Which brings me back to my original point that restoring (in some form) and operating equipment does not equate to actually preserving it. While the aesthetics are different - its continued existance is dependent solely at the discretion of its owner. To this end, you may be shaving this morning with a former BRW or M&E alco, or a SRNJ early U-boat.

It is imperative to make this distinction to recongnize that equipment owned by beneovlent owners may one day face new threats - despite their general disposition toward or inital statements about future musuem preservation. The only real way for preservation to happen is for something to be owned by a museum that has both a plan and capability to ensure its long term conservation and care.

Tom Cornillie

As far as modifying the 833 with a HEP package goes, the discussion for now is irrelevant. The NY&GL currently has the URHS U-34CH on the property which they have leased for a number of years now. This locomotive could provide HEP on any potential trips leaving 833 as is.

On the flip side of that, most museums don't have the facilities to accept new pieces as quickly as these engines went on the market a few years ago. Also, had Bennett's locomtives gone to a museum, they would most likely still be languishing in Conrail paint today and their carbodies would be rusting from the inside out under all of the bondo that made them look so good in Pullman green.

Sometimes it takes private caretakers to maintain equipment for future preservation. A very good example is the recent change of ownership with the PRR tailcar Mountain View. If it wasn't for the several private owners over the years she most likely would have been torched like the majority of the PRR passenger fleet. I guess she is now preserved because she is owned by a museum rather than a PV owner. But what constitutes preserved? Under glass where you can't even touch where a sign tells of what it did, or out on the mainline where the experience of riding in a buffet lounge observation car as it was in the 1950's is preserved in living history.

Kevin

One of the endless en-joys gained from reading this board are some of the types of comments that appear within this thread.

Honest to goodness, I don't know where some of you guys get the idea that simply writing a check to buy an item makes that person/group instantly competent on the upkeep or restoration of that item.

AFAIK, the property in question is a contract switching outfit. They have no mainline. They have no shop building or shop crew-and I suspect their depth of expertise on maintaining EMD or GE locomotives is...minimal. My guess is that they maintain equipment of the back of pick-up trucks or car trunks.

The presence of the U34 had something to do with a hair brained attempt to establish passenger service in competition with...NJ TRANSIT. For those who care about the details, look it up. My recollection of the U34 is that many thousands of $$$$ stood between its' current condition and a Blue Card. Personally, a better home for the U34 would be Steamtown or RMPA.

I think the sun set long ago on the Vapor steam boiler. Besides the issue of the dreaded 'A' word, support (in the form of expertise and material) vanished long ago from the railroad scene. There is also the little matter that most of the expense involved in running the thing literally goes right up the stack-not to mention the thirty day inspection requirement, boiler wash, etc.

I am not even going to touch the point that equipment in daily service for a for-profit operator is generally not considered to be restored.

Bottom line-this character has NO track record vis a vis restoring an E unit.

BTW, if anyone wants to argue any of these points-bring it on. I'll be glad to put my forty years on machinery (of all types) up against your expertise. Some of us write and bs about these topics, some of us can actually do the work-and SOME of us can even do both. What a concept.

Dave

BTW, I wonder why it was necessary for someone to take a swipe at Mr. Levin. IMHO, his E's should be the benchmark to detail and craftmanship that everyone should aspire to. Besides, I suspect that he went deep into his own pockets to fund that undertaking.

What constitutes preserved in a museum? Kevin's example of the Mountain View is a good one. It is instructive to compare the condition of the Mountain View, until very recently preserved in private hands, to its sister, to the Tower View, which has been preserved at a museum for roughly the same amount of time. Bottom line is that railroad equipment require some maintenance, even to preserve the status quo. I am encouraged that the Mountain View has gone to the Railroader's Museum at Altoona, and will be preserved within a stone's throw of the PRR mainline where it operated for decades. Hopefully the Museum will be a good steward and preserve, or even better, enhance and improve upon what private owners have accomplished over the years. I would hope that they have the budget and willingness to properly store the car make the little repairs which are always necessary in order to forstall the larger ones which will inevetably follow. Otherwise, they are simply putting of the inevitable scrapping for a few more years.

George

The debate over operation versus "preservation in amber" has been floating about long before Mark Smith started the magazine Locomotive & Railway Preservation, and will continue perhaps forever. I've heard rather vicious, although actually well-thought-out, debate over the pros and cons of preserving cars such as the DC Chapter's Dover Harbor, The URHSNJ NYC Creek obs, and Levin's locos and PRR 120, among many, many others. (The real hot-button issue: can a non-profit be set up to secure grants and garner tax deductions for what is supposedly a historic display piece but, in the eyes of many a club treasurer, is really in function and design an exclusive private-car "country club?" I'm not even going to touch that issue; I just want to show the depths of the complexity of said thoughts.)

The long and short of it is, without operation with which one can properly experience the living creatures, the "zoo" or "nature preserve" of our excursion lines and museums becomes nothing more than a bunch of glass cases of taxidermy displays in the museum of "natural history". Yes, it means some objects will be "consumed"--it's up to us to see that, for example, the Mexicans can "consume" two Alco PAs while we get to preserve two others. It also means addressing that, eventually, even Strasburg #90, or N&W 611 or UP 844, will simply be too old to run with original equipment/boiler/etc.

At the moment, for whatever reason, the Tower View remains perhaps the RR Museum of Pa's biggest embarrassment. I've inquired about the car's current condition and status through official channels and received no response. But if we're going to see both of these PRR observations preserved, of course one should stay in basically-original condition while one stays Amtrak-compatible and sees the rails now and then.

I don't trust museums anymore. I watched the Western Reserve Historical Society ebay one of the Cleveland Twist Drill Co.'s first drill bit milling machine while the man who donated the machine fumed with anger. He thought that it would be preserved in Cleveland and was assured of that by the WRHS but instead its now in a bunker in Canada.

I am witnessing the Ohio Historical Society's long range plans to close the Youngstown Center of Industry and Labor, a facility which I have donated steel related items to in the past. What would happen to the locally significant artifacts and archives that some of us expended quite a bit of effort to obtain? Probably end up warehoused in Columbus since who is going to drive 3 hours to look at Youngstown stuff?

These two examples cause me to distrust museums. The implication is that they will preserve artifacts in perpetuity, but they will tell you anything to get your donation then turn around and sell it off. At least there is no such implied perpetual care with a private owner, we all know that someday it will go on the market again.

"Stationary Steam" seems to operate under the delusion that all museums are permanently carved out of bedrock. Sad to say, even well-funded, "secure" installations such as state archives/museums are never a guarantee of everlasting permanence of either artifacts or missions.

I'm a big proponent of "conditional" donations: if the excursion line becomes the de facto state rail museum and the non-native steam locomotive someone donated no longer fits the mission statement, why shouldn't the donor have a chance (or at least first option) at reclaiming "his" loco?

On the other hand, an artifact like the "Mountain View" at RRers Memorial Museum is considerably less useful to a museum if at any time a donor can yank back his donation just because he doesn't care for a particular action, statement, etc. Levin, in what I consider a brilliant move, just stepped forward, made the acquisition happen, found the money for the car, and made everybody happy save for a few cynical nay-sayers here and elsewhere online.

All these problems are the "administration" side of a museum's operation that the public, and even a lot of the members, seldom gets to see or consider. It's also why, in many cases, what's needed is not a rail enthusiast but an effective bureaucrat, politician, and diplomat.

Any news on 833? The NY&GL itself is in the process of selling its operation in NJ and it looks like it will be the new operator of the Lackawaxen - Honesdale (PA) branch.

I'm a big proponent of "conditional" donations: if the excursion line becomes the de facto state rail museum and the non-native steam locomotive someone donated no longer fits the mission statement, why shouldn't the donor have a chance (or at least first option) at reclaiming "his" loco?


Two Words: Tax Code

The rules that provide for the deductibility of gifts of property , either as a corporate donation or an itemized personal deduction require the donation to be absolute and complete.

Retaining any rights over the property, even if the rights are based on a condition that is of remote likelihood and outside the donor's control would be considered to be an incomplete gift by the IRS.

I can't think of a donor who would retain such rights and forego the deductibility of the gift. Since 501(c)(3)'s are required to dispose of property only to another tax exempt organization, most people will take the deduction and be satisfied with that requirement as something of a guarantee that their donor intent will be honored.

I don't think the disposition comment is correct. A 501c(3) can sell something to anyone, either for-profit, or not-for-profit. If the not-for-profit goes out of business then usually the by-laws are required to state that the remaining assets go to another not-for-profit.

That being said, the sale of any assets by a not-for-profit are controlled by certain IRS regulations related to self enurement (sp?) and self dealing. In other words you can't sell the prize steam locomotive to your wife for $1.

Tim Andrews

This is problem in many fields of preservation. Thirty years ago a major museum decided to dispose of a large collection of company archives that been donated several years before. They did not deem the collection significant.

My father brought the banker sized boxes home, one at a time for almost a year and sorted through the contents of negatives, photos and company printed material. He made sure that each item was reviewed for relevance and then was distributed to other like minded individuals to ensure preservation. It was interesting that this company, although not in the railroad industry looked at producing a self-propelled diesel car based on their technology. Proposals were made to all the major railroads. I have that file and will make sure it eventually gets into the right hands.

My father, was a noted archivist and author in the aviation field. Having passed away a few weeks ago, rather suddenly, my sister, brother and I now face the nightmarish task of disposing of his collection of books, magazines, company reports, photos, promotional models and the like, collected over sixty years (which if you do the math covers 60% of the history of flight). Probably a moving van full.

Calls from fellow historians and enthusiasts have revealed that other areas of historic interest have some of the same personalities and "self-interests" as railroads. We have been told to "stay away" from some well known national museums ("the collection will never see the light of day") and asked to support a museum with one runway, one hanger and one locomotive, I mean airplane ("the collection would give this museum instant creditibity"). So we in the rail preservation are not alone with our "unique ways"

We have determined that we will take proposals from interested parties and than try to make an educated selection. It would have been easier to call BFI or offer it all on ebay, but we have a duty to make sure that this collection remains available to future generations. It certainly won't go to the institution eluded to above.

Tim Andrews
Chattanooga, TN

Yes, they can sell anything.

Generally however, a railroad museum wil not be be disposing of a locomotive, unless its a trade with another tax exempt or dissolution-especially if they want to retain accredidation with professional organizations-whih would require a formal deaccessioning.


You are correct, and what i was unclearly referring to was disposition upon dissolution.

In any case, you still won't be finding many donors placing conditions on their donated property that will preclude the receipt of a tax deduction.

Let's correct one point now:

Not EVERY donation to a museum or non-profit is driven by the tax deduction offered.

In the library for which I do some volunteer work, I swear that for every bozo that demands a receipt for the donation of two relatively recent railroad magazines, we have someone that donates hundreds of high-value, rare books and dismissively waves off any proffered receipt or inventory for tax purposes.

Some people just want to see the stuff go to a good home. But in some cases, the "good home" is no longer so "good" after a change or two of administrations. I personally know of one rather ugly squabble going on where an "artifact" now worth six figures on the open market was donated to a rail museum with all the best of intentions, but now said artifact is thoroughly outside the scope of the collection, and there's no good/legal way to either deaccession the item nor return it to the family of the original donor, who would love to sell the artifact and put the money to better use for the museum's collections........ and the worst part? If there was even a tax deduction for the original donation, it was probably for about $500-1000, the approximate value of the item back when it was donated.

I was intrigued by Stationary Steam's comments about the two museums in Ohio, in light of ongoing discussions about another Electro-Motive product, the Erie 5012 gas electric car, which has rusted and rotted away for decades in Worthington without much recognition of its ties to Ohio (Alexander Winton, etc.).

Out of curiousity I went to the Western Reserve Historical Society website and ran a search for various topics including Winton Engine Company, Winton Diesel, and Cleveland Diesel (the successor to Winton Engine) which had three plants in the Cleveland area and built engines for over 12,000 vessels during World War Two.

Based on the results (or lack thereof), I am not too surprised that they auctioned the milling machine that Stationary Steam mentioned. They may not have understood its significance. Princess Diana seems to command greater attention in Ohio than Ohio history does.