Precisely. We have to remember that we are competing for donor dollars against many other worth causes. Donors (especially large ones) may be wary of donating to an organization that does not have a specific project and plan of execution. As an active member of ATRRM associate Old Pueblo Trolley, Inc., I just landed a sizable donation that covers the completion of the mechanical repair of our GM TGH-3102 transit coach. In order to get any donation from the donor, we had to not only show them the vehicle that we proposed to complete, but a complete estimate of the work needed to get the coach roadworthy and additional estimate for the cosmetic restoration.

The other aspect is that we have to produce tangible results or return on investment in a reasonable amount of time. Our TGH-3102 is expected to be on the road within a month or so. Our initial target period of one month might have been overly optomistic, but that is a target that we set for ourselves. In the proposal, we stated that the coach could be completed by the end of the year. If you want donations, you need to be able to pitch your project like you're courting an investor. Ideally, your success in the project will lead the donor to donate again in the future, increasing their personal investment in your organization. Large scale events like Spencer (while nice) do not appear to me to be as effective in attracting donors as the individualized pitch.

Also, in starting our new project we have found many additional resources at the local level through our members. Part of the restoration that is not yet funded (and may not need to be funded through us) is the bodywork. We are working with the local school district's Joint Technical Education Division to add the bus to the official project list for the high school shop program.

Following up on PC's comments about the role of a national organization ... that's exactly why we need a group focused solely on rail preservation. It can help local groups with publicity to local and national audiences, share resources/experience and success stories, and connect groups with similar missions or projects. If you look at the Most-At-Risk list that NRHS put out in 2013, the national attention immediately helped landmarks like the 'Lion Gardiner' (the rare ex-NYC heavyweight) and ACL 4-6-2 1504 in Florida, each of which got multiple grants. These were landmarks that weren't getting noticed on a national level. I recently wrote a "Trains of Thought" post that shows the value of a national at-risk list: http://tinyurl.com/mcc3rwu

NRHS also has its Railway Heritage Grants program, which awards $50,000 per year to a dozen or so groups across the U.S, plus the annual RailCamp programs for high school students (which sold out this year). Our NRHS page on Facebook and Twitter page (@RRPreservation) help promote museum/tourist line events and restoration projects. There's much that would be lost without a national voice.

Elrond Lawrence
NRHS public relations

One thing that is needed in preservation is a national database of services and providers, listing on a state by state basis, and by type of service or product, the organizations and people that can supply needed services to the preservation industry/hobby. This is particularly needed in the areas of cost estimating and project planning, two specialized talents often lacking in many groups, and a contributing factor to failed preservation efforts.

The only group that I know of that has even come close to producing this kind of a list, and it was primarily for internal use, is the National Model Railroad Association (NMRA). They collected over the course of many years a database of their clinic and program speakers referencing their topics, particular areas of expertise, contact information, and how far they were willing to travel. I don't know if they still maintain that, but the concept is an excellent one, and adaptable to many industries including preservation.

The NMRA also maintains the Bruce Meyer collection library of EMD technical drawings and paint and styling diagrams, as well as other technical libraries that are useful to both modelers and preservationists.

But of course doing this kind of project is similar in time and effort to maintaining and cataloging a print library of books.......

PC

Both of these comments point directly to the mission and purpose of an organization that already exists called the Association of Tourist Railroads and Railway Museums (ATRRM). Attendance at the spring and fall meetings and receiving (and contributing to) ATRRM's fine quarterly journal, Tourist Railroads and Railway Museums can meet most of the needs listed in the comments quoted above.

Full disclosure, I am also a Director of ATRRM. The stuff I have learned through networking at the spring and fall meetings is well worth the cost to attend these meetings.

Thanks!

Thanks, Jim. I will add here the address of the ATRRM website:

http://www.atrrm.org/

Note the request on their front page for information to help establish a database of individual experience to allow members to contact other members for information and advice.

PC

First, I will admit that I did not vote in the recent NRHS national election. I had a ballot, and considered voting, but I decided I did not know enough about the challenger to Mr. Malloy to make an informed decision. I take the same course when it comes to public down-ballot elections where I don't have enough information on the candidates for an office - like a school board seat - for fear of electing someone who turns out to have positions totally opposite of my own. I try and do my homework when it comes to those offices, but even in the internet age, there are still gaps in information available about some things and people.

That said, the membership of the NRHS has elected a new President, with his own ideas about how the National should be run. It seems to me that the outgoing administration is trying to pull a lame-duck, last-minute, end-run series of irreversible changes to the national in advance of the new President taking office. I find it hard to believe that most of the proposed changes could not wait until the new President takes office in November, to give him a chance to say yea or nay to them. He is, after all, the new leader of the membership, and those who elected him are entitled to run the organization now as they see fit.

"I find it hard to believe that most of the proposed changes could not wait until the new President takes office in November, to give him a chance to say yea or nay to them. "

And if circumstances ARE so exigent, why wasn't that apprehended and disclosed BEFORE the election?

Nothing changed that much since last spring.

First Greg, spells his name 'Molloy' and second, if you read the latest article on TrainsNewswire, or the election bios, you would know Al's on the BOD now so will have some say. Also, he's been to every BOD meeting this year.

Bob H

Mr. Woodring ‘s comments on the current machinations at the NRHS do not answer my basic questions but do serve to highlight why I posted in the first place. Rail preservation needs people’s time, effort, and money. These are all in limited supply and it appears as if they are dwindling further as those interested in this endeavor age out and are not replaced in equal numbers.

The other discussions regarding the NRHS prompted me to step back and ask the more fundamental question,, “If not the NRHS, then what?” It appeared to me that, in a dwindling resource situation, serious consideration should be given to the concept that the time, effort, and money involved in the debate as to the state of the NRHS and in any effort to continue the NRHS’ operation may be better redirected to entities that already meet the national needs of the rail preservation community or that have the greater potential to meet those needs.

In an effort to establish if this hypothesis is correct, I posted the following questions:

1. Does the preservation community accept the changes suggested to reinvigorate the NRHS as necessary for rail preservation (and not the NRHS) to move forward or does it let the national fade away?

2. Is a new or revamped national organization necessary to further rail preservation or do internet-based communities, such as RYPN, photo and video sharing sites, and other national organizations, such as the R&LHS and ATRRM, combine to completely serve the national interests of rail preservation?

3. What other nationally based services are necessary for the rail preservation community to continue to move forward?

4. If another entity, in addition to these web-based resources and non-NRHS national groups, is needed, why?

Answers to these questions and the issues that surround them could help guide resource allocation and provide direction in ways to better support rail preservation.

Amen to that. Having served as an official delegate on behalf of my organization to ARM/ATRRM, I have found the participation in the organization a great benefit to our organization. I have not found participation or association with NRHS to have any benefit either to myself or my organization and have discontinued my association with that organization.


That said, my observation is that there is an ongoing divergence/separation regarding the preservation work in the railway preservation field and the social benefits provided by an organization such as NRHS. With the development of new ways of sharing media, it is no longer necessary for people to gather in one location to view slides/photos/videos.

If the NRHS specifically is to continue into the future, it must identify it's core mission and clearly state that to current and perspective members. What will it's function be? How will it acheive that function? What impact will it have that cannot be acheived by other existing organizations? What are the performance measures and who determines whether we have achieved them? ATRRM has a clearly defined role and mission. NRHS? I am not so certain.

There are so many organizations involved in the preservation industry that I do not see any particular one as being "essential" to its future, though it would be nice if they all survive and prosper. If the NRHS national were to disappear next week it would not be the end of the world, many of the chapters who own equipment have been leaders in preservation on their own. They would still be there and are fully capable of functioning on their own just like the Amherst Railway Society and other fully independent groups that have never had any affiliation with national organizations.

As one of our wise participants in this forum has occasionally pointed out: "Non-profit is a tax filing status, not a business plan". Being a non profit and doing something that is "noble" gets an organization nothing, they need to provide a service or product that others need in order to for them to survive and continue in business. In that regard, the product "mix" that a revised NRHS will provide has yet to be seen or evaluated.

Regarding ATRRM, I am very respectful of what they are trying to accomplish, but I do find a few aspects of the organization confusing. One point being that their membership structure is based around organizations but the request for volunteers to join the information and experience database is an appeal to individuals. A lot of people with railroad industry experience out "there" are not members of preservation organizations with ATRRM membership.

I also find the combination of non-profit organizations interests with for-profit tourist railroads and shortlines under the same umbrella to be a bit conflicting. I try to help museums when they call, precisely because they have an educational mission and a requirement to provide a public benefit. I consider them a worthwhile cause, and the professionalism of museum staff is often very impressive.

I cannot say the same for all the tourist railroads and shortlines. Relations with some are superb, but you also run into some people who are rude, pushy, or confrontational, and call up feeling they are "entitled" to your time and effort. That industry is composed of for-profit businesses and they should not expect retired people to be running around for them or doing expensive favors that help finance their operations, but unfortunately there are some that do. So putting your name on a list to volunteer your time and experience to museums and shortlines does have some negative aspects regarding the direct access it provides shortlines to you. But it is good to see that ATRRM is coming up with new ideas to try to help and to make information more widely available.

PC

Walker's comment of "That said, my observation is that there is an ongoing divergence/separation regarding the preservation work in the railway preservation field and the social benefits provided by an organization such as NRHS. With the development of new ways of sharing media, it is no longer necessary for people to gather in one location to view slides/photos/videos" is probably one of the most descriptive and accurate comments made in this entire discussion.

Having attended numerous NRHS Board of Director and other meetings over the past several decades, I have seen a long fight between those wanting a social organization and those wanting an organization that accomplishes meaningful preservation. This fight, in my opinion, has kept the NRHS from making much headway in either direction. Meanwhile, local chapters have been able to choose the direction that they wish to head. However, this lack of uniform goals has led to chapter versus chapter, member versus member fights when the issue of national NRHS leadership and organization control comes up.

This fight has included subjects such as how to handle money (yes, there was a huge fight over if money should be put anywhere except a simple bank account), the use of the internet (a big fight about a website and a Facebook page - there is always that one member who doesn't use the internet so no one should use it), and whether anyone not a long-term member should be allowed to attend a convention (no new members wanted by some).

It is not unexpected that there is now a fight about the basic goal of the NRHS. Many older members feel threatened by the change, especially those who favor a more social organization where they can sit and talk about what happened fifty years ago. However, this attitude has made the NRHS a not always desirable place for younger rail enthusiasts who focus more on today (something they will probably still talk about fifty years in the future) and are more active in much of the preservation world, especially preserving the past few decades which doesn't exist as far as many of the older members are concerned.

To me, it is amazing the the NRHS has existed as long as it has without major change, but the accelerated change has put more pressure on the organization. One of the biggest changes is simply information availability. Monthly or quarterly news magazines once ruled, but the average smart phone user checks it every nine minutes for news and information. That is almost 5000 news updates between a monthly meeting of a local chapter. That means that the meetings aren't for news like they once were, so social is now the main reason for a meeting. Meanwhile, preservation and operations take place on a more often schedule - often each weekend. Here, work is being done and the social interaction takes place in a more active manner. Some of my most enjoyable discussions have taken place while grinding rust or installing windows.

Some seem to think that the changes in NRHS, or even the topic of change, is a very recent activity. However, it is decades old and those opposed to all change have finally run up against the change-or-die requirement. and they don't like it.

"Many older members feel threatened by the change, especially those who favor a more social organization where they can sit and talk about what happened fifty years ago. However, this attitude has made the NRHS a not always desirable place for younger rail enthusiasts who focus more on today (something they will probably still talk about fifty years in the future) and are more active in much of the preservation world, especially preserving the past few decades which doesn't exist as far as many of the older members are concerned."


That's insulting, belligerent and geriatrophobic.

There's plenty of Chapters that have active preservation efforts with either structures or rolling stock, who also have social meetings and do both successfully. You have presented a red herring and a false dichotomy.

Outside of the CRHS, where are these bands of youthful preservationists roaming about exuding that can do spirit but excluded from participation by the an oligarchy of geezers frozen in time?

I'm aware of two groups OUTSIDE of the NRHS heavily focused on "doing stuff" , the Anthracite Railroads Historical Society and the Erie Lackawanna Dining Car Society. The ARHS not only has their F-3, et al, but regular social meetings and conventions that are image and socially focused. The ELDCPS has assembled a fleet of cars, but is working to present the dining car experience of about fifty years ago. There's a mix of members and most people have social needs which are met through the accomplishment of a common purpose.

But even if the premise of your argument had a scintilla of merit, what we know about these proposed changes is that there's very little to suggest they address your idea that there's this battle between young turks doing, and geezers hell bent on watching slides. Eliminating chapters simply concentrates power, and removes the local focus that Chapters provide.

If you want to invest yourself in what's been described by Wilhelm Roepke as "the cult of the colossal" fused with the tyranny of experts, that's fine, just don't tell me it's about saving the NRHS by accommodating an energetic insurgency.

For the record, I'm neither a young turk or geezer. I appreciate both doing stuff and seeing how things were, before I was born.

Mr. Walker makes some very important observations about the evolving nature of preservation from a somewhat armchair approach to a hands-on focus. Mr. Cook reiterates a key point that any organization needs to have a clear focus and a solid business plan. Bartman’s insightful reflections regarding his experience with the NRHS speaks in broad terms as to the technological changes and demographic shifts that have impacted, amongst other things, the little corner of the world of rail preservation. Superheater points out that the most successful organizations, whether they are affiliated with the NRHS or not, are the ones where social, historical, and hands-on preservation activities are integrated to form a complete preservation experience for those who participate.

This thread has been useful in pointing out the some of the many resources available to the preservation community and in elucidating some of the unmet needs or areas where the need is partially, but not fully, met.

Bartman’s forthright framing of the issues facing the NRHS and his stated purpose for any reshuffling of the deck in that organization fails to address the fundamental issue. As Larry the Liquidator says bluntly in the film clip I began this thread with, “Who cares?”

Contributors to this thread have made it apparent that there are many national-level resources for rail preservation including, but not limited to, ATRRM for support with practical needs such as insurance, internet utilization, and restoration/maintenance, L&RHS for support with historic information and research, NMRA for historic documentation and technical drawings, internet online communities for photo, video, and information sharing, and web-based fundraising tools and resources.

This brief market overview does not even include the many large to medium-sized organizations that are filling a regional or national need. For example, the Streamliner event that the NC Transportation Museum organized and ran was larger in scale and did more to put rail preservation in a positive light among the non-rail general public than anything the NRHS has ever done in a single event. The NC event also drove quite a few preservation efforts.

Accepting Bartman’s description of the situation at the NRHS as accurate, it appears that the NRHS is too bogged down in political wrangling and has been for years, and through its own intransigence has mismanaged itself into obsolescence.

Rail preservation dollars are very difficult to come by and are becoming more so as many who share our interest age out. It seems that the NRHS’ business model is obsolete by about 10 years and the NRHS’ proposed changes would take even more effort and money as they attempt to reinvent themselves at this late point in the game. Their probability of success is minimum given their track record of mismanagement and infighting and the fact that almost everything they want to package as the "New NRHS" will be, to a large extent, redundant in their marketplace.

Given all of this, would it be better if the NRHS dissolved such that any remaining funds are distributed among the many worthwhile organizations who have a proven track record of performing and producing results and so future fees and donations are put to a more economically productive use?

Maybe it is time to stop manufacturing Buggy Whips.

I don't see how it is insulting when its the truth. There are people who want the organization to be all social and there are those that want it to be all preservation. Yes, there are groups that are both, but they are not normally the ones in the fight for what direction the NRHS will head. But even here, notice that different members normally attend each event. This simple fact is clear if you read all of the posts and discussions about the future of the NRHS. "Scranton Yard" is correct - can/should/will NRHS survive and what will be the impact of the survival or loss of the organization is a question that should be addressed.

One failure of much of this discussion, in my opinion, is that some seem to think that all of the challenges and issues will go away if the NRHS changes, doesn't change, or fails to survive. Look at any posting site such as this, and you will see very differing concepts of the hobby, and there always seem to be those who are happy (maybe overjoyed) to complain or challenge the status quo and/or changes of the industry or hobby. Much of this is necessary for the hobby to advance. But the definition of advance is also necessary to define. Here is where much of the debate really seems to be focused.

I have been in the middle of this debate (some might say fight) and have seen it for several decades, so I really haven't seen many points that haven't been stated before, but often without an answer or solution. I have helped start up a railroad museum and tourist railroad, operated different types of train events (mainline and shortline steam trips, photo freights, rare mileage trips, equipment displays, etc.), and written articles for most of the major hobby magazines. I have also been fortunate to work through the deregulation era (it will destroy us all I once heard) and now handle legal issues and training for many railroads. Those battles were probably as bad as the hobby is seeing today.

Today's division in the hobby and preservation world is real and pretending that it doesn't exist is what has put the NRHS into trouble. A number of other groups have survived the fight (so far) by having a very narrow and limited focus, but even here many of the specific rail historical societies are seeing frightening drops in membership. For example, the current officer elections for the Mass Bay RRE has almost every candidate talking about a need to maintain membership numbers and finding techniques to get members more involved. The same is seen in some of the other historical societies that I am a member of.

Not having a narrow focus creates lots of conflict within NRHS. For example, I get criticized for having a 1980s-1990s photo freight aimed at younger members because older members might not be able to participate due to the ruggedness of some of the locations. At the same time, I am highly praised for doing it by younger members who want to do more than just ride a train. I hear demands that all trips must be behind steam while others say they must all be behind modern diesels (and if they don't get their way they won't attended the convention or other activity). I hear that a social hour or more is needed at the banquet so folks can chat while I hear from others that it is wasted time that they could go do photography, tour a facility, or be involved in some preservation project. I hear that more photo stops are needed while also hearing that they are a waste of time and we need to get in earlier to get to the evening buffet at the hotel. I hear that mailing convention tickets is a waste of money and it shouldn't be done (and never has been in the past so it is obviously nothing that anyone wants) but see that 80%+ of the members want their tickets mailed when it is done. A recent one is that putting information out on the internet isn't fair to folks who don't choose to use it. The list continues and is very long between groups of members with very different objectives and likes/dislikes. That is why I try to include many different types of activities in many of my events.

I get the chance to talk to hundreds of NRHS members from all around the world each year (I walk each train and talk to various folks about their experiences and what they would like to see and do), as well as many new members who have joined to attend the NRHS conventions. I also talk to a great number of people who ride my own charter trains. One of the most common comments I hear from younger people are complaints about local chapters or clubs where the older members just want to sit around and talk about the older days and "not admit anything has been manufactured since the GP7 or exists past the Wabash" (no offense to these, but just an example that I have been given about a certain NRHS chapter). I personally have left chapters - and even been asked to leave, because of this attitude. One chapter actually had a very senior members sign up dozens of new members (actually friends of his who had no interest in railroading) to get their proxy votes, and then used them to throw out all young members because they didn't fit in with the chapter. Guess what - the argument was whether the group would be all social or if some preservation and tours would be done.

That is the challenge of just about every organization - hobby or professional - and is part of what the NRHS is trying to figure out. By allowing members/donors/chapters/affiliates/whatever to choose their engagement, there is the possibility of stopping the arguments and allow those that want to be social be that way, and those that want to engage more in preservation to help in that direction. It seems to be working for a few groups (many professional museums and other organizations are that way where you can be a simple member and get the discounts and newsletters, or be more engaged by being a docent or some other more involved participant). Many professional organizations have parts that are dedicated only to younger members which allows them to focus on their wants and needs. With the division within NRHS, who knows if it will work.