How much irreplaceable Cleveland history has been lost by these goons?

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/03 ... soc_3.html

How not to manage your steamship?

http://www.nobska.org/

We are going to see a lot more of this... even more than the last decade. This is going to be a good decade to be a private collector (if you have the funds). Potential donors have a lot to think about. The comments about donors in the article is very telling.

Rob

Unfortunately, THIS thread could get VERY long and VERY ugly. I can write my own chapter based on my experiences, but won't for now.

I'm sure others will be forthcoming with their thoughts......

Mark

For those of you that are not involved with a museum, let me tell you that even a small organization like ours, that has no salaried employees, has expenses that must be met. These are daily operating expenses and do not inclue any acquisitions or maintenance of existing equipment. We have had to pass on some significant pieces because we couldn't afford the price to transport these items.

So when a group of people attempt to save an historic piece of equipment, they do so in stages. Rarely does one find enough money up front to fund the entire operation. So while it is truly sad that the steamship is gone, it isn't like they didn't try to save her.

And again I'll put the challenge out there for all. Instead of making derogatory comments about this organization or that group, get involved. Get your butts out and help maintain or restore that historic equipment. And if you are to old or incapable to help with physical labor, man the museum or gift shop; give tours; become a docent; give money! But don't jut sit there behind the keyboard and pass judgement on those that are giving it their all.

And thanks to those that are involved in this endevour to keep history alive.

Later!
Mr. Ed
Trustee, member, volunteer-Pemberton Township Historic Trust

The truly sad part is the Nobska was scrapped over 3 years ago, and to my knowledge the drydock has sat empty since. Photo was taken last weekend.

I've seen that plenty in commercial real estate, when a building owner tosses out a long term tenant in the hopes of really raising the rents--then the building sits vacant for years. Brilliant.

I would almost wonder if the dry dock owner had doubts about the long term prospects of the Nobska organization and figured to get the cash while he could. 'Course serves him right if he's had no other vessels since--too bad some non-profit couln't own a dry dock--think Strasburg for the marine set.

Michael Seitz
Missoula MT

[quote="Stephen Hussar"]The sadest part is the Nobska was scrapped over 3 years ago, and to my knowledge the drydock has sat empty since. Photo was taken last weekend.

quote]

Reading the entire Plain Dealer article, it now puts the dispersal of the Lake Shore Electric Railway materials into context. Apparently, the city of Cleveland had a lot to do with the aborted Western Reserve's plans for a new exhibit hall near the lakefront airport, just as the city's troubles derailed the lakefront trolley museum.

Sad lesson learned.

In this case the drydock "owner" was the NPS.

Stephen

Skullduggery in the preservation movement has been around for decades, so museum leadership must be vigilent to assure proper stewardship.

In 1964, Lucius Beebe wriote in the Foreward (sic) to Some Classic Trains by Arthur D. Dubin:

"The acquisition of railroad memorabilia and rare photographs achieved such passionate dimension that an accomplished art collector, to whom the theft of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre would have been a mere finger exercise, looted the New Haven Railroad of its picture file in its entirety and ended his days in jail."

Sloan

Mr. Ed touched on realities, and it is hard to deny that owners of rare artifacts are feeling more pressure to sell some to meet financial needs. There have been recent articles about University-owned museums selling off artifacts to make up for short comings.

I predict that the next 5 years are going to see a lot of railroad pieces traded, sold or scrapped. The current situation is unsustainable (rusting hulks, increased economic demands and resources for required maintenance of primary displays).

It's been well documented here that trolleys in IL were recently scrapped by a museum in favor of some of the Cleveland equipment in better condition... you've got the NRM efforts to eliminate displays (other than #261), the well publicized MOT de-accession... and more are being planned.

Not all of this will be bad. You could end up with more integrated exhibits and museums with a tighter focus. But you could also end up with a lot of personal favorite pieces gone for good. However, as I mentioned earlier, it might be a good opportunity for you if that is what you want.

There are still steam-era relics to save from the weeds, but we are now a point where most of what could be "saved" has been. That means the next great rationalization comes from the "saved" lot.

It is going to be interesting...

Rob

The Nobska project was managed by people where were either incompetent or dishonest.
My first meeting of the restoration committee was led by a man who said the ship, 210 feet long would be equipped with one boiler. "That's boiler singular, not boilers plural a boiler like this can not be made in this country, we will have to go overseas to have it made" his words No single boiler made would produce the amount of steam he wanted to produce and fit in the allocated space. The same person made it clear that he would make all the decisions and we were there to agree with him.
At a later meeting George King made some recommendations, these recommendations were summarily rejected by the same individual. George King quit.
Work on the hull progressed for two years, slowly. The restoration of the hull entailed essentially a complete removal and replacement of the entire keel, most of the frames and the shell plating or strakes from the keel to the main deck. While it would have been more sensible to construct a new hull. A new hull would lost it historic authenticity.
The job was shut down for financial reasons, funds were needed for the depressed central highway project, better known as "The Big Dig"
When a year later the hull restoration was restarted a new contractor was hired. This time work progressed much faster! The plans approved by ABS were ignored. It was decided that the remaining keel could be reused. The strakes were formed to shape, off site and attached vertically, even thought the design and lines of the ship called for the strakes to be run horizontally. The frames were placed inside the hull, but not assembled or mounted in position, that was to be done later, after the strakes were in place. When I looked at the strakes mounted side by side with anything from no gap between them to a 3/8" gap between them I asked about edge preparation for welding.
I was told that would be done later.
There was no inspection done by either the Coast Guard, ABS or any other inspection agency. When the money ran out the contractor left the job. Every one was assured that all that was necessary was to weld all the open seams on the hull. Assurances were given that welders would have no trouble completing the job at a later date.
Nobska occupied the dry dock about ten years at no cost.
The National Park Service bent over backwards to accommodate the project and got kicked in the head for their efforts. Do not blame the NPS for the outcome. The Nobska trustees walked away, leaving the hull in no practical condition to finish. The NPS had to scrap the remains at their own expense after $3,000,000 in federal funding went in to the project.
As a side note. A portion of the keel and a portion of some frames were preserved. Why? I was told with the portion of the original keel the hull can be rebuilt at a lated date persevering the original hull number. At the same time there was no effort made to save the large copper piping on the top of the engine that connected the four cylinders together.
The engine is still I believe in Fall River, MA Almost completely dismantled. The engine was removed to be rebuilt at the New Bedford Technical High School. Even though the last engineer who served on the Nobska was available to help in the rebuilding and would have gladly volunteered his time, someone else was hired to do the work, some one with no experience with reciprocating engines "He is a Mass Maritime graduate, he knows all about it" I was assured by an enthusiastic trustee.
I expect to be damned for what I write here, but those are the facts.

No way, thanks for taking the time to fill in some of the blanks. This subject has come up (here) many times over the years, and it's nice to hear from someone close to the project.

Stephen

Returning to the general topic at hand........

It appears to me that the whole issue of museum administration, accredition, and "credibility" at times seems like both a noble goal and a millstone.

On the one hand, no one wants to see a museum run by a clique or "overlord" or operated like a little fiefdom. We most likely have all seen something of that kind: a private collection of stuff operated under the somewhat questionable guise of a "railroad museum" or excursion line; a preservation effort largely dependent upon the good graces and fortune of a single benefactor or two; administrators with personal agendas that, to make up an example, go get a streamlined observation car when the railroad is a 19th-century museum.

At the other end of the pendulum swing, we see museums that are "professionally" administrated, but can't accept or deaccession anything without invoking massive parliamentary procedures and/or an act of God, can't find a way to let a private donor underwrite a restoration project, has become hidebound by massive layers of legal or political bureaucracy, and/or has a massive library or photo collection that can't be accessed because it needs to be "properly curated."

I can personally recount the following account: While attempting to do photo research for a book project some years back, I went to two institutions, one a major city/state historical society and one a library. Both were quite professional and had good reputations as archives.
The first location, after signing in for my appointment, had me go through the index and fill out, by hand, a requisition slip for EACH AND EVERY photo I wished to examine, based on its catalogue description. Each withdrawal took, on average, five minutes, and from there it took maybe a second at most to make a decision as to whether the photo was of use or not. If it was of use, there was a whole different protocol for requesting a scan, copy print, etc. with sliding fees. In one afternoon, I found two photos of use.
The second location, after a rigorous security clearance and check as to my intentions, sent me back to the photo department, then after one more "strip search" to leave behind pens and sharp, pointy things, heard my search and basically said "put on the cotton gloves; the 'quick and dirty' file is over there; if you have more specific needs, start with that file or this row; if you need something more yet, look in this inventory and we'll see what we can find for you. If it's in that 'quick and dirty' file, we may already have hi-res scans in the computer; if not, talk to us." In less than an hour, I was trying to figure out which photos I had room to use out of the forty or fifty I had located, and would spend more days securing many more such photos.

Now, consider which of the institutions above is considered more "professional" in the eyes of museum studies, curators, benefactors, etc.
Now, consider which one was of more use to me, the researcher, and which one actually furthers the mission of education and preservation.


Have any of you ever been to a meeting--business, societal, whatever--being run by someone with a very dog-eared copy of Robert's Rules of Order? Have you ever seen shouting matches erupt over whose turn it was to speak, and why? Have you ever seen a meeting where the point of the meeting seems to be having the meeting, and not actually discussing the upcoming festival, or the restoration project's progress report, or what to do with the money someone left the group?

A similar mindset seems to drive any number of institutions. In the pursuit of "professional standards" or institutional recognition among peers, the actual mission statement can often go astray. At an extreme, to cite a stereotyped/cliched example, a university can get so wrapped up in publishing papers, securing top professors, and getting grants and endowments that it loses track of actually educating students.

Although we may bemoan the seemingly lackadaisical or "incompetent" administration of a certain museum and its operable 4-8-4, the other extreme can often be just as bad, from a functional standpoint. It's a delicate dance with no formal dancing diagram, and at best one or two dancing instructors with their own agendas.

I concur with Stephen's observations and thank Rollerman for his account of the Nobska restoration. That really helps fill in the blanks about what went wrong.

While it may not be too pleasant to discuss efforts that have resulted in failures, there is the potential to learn things that can avoid repeating the same mistakes. Failed projects that attract widespread newspaper publicity and take millions of dollars of taxpayers money to the scrap yard do not help the environment for other preservation efforts and their supporters.

PC