM Subject: [CTNEWHAV] Genealogical Access to (CT) Public Records > GENEALOGICAL ACCESS TO PUBLIC RECORDS: > > ...Okay, so maybe I shouldn't stick my oar in on this records access issue, > but...well, here goes: > (Forgive me if I should not be doing this on this particular list). > > ...There are in my opinion, two main sides to this issue: As someone with > 300-plus-years of New England ancestry on all sides....(no better or no > worse than anyone else, just another sense of "uniqueness"), I can > understand the arguement that town and city records which concern my > ancestors, (who "made" that community), ought to be accessible to me and > others without impediment. > > On the other hand...as anyone knows who has been in local government, > especially if one feels responsible to local voters for keeping a reign on > local expenses...(far too few, sadly, take this responsibility seriously > these days), then...having scads of inquirers and inquiries invade a town > clerk's office on any given weekday, can certainly be a distraction to > office staff with other responsibilities, if not the source of a great deal > of extra expense. After all, the primary usefulness of such records is > their application to current legal issues, such as inheritance and property > rights. So is it any wonder that some municipal employees might feel > "put-upon" when asked to deal with genealogical records which do not > necessarily fit into the category of what some would call the "practical" or > "necessary" concern of local government? > > ...I do not necessarily support either viewpoint...I merely offer these as a > representation of both sides of the issue. > > ..So is/are their solution(s)? Well, before addressing that, may I suggest > that there is another controversy inherent in genealogical research which > needs addressing, if our solution(s) are to be effective. You have all > experienced this to some degee...on one side of genealogical research are > the volunteers, who pursue genealogical research mainly of their own lines, > and show a spirit of generosity towards fellow researchers of the same > type...sharing what they know when and where they can. On the other side > are those professional genealogists, either individuals or organizations, > who pursue genealogy for a fee...either to cover costs, or at times, for > profit. There are valid points for both positions... Another major > complication is...copyright. Some genealogical research publications and > directories of over 100 years are in the public domain, though the layperson > is not able to easily determine what is copyrighted, and what is not, which > complicates the reproduction for public posting of out-of-print works of > general interest, making for a rather expensive market-by-default of "rare" > genealogical books. Another important complication is the fact that there > appears to be no "authenticated" source of (internet databased) genealogical > records, so that many, many people are constantly duplicating the efforts of > earlier genealogical recordkeeping...imagine how you would feel if you were > a town clerk assistant, and you knew that the records being requested by the > fifth amateur researcher this month, were already available, and already > cross-referenced, somewhere else, such as in a state library or historical > society? Not only does the lack of a properly authenticated genealogical > database on line cause an infinite amount of duplication of effort...effort > which could be better spent researching genealogical issues not yet > researched...but it promotes the dissemination of already published bad > genealogical work which is copied by amateurs who are not aware of > subsequent corrections or better records sources. (Perhaps one of the best > places to observe this problem of duplication of effort, and of how research > errors can be perpetuated, is on the otherwise wonderful L.D.S. > website...the L.D.S. obviously believing it beyond their capabilities or > control, to be personally responsible for verifying for everyone else, their > vast volume of on-line genealogical data...which they make available to > non-believers without cost). > > So how can the access to genealogical records problem be solved? I suggest > that enough genealogical societies and individuals have to be willing to > abandon...some economic self-interest, to band together in supporting not > only a central repository which is on-line accessible, but also be willing > to contribute to, and support...a situation-by-situation "system of > authenticity", whereby a ranking to primary sources are given to the central > repository's "official" database of family lines, and whereby a bibliography > of sources is posted along with each genealogical entry. This same > repository should then pursue prioritized research efforts, imputting to the > database the highest-ranked primary sources of information first, and then > footnote any discrepancies afterwards. It should also allow for referencing > further research discoveries as they occur, and should include subsequent > research judged "of sufficient value", as it occurs, so that major > controversies can be addressed as well. (For those determined to pull a > profit out of their efforts...I would like to point out that such a system > of primary-source verified records might be more "salable" to the widest > market, if those buying the research could know before paying, that what > they were receiving had some imprimatur of authenticity...after all, more > and more of us are no longer satisfied with the cachet "approved by XYZ > Society", when we know that there are better governmental primary sources > out there... For myself, I believe such a database should seek non-profit > status, and receive its funding through donations and modest usage fees. > Public access on the internet and in libraries to such a database would > solve the problem of municipal records access...no longer would anyone have > to go to the town hall, if an authenticated facsimile of the birth/death > certificate in question, census account, etc., were accessible in both print > and image form through the database, and to the degree good research had > been built into that database, the information would actually be more > concise and more "usable" than that from town hall sources. Also...no > longer would someone have to buy a volume of data, just to access two or > three persons...if the database charged for access, it could charge just for > the information used.... The existence of such a database would also give > independent researchers wishing to donate their own research, a public > repository to give to, which would not try to "profit financially from, and > subsequently market for a fee", their freely-given research donations. I > submit that not all genealogical amateurs have spurious data to offer, and > that quite a bit could be quite valuable...if research standards could be > applied to such free donations, and if the donors didn't sense that they > might be abused by the places to which they donated... > > Now...from a practical standpoint...it is not realistic to expect > genealogical societies with their own long histories as research > institutions, to voluntarily "give up" their own collected work, especially > when they have been able to market that collection to the public, for > remuneration. But the lack of a centralized, primary source > qualitatively-indexed genealogical database, perpetuates many undesirable > impediments to sound genealogical research. It promotes the perpetuation of > inaccurate genealogical work. It is the primary cause of an infinite volume > of duplication of effort. It greatly increases through duplication, the > cost of maintaining archives in numerous diverse places, and it is > responsible for the waste of scads of internet bandwidth. Up to now, > knowing one's family history has been an interesting, > historically-meaningful pastime, but the time is coming, if it is not > already here.. when accurate DNA records will have an important medical and > health application... > > ...Please forgive my use of bandwidth here...if there is a better forum for > addressing these concerns, please tell me where it is... > > > > ==== CTNEWHAV Mailing List ==== > Need to reach Colleen, the discussion coordinator? Send her an email > at <[email protected]>. > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >