Not a whole lot has changed in it in a while either. Last I knew (a yera ago or better), she had severe body rot where the sides met the frame, with rust holes that one could stick a finger through. Like most of the streetcars/ interrubans, she was covered with tarps, but that as about it.

The cleanup of the site was a great deal better than from my Denison-days of the mid-1990's, however; I remember being given a tour of the Columbus, Delaware, & Marion car, and seeing where water had built up in the milk glass ceiling fixtures to the point ice had formed and cracked or otherwise damaged them. Given the intensive investment in this equipment initially to get it restored in the 1960's and 1970's, it was definitely a sad state indeed. Here's hoping that new focus will continue to show fruits.

I'm not sure what the state is on the other one that used to be at the Henry Ford Museum, and was sadly in much worse condition. I believe it may have gone to IRM, yet another case of a piece of Michigan's transport history leaving the state because we can neither afford to take care of it, or choose not to.


TJ

Ditto to what Brian said. And the list grows a great deal longer when you include museums with railroad-related items in their collection, but may not be considered a traditional rail museum. My former employer, for instance; The Port Huron Museum is probably known more for its Marine Heritage and Art Collections, however since 2001 they have one of two surviving GT Fort Gratiot Car Shops (burned 1913) repaired combines (other at Mid-Continent), and the 1858-built depot that Edison worked out of as a boy.

Fact is, especially in economically strapped states such as Michigan, the first thing many Boards think will "solve the problem" is to begin to sell collections. Ideally, nothing should be accessioned without thorough thought and a severe test against a TIGHT, WELL DEFINED mission statement in the first place; that said, something should not be deaccessioned without the same. Sadly, I have seen too many cases were over-eager Boards begin selling off items willy-knilly, only to find that those pieces which they consider "junk" become extremely valuable when they realize missing or lost associations, changes in focus, etc.
In short --- like the Pirate Code, they are "more or less guidelines," but
after seven years in the museum-biz, I and Karl Malden wouldn't run a museum without them. Accesion and deaccesion aren't just fancy words for "getting rid of items" --- they delinate that thought, discussion, and HARD choices were made before something was moved on to a better place. I'm all for better homes ---- just make sure they really ARE better homes.



TJG

Henry Ford did a lot of work on 3865, the car which is now at IRM, including new side sheets and a lot of sandblasting work. Its exterior was completely restored to approximate original condition and it looks pretty sharp. It has a lot of problems though; the interior was completely disassembled and a lot of parts and pieces were lost, plus the only pattern for putting it all back together is under a tarp in Ohio. The traction motors were also filled with sand when the car was sandblasted, so at best they'd need a complete rebuild. I'm not sure about the state of the car's wiring either. For now, it is in IRM's Barn 7 on display and there are no plans to work on it in the near future.

AAM views it's Code of Ethics for Museums--
http://www.aam-us.org/museumresources/ethics/coe.cfm--
as a formal statement of the ethical principles museums and museum professionals are expected to observe. It therefore applies to all museums, not just AAM's Members.

I encourage everyone involved in museum administration to read the code if you have not done so before--it is a very useful document. In crafting and amending the code, AAM has taken care to solicit wide input from a variety of museums of all types, collections, sizes, and governance structures. The code sets out broad principles that define good practice, at a high level of generality--how to apply those principles in the context of a specific museum or type of museum is left, deliberately to the museum itself.

It's also important to understand that AAM is not an enforcement or compliance agency--the purpose of the code is to define a set of professional practices, and part of AAM's mission is to equip museums with the tools and trianing they need to adapt them to their own circumstances. The focus is on education and assistance, not regulation or coercion of any kind.

As a real-world practical matter, any museum is free not to follow the AAM code. At the same time, any member of the public is equally free to ask a museum's leadership to justify why it would choose not to follow the general code of the profession. It is the public at large--not AAM or any other museum association--to which museums are accountable.

And yes, Brian is quite right, there was and is still debate about whether funds from deacessioning should only be used for acquire new collections (the "strict" position) or can also be used for care of collections (the current "flexible" position). There is no universal definition of care of collections, and it is possible to get a huge variety of actual uses of the funds generated by a deaccesison and sale in under that "tent." It is not generally regarded as an onerous or "tight" restriction.

The Western Railway Museum is also a member of AAM. I just mailed our dues renewal today.

Al Stangenberger
Treasurer

frank-
Wow; count me VERY pleased, and thanks for the update/ correction. Last time I saw this car, it was outside, stripped, (a gutted shell) at the Ford. This cosmetic restoration (even with the issues you mentioned, many of which I knew) is more than many of us here in Michigan could have ever hopped for.

We'll put Erik, and as is usually the case, much more eloquently than this sloberer of words/ bane of the English Language....


TJG

So what became of the N&W 4-6-2? Did Ohio Central acquire it, or did they decide to just stick with the Nickel Plate 2-8-4 from Roanoke?

As far as I know the deal for N&W 578 between the museum and Ohio Central fell through almost 1 1/2 to 2 years ago I thought. I think it was about the time Ohio Central said no more public excursions. Thus the museum decided not to go thru with the deal. That is my understanding of the situation.

I believe the ORM has narrowed its focus to include only traction equipment, a wise move in my opinion since that has been their true focus all along. Getting rid of the non traction equipment will free up scarce resources to better care for their other equipment.