The Rail heritage thread got me thinking about the rail preservation/tourist industry as a whole in regards to were it's at and where it's going. I don't profess to be overly knowledgeable when it comes to just how organized the industry really is or isn't, but as someone who's in the marketing/advertising business, I have a few thoughts on possibly how the rail preservation/tourist industry can attract talent/volunteers, grow, promote and sustain itself now and for the future:

1. Make a concerted effort to organize more at a national level (I know TRAIN exists, but I was unable to find their website for more info). A council or organizational group could be formed, example: National Association of Tourist Railroads and Rail Museums (NATRRM). Common goals such as the development, promotion, certification, funding of the rail preservation/tourist industry would be the central focus. This would help allow finances, skills, resources, equipment, capabilities, etc. to be pooled together and shared for greater effectiveness and efficiency.

2. NATRRM could develop a safety/standards/training certification program that each museum, operation, etc. would have to meet in order to gain certification (Good Rail Museum/Tourist Train Seal of Approval). Perhaps if the insurance industry were brought in on the ground floor of creating such a program, rates and plans could be brought down for those operations deemed to meet the high safety/training standards of the program.

3. NATRRM could implement a national advertising campaign to give a legitimate face to the rail preservation/tourist industry. Come up with a catchy slogan like, "Trains can take you to places not on a map" or "It's a ride back into history." Ads could show website address that would list all the membership groups throughout the country.

4. NATRRM could also double as a lobbying organization in Washington. Look what they've done for plastics, highways, farmers, milk, pork, etc. Group could also serve as a point for dealing with the Feds concerning regulations, funding, etc. More strength in numbers.

5. NATRRM could hire a few full- or part-time employees to travel around the country and offer presentations to kids in elementary, high schools, vo-tech, etc. At the very least these ambassadors could pique some interest in the rail preservation/tourism industry and perhaps plant a seed for future volunteers and laborers. The costs could hopefully be covered by TRAIN membership base?, corporate contributions, grants, etc.

6. NATRRM could seek out and create more opportunities with colleges/universities/vo-techs for accredited programs in railroad preservation/conservation that could tie into existing architectural/artifact preservation/conservation programs.

7. NATRRM could evaluate and give accreditation to facilities such as Strasburg, Railroad Museum of PA, Steamtown, etc. that can provide internships and hands-on-training with aforementioned colleges/universities/vo-techs.

I realize that many groups and organizations operate with volunteers and shoe string budgets, but perhaps it takes someone or persons that can think outside the box and organize a somewhat splintered and varying array of many tourist railroads/rail museums into a more cohesive group that hopefully would have more common ground than not.

Obviously, Mike, you have devoted considerable thought to this issue, and I , for one, appreciate your efforts. Now, it's going to seem like I'm throwing cold water on you. I'm not; just injecting some reality.

> 1. Make a concerted effort to organize more
> at a national level (I know TRAIN exists,
> but I was unable to find their website for
> more info). A council or organizational
> group could be formed, example: National
> Association of Tourist Railroads and Rail
> Museums (NATRRM). Common goals such as the
> development, promotion, certification,
> funding of the rail preservation/tourist
> industry would be the central focus. This
> would help allow finances, skills,
> resources, equipment, capabilities, etc. to
> be pooled together and shared for greater
> effectiveness and efficiency.

One of the complaints I hear over an dover is that there are already too many organizations for an industry as tiny as this one. There is TRAIN (their web site is or used to be www.train.org), there is ARM, there is RPCA, there is AAPRCO, and there is an organization for dinner train operators. A lot of museums and tourist lines belong to 2 or more of these organizations. With some exceptions, overall, they are trying to do basically the same things. The problem is that this is too many organizations for such a small industry; the result is a bunch of tiny, if busy, organizations, no one of which has the financial resources or manpower to do much of anything beyond survive and have an annual meeting.

This is, IMO, a reflection of the industry itself. That is, fragmented and fiercely independent, often in competition with itself.

> 2. NATRRM could develop a
> safety/standards/training certification
> program that each museum, operation, etc.
> would have to meet in order to gain
> certification (Good Rail Museum/Tourist
> Train Seal of Approval). Perhaps if the
> insurance industry were brought in on the
> ground floor of creating such a program,
> rates and plans could be brought down for
> those operations deemed to meet the high
> safety/training standards of the program.

I think ARM has such a program or is working on one; TRAIN for years had committees that were working to establish "best practices" in many areas, including rules and safety. These things pretty much died due to lack of interest.

> 3. NATRRM could implement a national
> advertising campaign to give a legitimate
> face to the rail preservation/tourist
> industry. Come up with a catchy slogan like,
> "Trains can take you to places not on a
> map" or "It's a ride back into
> history." Ads could show website
> address that would list all the membership
> groups throughout the country.

A good idea, assuming maximum advantage is taken of public service announcments (read free). If you've ever sat in on a membership meeting of TRAIN or RPCA, you will quickly learn that they haven't any money for this kind of thing (or any other kind of thing). Most of these organizations just barely break even each year and have little, if any, cash in reserve. And when business is down, you will hear museums and tourist roads complain long and loud about the cost of dues. I wonder how they would feel about special assesments to fund something like this? given the small size of the industry, it would probably be a large amount per member.

> 4. NATRRM could also double as a lobbying
> organization in Washington. Look what
> they've done for plastics, highways,
> farmers, milk, pork, etc. Group could also
> serve as a point for dealing with the Feds
> concerning regulations, funding, etc. More
> strength in numbers.

Here, all of the above organizations are already at work. Each has a Washington rep (the same guy works for all of them), and he is a busy man indeed. The kind of lobbying effort you describe takes hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, but the one they have in place is much better and more productive than nothing at all and is surprisingly effective.

> 5. NATRRM could hire a few full- or
> part-time employees to travel around the
> country and offer presentations to kids in
> elementary, high schools, vo-tech, etc. At
> the very least these ambassadors could pique
> some interest in the rail
> preservation/tourism industry and perhaps
> plant a seed for future volunteers and
> laborers. The costs could hopefully be
> covered by TRAIN membership base?, corporate
> contributions, grants, etc.

Once again, I have to mention that at the last TRAIN meeting I attended, they were forced to suspend their newsletter just to make ends meet.
The money just isn't there. Grants might be another thing altogether, though.

> 6. NATRRM could seek out and create more
> opportunities with
> colleges/universities/vo-techs for
> accredited programs in railroad
> preservation/conservation that could tie
> into existing architectural/artifact
> preservation/conservation programs.

An excellent idea, IMO.

> 7. NATRRM could evaluate and give
> accreditation to facilities such as
> Strasburg, Railroad Museum of PA, Steamtown,
> etc. that can provide internships and
> hands-on-training with aforementioned
> colleges/universities/vo-techs.

A drawback here (besides cost and manpower to do it) is liability. And enforcement.

> I realize that many groups and organizations
> operate with volunteers and shoe string
> budgets, but perhaps it takes someone or
> persons that can think outside the box and
> organize a somewhat splintered and varying
> array of many tourist railroads/rail museums
> into a more cohesive group that hopefully
> would have more common ground than not.

Money, in meaningful amounts, is always the missing link in this industry. Probably the majority of our entities operate on shoestring budgets or even less; many are really hand-to-mouth. A disturbing number of them won't make it another 5 or 10 years.

I think you bring up issues that should be explored further, but it's important to maintain perspective and not confuse the size or resources of this industry with those of the enviros or the other, far larger interest groups.

Good points in both these postings but one that Mike needs to make more firmly is that if you are truly an impoverished museum, the one thing you can't afford is to not spend what money you have on advertising. You gotta get the butts in the seats or the visitors in the door or all your efforts are meaningless.

There doesn't seem to be leadership at the BOD level on either TRAIN or ARM to enforce and certify recommended practices (assuming universal ones can be written). As one past board member of TRAIN explained it to me, it would set them up for lawsuits.

The valuable efforts made by some semi-industry wide efforts which have resulted in the new and better steam boiler regulations (imperfect though they may be) are about the best we can hope for until we do learn to speak with one louder voice.

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> Good points in both these postings but one
> that Mike needs to make more firmly is that
> if you are truly an impoverished museum, the
> one thing you can't afford is to not spend
> what money you have on advertising. You
> gotta get the butts in the seats or the
> visitors in the door or all your efforts are
> meaningless.

Yes, but is you are impoversished, where does the ad money come from? Sounds like a classic Catch-22 to me.

> There doesn't seem to be leadership at the
> BOD level on either TRAIN or ARM to enforce
> and certify recommended practices (assuming
> universal ones can be written). As one past
> board member of TRAIN explained it to me, it
> would set them up for lawsuits.

Not just that, but let's say you are TRAIN and you go to the AB&C steam tourist line and you find they are doing something that is contrary to your best practices. You order them to correct it. They laugh in your face, drop out of TRAIN, and keep on keeping on. You make them remove the TRAIN logos and any certification stickers. Unless what they are doing violates FRA or a state PUC or OSHA or ADA or EPA regs, you have no way to enforce anything, since your "best practices" do not have the force of law behind them. If they drop out and you stay after them, they can sue you. And if one of your best practices is later indicated as a factor in an accident or injury, you are open to the full force and weight of liability. Merely defending yourself (even if you are in the right) will cost a fortune. That's probably why they don't do it.

It's not like the AAR, which can put an interchange embargo on a railroad if they violate too many AAR regs. Even AAR can't enforce practices, only regs.

> The valuable efforts made by some
> semi-industry wide efforts which have
> resulted in the new and better steam boiler
> regulations (imperfect though they may be)
> are about the best we can hope for until we
> do learn to speak with one louder voice.

> Dave

> Not just that, but let's say you are TRAIN
> and you go to the AB&C steam tourist
> line and you find they are doing something
> that is contrary to your best practices. You
> order them to correct it. They laugh in your
> face, drop out of TRAIN, and keep on keeping
> on. You make them remove the TRAIN logos and
> any certification stickers. Unless what they
> are doing violates FRA or a state PUC or
> OSHA or ADA or EPA regs, you have no way to
> enforce anything, since your "best
> practices" do not have the force of law
> behind them. If they drop out and you stay
> after them, they can sue you. And if one of
> your best practices is later indicated as a
> factor in an accident or injury, you are
> open to the full force and weight of
> liability. Merely defending yourself (even
> if you are in the right) will cost a
> fortune. That's probably why they don't do
> it.

> It's not like the AAR, which can put an
> interchange embargo on a railroad if they
> violate too many AAR regs. Even AAR can't
> enforce practices, only regs.

Good thoughts!

Recommended practices are only that -- recommendations. If these are reasonable then they will be considered. If they are rational then they may be used.

The Association of Railway Museums has issued and distributed, with the backing and assistance of the American Association of Museums and the Institute of Museum and Library Services, the document "Recommended Practices for Railway Museums." You can find this document and an explanation about it on the ARM website. Once at the site select Recommended Practices from the menu on the left side.

Brian Norden


Association of Railway Museums
bnorden49@earthlink.net

Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that we are a fractious bunch, and often compete against one another. Why is this and what can be done to correct it? Far to many museums, (some mof which I'm quite fond,) have members that cary grudges against other museums. (I've met members who carry grudges against museums they've volunteered for for years.) You'd think this was some sort of organized religion. It seems to me that if organizations shared assets, or at least catalogs of collections, then all parties would benefit. Lets say that John Public wants to make a movie and include a PCC car from his home towm. He goes to his local rail museum and they reply, "I'm sorry, we don't have a local PCC car, but there's another museum a couple of states over that does. Here's there web adress. Oh, and according to our records, (hypothetical on-line interorganizational catalog,) this other organization has prints for those cars if you wanted to make a mock up to use as a set piece. Here's there number, maybe they can fax you a copy." If we are polite, and speak positively of other organizations, it could engender more positive feelings about the entire industry in the general public. There's still a very large number of museums and tourist lines in Empire State Rail Museums guidebook. If all of those organizations, (or even most of them) worked cooperatively, in a fashion more like art museums and public libraries we could all satnd to benefit. Would there be any practicality or advantage to be gained from combinig several of the organizations such as TRAIN and ARM to make a larger one? How do we learn to play well in the same sandbox?

Sincerely,
David Ackerman


david_ackerman@yahoo.com

> Earlier in this thread it was mentioned that
> we are a fractious bunch, and often compete
> against one another. Why is this and what
> can be done to correct it? Far to many
> museums, (some mof which I'm quite fond,)
> have members that cary grudges against other
> museums. (I've met members who carry grudges
> against museums they've volunteered for for
> years.) You'd think this was some sort of
> organized religion. It seems to me that if
> organizations shared assets, or at least
> catalogs of collections, then all parties
> would benefit. Lets say that John Public
> wants to make a movie and include a PCC car
> from his home towm. He goes to his local
> rail museum and they reply, "I'm sorry,
> we don't have a local PCC car, but there's
> another museum a couple of states over that
> does. Here's there web adress. Oh, and
> according to our records, (hypothetical
> on-line interorganizational catalog,) this
> other organization has prints for those cars
> if you wanted to make a mock up to use as a
> set piece. Here's there number, maybe they
> can fax you a copy." If we are polite,
> and speak positively of other organizations,
> it could engender more positive feelings
> about the entire industry in the general
> public. There's still a very large number of
> museums and tourist lines in Empire State
> Rail Museums guidebook. If all of those
> organizations, (or even most of them) worked
> cooperatively, in a fashion more like art
> museums and public libraries we could all
> satnd to benefit. Would there be any
> practicality or advantage to be gained from
> combinig several of the organizations such
> as TRAIN and ARM to make a larger one? How
> do we learn to play well in the same
> sandbox?

> Sincerely,
> David Ackerman

David: Like your line of thinking.

Les Beckman (Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum/North Judson, Indiana)


midlandblb@cs.com

What you have posted is oh so true and the closest I can come is an analogy. The obsessed build boxes, instead of windows these boxes have mirrors on the inside walls to view the best of all possible worlds and contain the answers to all necessary questions.
By the same token I have found that the folks that work in the "REAL" railroad industry tend to act like a family and help each other out of many jams. Maybe this is why the majority will have nothing to do with so-called "rail-buffs" (short for buffoon)???

lamontdc@adelphia.net