The collection in Scranton was donated to the NPS by the Vice Chairman of the Steamtown Foundation, John Luciani, on 8-25-89, at which time the collection, in its entirety, was accessioned (STEA-00001 and STEA-00002) in order to document NPS ownership. During the 2001 collection inventory the Park Historian determined that the rolling stock were historic structures and not museum objects. As a result, on 3-7-01, Kip Hagen authorized the removal of 43 locomotives, passenger cars, and rolling stock from the museum property list retroactively to the original accession date(s) and so, technically, the locomotives, passenger cars, and rolling stock in Scranton are owned by NPS but were never an accessioned part of the collection.

"Is there a published mission statement out there to use as a starting point for consideration?"

There is a Comprehensive Interpretative Plan (2003).

http://www.nps.gov/stea/getinvolved/planning.htm

So wait, what does that mean in terms of money? Would any of the rolling stock qualify for restoration funds that are NOT drawn from the SNHS budget, but rather the NPS budget as a whole? I mean, after all, none of it should be considered as part of the physical plant of the park.

On the flip side, what is to prevent the NPS from scooping up whatever equipment they want and distributing it to other federal preservation sites?

Interesting.

Well, let's see. They didn't acquire a "contract." They bought the entire company, including all locomotives, rolling stock, track, right-of-way, and satellite hotels, restaurants, etc. I happened to be in Williams the very day the sale was announced (Sept. 21, 2006), and the Williams/Grand Canyon News and Arizona Daily Sun (Flagstaff) went into excruciating detail for obvious reasons. Remember, the company itself had been on the market publicly for six months beforehand.

The mission of the Grand Canyon National Park is not to preserve and interpret steam railroad operations. It is to facilitate visitation to a spectacular but remote natural wonder. Xanterra does that through the provision of lodging, transportation, and hospitality services at Williams and the Canyon itself. How well? Open to debate. Like WalMart and other "700-pound gorillas," people both love and loathe them.

The point, which apparently went right over someone's head, is NOT to have Xanterra take over Steamtown operations. I don't think they'd be interested for several reasons, for one thing. The point is that there exists a precedent, and a massive one at that, for private partnerships and contract work with the NPS. And if Brother Superheater has not examined such partnerships at other NPS operations more fully and accurately, then it calls into question in my head his otherwise-worthy-sounding "Friends of...." proposal.

6-18003 - What it means is that the 43 locomotives, passenger cars, and rolling stock on the list from '01 are treated just like the historic structures on the site and are not part of the collection. Practically, what this does is put these objects under the control of the Park Historian, Pat McNight, while everything else is the responsibility of the Museum Curator, Sarah Smith. To me, this is one of the organizational impediments to a complete well coordinated all-encompassing management of all of the artifacts on the site and why the inventory of a lot of the items in the yard, on the scrap dock, up on the hill where they load the coal, upstairs in the shop, stored in cars in the yard, and in the administrative building basement, is incomplete or nonexistent.

"Well, let's see. They didn't acquire a "contract." They bought the entire company, including all locomotives, rolling stock, track, right-of-way, and satellite hotels, restaurants, etc."

And you think the company doesn't have a contract, permit, agreement or something else to permit to allow those things to be operated. The locomotives are chattel, but I'm betting that the real properties are not owned fee simple, and could not be demolished by Xanterra. But neither of us has the contract, so we don't know the terms (technicalities).

"The mission of the Grand Canyon National Park is not to preserve and interpret steam railroad operations."

Precisely, I'm glad you see that difference.

"I think the suggestion is less about Xanterra taking over in Scranton and more about potential partners such as the new non-profit group being able to exercise those same freedoms and opportunities. In other words, the precedent has already been set."

Actually, the very first post here was about a designated operator (which somehow is going to make it on 3 mill) and I claimed there was no authority to do that. What Mr. Rowland and Mr. Mitchell don't seem to realize is that Xanterra is only something of a concessionaire, in much the same way that Eastern National runs the bookstore, not responsible the ENTIRE operation -which is what Mr. Rowland has been pitching for YEARS.

I note that in the FY16 green book, the funding is virtually flat in nominal terms.

FY14 Actual: $5.568m
FY15 Enacted: $5.610m

FY16 President's Request $5.680m


"Do you hear yourself when you talk?"
-Owen Grady

You both appear to be blatantly ignoring each others' points. I'm gonna need more popcorn for this one.

That's just odd. Is there any advantage to this arrangement that I am not seeing?

I'm going to bed. I just watched Jurassic World and I'm getting tired of telling the Vic Hoskins' that their plan to weaponize the raptors is a bad idea. Hey, that does give me an idea.. weaponizing Twitter and Facebook. Perhaps we should have an FAQ Section answering persistent critics.

This all comes down to one thing. You are either part of the solution or part of the problem.

Nothing productive is going to come yammering away here, with snake oil salesmen pitching magic bullets, or those who dismiss realities as "technicalities". These people are not involved with Steamtown and never have been. The complaints are neither novel or helpful, because the proposed solutions are always inchoate, impracticable, or not legal that are merely figleafs for the real agenda, demolition.

Am I suddenly supposed to think the Visigoths (it was those guys, right?) pulling back on their catapults are really interested in the health of Rome? I don't know what's more insulting, that they peddle boulders as bouquets or they think I can't tell the difference.

I know what's been reported in two books and a couple newspaper articles. And I have a closer source than those as well, with whom I've discussed such intricacies.

We happen to be talking about two different things. Xanterra was already the concessionaire in the park for the properties such as the El Tovar Hotel and other historic Fred Harvey buildings. The purchase of the Grand Canyon Railway simply expanded their operations to newly-built hotels, the historic depot (owned outright by the RR and not the NPS), etc. in Williams, and the railroad.

And, yes, the line could, at least in theory, still be scrapped. Remember that the Biegerts sort of "accidentally" ended up owning the northern 20 miles of the line when Railroad Resources, Inc., which bought the line for scrap from the Santa Fe in 1984, defaulted and were foreclosed upon after a mile of track had been ripped up north of Williams. There could be some new right-of-way protections or covenants in place since the line was resurrected for excursions, but I am unaware of any.

I don't know about your friends and allies. But, personally, when attempts at potentially constructive analyses and observations on such "political" matters are greeted with Balkanization and polarization of this nature, my usual response is to turn around and walk away. And if I'm feeling gracious, there won't be single specific hand digits raised as I retreat.

In other words, with that brusque abruptness, you've just lost this potential supporter. And by everyone else's standards, I was sitting on the sidelines just watching the arguments with no firm decision either way.

I might suggest a change in PR spokespersons.

Interesting thread and perhaps if we all make an effort to mind our manners we can continue to explore ideas that might contribute to making Steamtown viable.

There's no doubt that the Xanterra relationship with the NPS is directly germane to this whole discussion. Just imagine what the nightly room rate would have to be if the hotels in the Grand Canyon were run by the NPS vs. Xanterra !! There are certainly major differences between the facts at issue in Scranton vs. Grand Canyon & Yellowstone....however there's certainly the possibility that the NPS could outsource the operation of Scranton to a DO and thus materially reduce the annual expense to the Federal gov't. of keeping the place open. Common sense tells you that if it were run as a private sector enterprise ( vs. essentially a jobs corp.) it would be operated in a much different manner ( closed in winter when visitation declines to near zero, active steam in operation on ALL days the place is open, multiple special events tied to active steam (( North Pole Express, Santa Trains, Day Out with Thomas, etc.,etc.)), and other community uses of the unique physical plant.

However the political reality is that outsourcing Scranton's operation is a long shot for sure and thus it makes near term sense to see if the new Friends organization can improve things materially and with dispatch. I think it behooves all of us to assist the new organization best we can and hope for some good results.

IMHO-Ross Rowland

Putting my business hat on for a moment, in DoD circles we would call this a GOCO proposal, or a Government Owned/Contractor Operated facility. Seems to me NASA has taken this approach as well.

Discussing ideas here on RyPN is well and good, but if not presented to the NPS directly, it does little good. In this case, what would be best is for a known entity to assemble such a GOCO proposal and shop it around within Congress and the NPS. The state of NJ DEP does much the same thing with many state owned sites, although they do not call it a GOCO.

I see two key elements. One is to ensure max employment of the locals as that is one reason the park was created. Second is profit sharing, as in, it will make the NPS a few bucks.

You might use Cass as a model for example. I have been to Cass twice this year, and tend to go each year for a "shay fix," so have been able to make some comparisons between the old operation and the new. Although a bit more expensive, I am impressed with the new operation. The bottom line is that there are examples to pull from and create a proposal to shop around at the NPS and congress. I’m just not sure who that would be.

Steam locomotive bearings run equally well in both directions. Bearings being chewed up comes from lack of lubrication, or other mechanical issues within the locomotive itself.

Thanks, Supe..... unfortunately, after waiting for it to download for 3 minutes, nothing. I'll try later - it seems useless to talk about how things should be done at Steamtown if we don't know what the result is supposed to be. Earlier postings suggested it was primarily an archetectural history museum that had trains around it, not an operating railway museum with buildings around it, and the operation was sort of a adjunct to create context for the site itself. If so, the only rationale for more than a yardgoat doing yardgoat things would be to increase visitation.