In high land valued metropolitan areas like Southern California and the Bay Area, what group can afford the space to build a single rail museum?

Yes, regionalization of resources does make sense. Unfortunately due to the limited amount of resources, the affected groups usually can not make the effort without a dramatic impact to their current activities. Building AND maintaining community support requires constant attention. Ideally, a museum board will have non-railfan members who have connections with the immediate community. Often those important ties will not transfer to nearby communities. If serious discussions about consolidating or perhaps moving activities are attempted, the organization(s) may place their hard earned community relationships at risk. As a result, organizations proceed cautiously.

Here in San Jose, we have been working toward establishing a railroad museum in our community. The focal point of our museum is the six stall San Jose roundhouse and accompanying turntable. Prior to its dismantling and relocation several years ago, the structure is the last intact Southern Pacific facility in the state of California. Recognizing a need for additional board level support, our predecessor organization merged into a larger and community recognized organization.

After nearly 10 years of work, the selected museum site was taken away by our public entity landlord leaving our project "homeless". This was a tremendous blow to the various stakeholders who had spent hundreds of hours toward a railroad museum and sadly resulted in the loss of an awarded $1M ISTEA grant earmarked toward restoration of the roundhouse. It would have been very easy to pack up and join with another neighboring organization, such as GGRM or PLA but instead, our board has decided to pursue other local opportunities toward establishing another museum location in the San Jose area. The largest factor was the various established 10 year relationships with other local preservation organizations and, more importantly, our donar base. Only after exhausting all opportunities for a local museum site, can we explore other options without permanently damaging existing relationships.

I applaud the efforts of Portola, SDRM and others who have revisited their missions and collection policies. These changes were not taken lightly nor happened rapidly. The key is open communication with stakeholders and an organizational mindset/ability to re-evaluate ourselves. Any organization must be dynamic to survive in our changing environment.

One of many interesting points in this discussion I need to comment on - Most of our visitors are just the opposite from the statement here. A full 80% to 85% of our visitors are not local in nature. In fact, we have made a concerted effort over the last two years to schedule special events that will draw the local visitor. My discussions with others have all resulted in conversations about how difficult it is to get the local visitor to appreciate what is in their back yard.

Scott Cessna
Executive Director
Railroaders Memorial Museum
Horseshoe Curve National Historic Landmark

Yes Eric - it is a great document to help keep focus in an organization. The Railroaders Memorial Museum has taken its fair share of criticism over the years for not having enough "stuff" out in the yard to look at. We do have a yard plan in place and are working diligently to make the building and track work out there a reality. We did just purchase a turntable from the VA Central and yes, there is a K4s coming home.

The approach we have taken is that we don't want a collection of rolling stock simply to have a collection of rolling stock. Our diner is in the process of being restored to host two exhibits. One on railroad china and one on the African American experience. Our Express Reefer will tell the story of the areas dairies and farmers markets. You get my point I know. Rolling stock we dont thin we can adequately interpret or that doesnt really meet the mission here is deaccessioned. We recently sold our Baldwin switcher to a private collector. we have made this board and others aware of our desire to deacession our Fruit Growers Reffer.

There is certainly nothing wrong with saving something of significant historical fabric in order to spare it from destruction but that act of saving it should come with a plan. Not everything a Museum comes into possession of is accessioned into it's collection. Many pieces have landed in the lap of an organization only to go on to a more appropriate situation elsewhere. Unfortunatley, many pieces simply sit until they are beyond usefulness to anyone.

Here in Altoona, now that our financial house is in much better order than it was 2 years ago, we can get back to spending some time carrying out an interpretive plan necessary to the continued survival of the Museum and the pieces - not limited to rolling stock - that have been placed in our hands by people who trusted us with their safe-keeping.

Too many Museums? Hard to say. Sticking to your mission statement if you have one at all - even harder. My Board just recently met to once again revisit who we are and what we do here in Altoona - a process everyone should undertake periodically. Do we want to remain the "pre-WWII PRR Museum" we have gained a reputation for being? Or do we plan to tell the story of 40 years of railroading in Altoona that continues today? My general feeling is that those organizations who either do not have a well-defined mission or do not stick to one they have will find themselves in trouble. Mostly because if there is a problem projecting to the public exactly why you are there (your mission) then there are certainly other problems permeating the organization that will lead to its demise as well.

Scott Cessna
Executive Director
Railroaders Memorial Museum
Horseshoe Curve National Historic Landmark

I love these topics that are "hypothetical" in nature and elicit many good thoughts. In many of them there almost seems to be a "hidden answer" amongst the numerous threads.

This thread interested me, and I wonder if we can expand it even more to "We also probably have more Railroad Historical Societies and train rides". There also seems to be an over abundance of these as well, often competing against others whether in Railroad category, geographical locations, types of equipment, etc.

Not that I'm the enternal pessimist, but most of the the problems that many of us listed are real. I particlularly agree with "Pullman" when he mentions how "egos and sentiments far too often override what should be the reality of the situation". He again raises my curiosity when he explains the publics view of what we do. On many occasions I've been asked by a railfan "why don't you run a trip over so and so division, or to here or to Podunk, etc. The reality of the situation being that if my group ran trips catering exclusively to railroad enthusiasts, we probably would have been bankrupt ten years ago. It's not that ALL railfan-oriented trips don't work, but being in the non-profit train ride genre for over 25 years, I can say unequivocally that they don't. Metro North recently ran an excellent railfan oriented trip over the New Haven lines. It was a great trip, and everyone who rode remarked how well-thought out it was. But it was run by a bureaucratic agency who owned all the equipment, took care of insurance, marketing strategy and resources, train crews, and of course, owned the railroad. I doubt if any non-profit agency could have managed this as well , especially on the money end.

That's where the egos come into play.

Of course theres the ARM, and TRAIN, and the private owners, along with the NRHS, and the RLHS.

Here in New Jersey we've had an effort by some valiant people for over 20 years to create a Transportation Museum. In turn they instituted a "United" front including representation of many of the Historical Societies within (and outside who's railroad's traversed the state) in a unified effort to garner support. Did EVERY society join in the effort?? Are you kidding! Some even went to extraordinary lengths to "derail" this effort. (Here's the egos again!).

Pullman is correct in saying something that no one wants to hear: "The same egos and personalities that led one group to form and set themselves apart from another is the monster that won't go away".

How right you are.

And as for some of these sites that were mentioned as "jewels", I don't disagree with that assessment, but some of them are not exactly financial wonders, and some in a perpetual life and death struggle for survival.

This hobby, obsession, or whatever one may call it, is at a crossroads. I see very minimal recruitment of younger people into all of the phases mentioned here. Membership is down and doesn't really show signs of recovery. There are less and less "doers" and more and more "Siskel & Eberts" out there. As someone else accurately mentioned, the "temporary fix" of equipment, once acceptable, is no longer the rule. And liability concerns and limits are at an all time high. When you paint yourself thin in this kind of atmosphere, the likelihood for failure increases.

I'm not getting any younger, and my health has imposed limits on what I physically can do, and that hurts in itself. Not wanting to cast aspersions on the many people who have done wonderful work in our field, I nonetheless feel that many of us in all sectors, public and private, have virtually painted ourselves into a corner by letting our sentiments and personalities cloud our judgement.

Interesting topic. Seems to me that the answer to the original question of whether there are too many RR museums depends a lot on ones definition of "success"!
If "success" is defined in the traditional commercial sense of a facility being able to generate sufficient revenues from admissions/donations/souvenir revenues etc. to cover its operating/upgrading costs then very few if any of our current RR museums would be "successful". Even the most heavily visited among them (Sacramento, RRMPA etc.) depend on public funding to stay afloat. The vast majority don't generate anywhere near their annual needs from the "farebox". An unfortunate majority are periously close to not reopening each year as they have no cash reserves and I'd guess that over the next decade many will cease to exist.
What sets the most "successful"(in terms of annual attendance) of them apart from the struggling majority is action. In todays America the vast majority of our people want/demand animated entertainment not just rooms full of displays/artifacts and dioramas. If a RR facility combines action(a live train ride-steam is even better) along with its historical offerring it has a chance of competing for the general publics discretionary entertainment dollar. If not, then its appeal is limited to the very small segment of the population who both are interested in railroad history and are ok with static only experiences. Just look at the attendance records for the nations action/theme parks vs. our static museums for the past 20 years to give you the dramatic truth here.
Closer to our subject why does the RRMuseum of Penna. at Strasburg attract approx. 5 times the number of visitors as the ARRMM in nearby Altoona?? Why does the CSRRM in Sacramento attract approx. 6 times the visitors that the B&O Museum in Baltimore,Md. is able to generate??? The "winners" in both these cases(and many other similiar examples) offer a "live" steam ride as part of the experience vs. static only.
I would agree with those who have observed that the "core" of the RR enthusiasts is a shrinking number. It seems that the steam era produced a substantially greater number of "serious" enthusiasts then the diesel era has.If this is a fact then it's another argument that our preservation institutions need to get ever more creative in their quest to attract support.
Mr. Cessna mentioned the work they're doing on their front yard. I would argue that having interesting, attractive exterior exhibits is very important to convincing people to make that final decision to come inside and see the "rest of the story".
I have been recently very encouraged by the strong influence that the Thomas the Tank Engine and the Polar Express products have had in generating terrific interest on the part of youngsters in railroading. I"m a part time locomotive engineer on the NH&I RR and this years crowds (most of the Polar trains were advance sell-outs!) were tremendous. Now if we can capture that initial interest and convert some of them into long term supporters then we've got a chance of passing the torch!
As for mainline steam- I wouldn't count it out yet. One of these days the stars will be in the right alignment so that one or more of the Class1's will realize that there's a political gold mine out there and a way to allow public money to be invested in their properties without ceding control at which point flying the flag will come back into vogue!! Patience is a virtue!!
Best wishes to all for a healthy-steamy 2005!!
Ross Rowland

While I applaud the organization and the efforts of my colleagues at the Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania and wish them continued success, for the benefit of people elsewhere in the country who read this board and may not have been there, let's clarify one thing. The RRMPA does not offer a live steam ride. It is an independent, for-profit, busness across the street. The RRMPA is not saddled with all the headaches that go along with operating a tourist train, especially a steam locomotive. They simply enjoy the benefit of being next door to one. By the way - more power to them! I'm not sure how Ross knows what my attendance numbers are. They are up considerably in the last 2 years. If you take my public funding away, what I first lose is programming. I get help from the Department of Community and Economic Development in the form of program grants - not general operating support. We have shown DCED that we are an economic development engine in the Central Pennsylvania area and deserve to benefit from that type of funding. I get much appreciated and vital help from the PA Historic and Museum Commission for general operating support and while we still struggle to make ends meet, I would still show a profit for 2004 and would be opening for the season in 2005 without public money. I force my staff to come up with a way to balance our budget assuming no dollars from the Commonwealth are forthcoming. When it does, we expand our offering to the public. We will soon see what a live steam locomotive does for visitation.

Scott Cessna
Executive Director
Railroaders Memorial Museum
Horseshoe Curve National Historic Landmark

A very niave and possibly idiotic question coming, but:

A.) Is there an SP roundhouse/ Maintenance Complex left of more than
three stalls
B.) Does it not make some real sense, given rising land values, declining
membership over time, etc. to pull all thre engines together in the
same roundhouse?

Think of it --- three engines, of the same type and class, working together out of the same facility. Where else can you actaully see this in North America. Think too of the savings --- if an "SP-Pacific" endowment was started for all three ---- the combined power could be unbelievable. Imagine --- access to three group's worth of volunteers, three group's of capital, three group's worth of the closest you'd ever get to interchangable parts --- WOW.

Look, I know that in some sense this is happening from the comments above, at least in the friendly "lets share knowledge" section. But take it the next step --- and think what it could become.

Of course, this will never happen, as we are too fragmented of a profession to every do something as practical as this, so i don't know why I continue to daydream like this.

See, there my goes my split personality: my pessimism has no bounds either. ;- )

TJ Gaffney

Actually, almost no museum in any market segment is a success by this definition. On average, museums nationally rely on a "rule of thirds"--one-third of the revenue comes from gate, gift shop and other on-site commerce; one-third membership, donations, and endowment income; one-third public subsidy (state, federal, municipal). That goes for the Met or MoMA or the Art Institute of Chicago or MSI as much as for Joe's railroad museum.

If anything, I suspect railraod museums depend disproportionately on the gate for revenue compared to industry averages.

The only truly for-profit and profitable museum I know of anywhere off the top of my head is the International Spy Museum in Washington DC, and it is arguably profitable only becuase it has no research/archives/ preservation/scholarship function.

A very niave and possibly idiotic question coming, but:

A.) Is there an SP roundhouse/ Maintenance Complex left of more than
three stalls
B.) Does it not make some real sense, given rising land values, declining
membership over time, etc. to pull all thre engines together in the
same roundhouse?

TJ - If rational business practices and good marketing were the driving force, probably most of the people actually involved personally with these projects would welcome it, provided that certain others were left out, of course. My reading between the lines about those somewhat amorphous "geopolitical" concerns is it is probably a gentleman's way of not pointing fingers at certain power brokers within the several involved communities that are concerned about giving up ownership or control of the locomotives and the programs. Think: if all three were part of one project, one of the three would get first priority to be finished. What if that one is the other guys? Who could guarantee that yours would ever be done? Never mind that a victory on one would lead to more support for all in the long run.....

Toil in these vinyards for long enough and you develop serious cynicisms about wine. The nature of the structure and reliance on democratic business practices within non profits, and the devolvement into personalities doesn't seem to lend itself often to good team building. We are a community of those that run with scissors.

dave

With all due respect I would say that Mr. Cessnas missing the main point. The customers(who pay their way through the gate) could care less that the RRMPA on one side of the road is a publically supported 501C3 "museum" type organization, and the Strasburg RR on the other side is a for profit commercial enterprise. What they care about is that they can park once, see the historic "stuff" and walk across the street and ride a "real" steam train. The same is true in Sacramento. Would these institutions attract substantially less visitorship if they did not enjoy the symbiotic relationships with their live steam neighbors?? The answer is clearly yes!
As to the relative attendance figures, those are my "educated" guesses based on freinds estimates in each location. As all of these institutions recieve public financial support I'm sure their attendance figures and other financial figures are available to the public if one wants to seek them out under FOIA or directly from the institution. I believe the CSRRM and the RRMPA publish theirs in their annual report?? What's important is the point that those who offer both a "museum" type experience coupled with a "live" experience attract far greater attendance.
Mr. Cessna himself saw a graphic example of this at his own institution this year when NS did not allow the diesel excursions up and around Horseshoe Curve as they had in past years. He'd have to share the actual #'s with us, but my reports from the scene were that this years attendance vs. last years with the Curve trains running was dramatically lower. Just another example of people wanting "action".
If anyone has done the homework and has the attendance figures of the various RR museums it would make interesting reading. If no one has, I'll see if I can dig them up and share them here.

If we are comparing various museums it might be as well if we were clear about the different forms of ownership and governance for each one.

RRM of Pa is a state-owned entity, administered by the PA Historic and Museums Commission. It does have a Friends group which is a 501(c)3.

CSRM is also a state-owned entity. It has an allied Foundation which is a 501(c)3. CSRM's paid staff are a complex mix of state civil servants and foundation employees.

B&O RR Museum and Altoona are 501(c)3s.

So to sum up--two of these four are government owned, but have independent 501(c)3 charitable organization Friends groups. The other two are not government owned or operated, and are themselves 501(c)3 tax-exempt charitable organizations.

My point was simply to clarify ownership of the train ride at Strasburg. Thank you Eric for further clarifying the ownership staus of the Museums themselves. I was not arguing the added benefit of a train ride. That goes without saying. The only reason our Railfest attendance was down was due to less capacity on the train. We still ran trains this year past year. We ran excursions on the Nittany and Bald Eagle from Tyrone to Port Matilda and back and the trips were a great success. I only had a third of the seating capacity this year. As far as my attendence, the average over the last 5 years is nearly 90,000. From a high of 110,000 to a low of 74,000. With "half" of my attraction being outside (Horseshoe Curve) we have experienced wild swings in attendance based on weather.

Scott Cessna

This has been a very valuable discussion for all. One point about advantages of having multiple rail museums has been missed.

The children of today are the workers and visitors of tomorrow. I have asked a number of visitors where they heard about our museum and why they came. A common reply from young parents with children in tow is "My parents brought me here as a child."

Our museum provides rides for visitors. I would estimate that 80% of our visitors live within one-hour driving time from the museum. That probably is about the maximum limit for traveling with children ("Are we there yet mommy?).

Multiple museums can provide a rail experience that is within easy reach of young families. If the number of museums is reduced,
the number of children exposed to the railroad experience will go down. This means the future potential market will go down. The rail museum "industry" could enter a death spiral.

Many railway museums are not very child friendly or do not provide an experience that children will enjoy, but that's a good topic for another discussion.

fk

The original question in this string was, “are there too many railroad museums.â€

I think Fredash makes a very valid point regarding the importance of location. As the tourist rr industry has learned,location is critical. There's little doubt that the Strasburg RR owes a lot of its success to being located smack dab in the epicenter of the Penna. Dutch tourism belt, and thus able to draw from the multitudes that come to its front yard to recreate. There are many examples of good quality tourist RR's not so fortunatly located that struggle to survive because they must convince people to come to them JUST to ride the train.
My research to date indicates that there is no one who keeps the annual attendance figures at Americas RR museums so I'm going to have to reach out to each museum and request thier #'s. I'll report back when I have the results of that effort.
Ross Rowland