Yet another interesting topic! Bravo. Just a note to add to how some of the equipment ended up in museums. Most was a gallent effort by a few who had forsight to save a fast dissappearing era. I give much credit to the early members of Mid Continent for there fast efforts to save. Some might of been better left for someone else, but most was a good save. Many don't realize that once in a while a RR themselves would use the museums for a "dumping ground" as well. As a kid I remember every time coming into N.Freedom checking the siding up town to see what else arrived. Many items just appeared "as if by magic". I remember 2 Milw stock cars that showed up unexpectedly. They were torched years ago for scrap. Some of the SOO MOW cars that were dontated might have been better parts cars. I agree that back then you didn't turn anything down, especially if it came with free shipping.

No need to get the flames started on MC for the back lot of deteriorating equipment. I am aware of it too. To say these artifacts belong under a roof in a no brainer. Trust me those of us involved in restoration and maintaince no the need, we all do. I am paticularly upset over care shown to a few things that with a minimal amount of effort could of been preserved from getting any worse. Buracracy is aggrivating to commonsense sometimes.

I can sympathize with the people/members who can't seem to let go of equipment that has been untouched for years. It is a form of emotional attachment I think. The what's best for the equipment is probably the best thought to have. As much as I am not the UP #440's biggest fan, I along with 2 other members spent a week in Lincoln,NB getting her ready to ship on her own wheels. Left me with mixed feelings for a moment or two when she left last fall. Just as long as it is not one of "my favorites". Another thing I feel is important to remember that when "cleaning house" is to go slowly. Just like when there is a spring cleanup in the engine house, people with good intentions end up scrapping locomotive parts because they don't know what it is or are short sighted and don't believe that the loco/equip will ever run again anyway. Another thought is, from my experience I see musuems having ebbs or tides in growth. By growth I mean things happening. A crew who learns to work together can get a lot accomplished and cars/locos can be restored/put back together. If you go for a long spell where nothing gets done, then scrapping/selling off "seems" like a good idea. I can only hope for change, hope is all I got.

I try not to think in terms of limitation. I for one do not think that just because a piece of equipment is not from the home state of the museum that it should be considered for deacquistion. If it doesn't fit future use, no one cares to display it, and everybody aggrees it should go fine. But as I was trying to convey in previous paragraph, things do change, oppertunities do come up. So just don't throw the baby out with the bath water, you might later regret it. Case in point. In the middle 60's MC had two tank locomotives donated to them. Like many I don't really care for tank engines compared to small logging mikes and praries, so I do understand the logic of the day. Anyway one was the future Crab Orchard #5 {think it was their #5 too, as it was it's original number}. Now, the #5 was a butt ugly tank engine built very late {post war}. It was used for a very short time when the operators destroyed the firebox, so the story went. In about the early 70's a buyer approached MC and the decision was "yes, sell it, take it away from here". Only one board member stood his ground and questioned the sale. He even made sure the minutes showed he was opposed. The "belief" was that the firebox was shot, completely junk, it was ugly {true} and it didn't fit our mission statement, and we needed money real bad at the time. I believe it needed tubes and rear flu sheet. Crab Orchard got an almost new locomotive {very low miles}. The #5 was a 2-4-2. Now it is quite possible that we would of never made it into a cute little engine with a tender, but it was a possibility that we never looked at, but it was almost new mechanically, was useable for pulling trains in a pinch. Someone else saw the potential and used it. Bravo for them. It may have ended up being a good thing for the engine this way, at least it ran and got attention. The point I am trying to make is that some folks think in a small box and do not recognise that there may be future uses for something in the collection, so be choosy and really think it over before getting rid of your collection. Yes, somethings should go, but be choosy.

I realize this thread started more about coaches, but if it is in the collection the thread includes it too. Cheers, John.

2. A month doesn't go by without someone contacting us looking to sell or donate or trade something to us. I have to assume this happens to every museum or preservation group. Even if your group has a mission and an acquisition policy in place it is easy to be tempted and "save" something else. In our group, I am usually the one that asks "Why?" or says it doesn't fit our mission.

What I always find interesting about this kind of thing is that seldom does one museum offer to find an appropriate home or give a potential donor a lead to another home. Also, often museums scrap pieces that may fit well into another collection without making this intent known to others. Often the news comes out two weeks before the torch is lit.

I think a clearinghouse of available pieces makes some sense.

James

On the face of it, a "clearinghouse" list makes a degree of sense.

However, casting aside the myopia that besets far too many of these organizations, there's a serious problem with the clearinghouse concept:

Imagine the uproar when a museum, a dozen years down the road from its old self with a refocus on the mission, decides to put up for disposition a piece that many locals donated graciously to purchase, which many others sweated hard to paint and restore, and is still a local point of pride and joy. The word gets out publicly, and the next thing you know there are people threatening to chain themselves to these pieces rather than let them leave. (Okay, I exaggerate......... [reviews the Ohio Ry. Museum threads]...... oh.... I guess I'm not, sadly.)

I can cite a local example: Years ago, the B&O Railroad Museum accepted on behalf of certain Baltimore railfans (primarily the founder of the local NRHS chapter, George F. Nixon) the donation of PRR GG1 4890 for display in Baltimore. I believe it ended up on the same siding as the CSS&SB interurban car and the South Shore "Little Joe".

The B&O Museum later refocused on the "B&O" in its name, and somewhat quietly disposed of 4890 by transferring it to the National Railroad Museum in Green Bay. (Also gone: the South Shore stuff.) Meanwhile, another GG1, 4876......... well, let's not go there today, thank you.

Without a doubt, the 4890 is in much "better" hands at Green Bay--it gives Green Bay another "landmark" loco from outside its territory and helps it be "national"; it's stored indoors in climate control, as opposed to outside, and is one of the best-preserved locos in America today. But the end result of the "transaction" amounted to a "slap in the face" for those who worked hard to save and preserve the locomotive. I'm sure more than a few PRR-loving fans in the Baltimore area have yet to forgive the B&O Museum for the action--and, you know, although there's no reason it would succeed from a legal or ethical standpoint, I have the nagging feeling that someone could make a case for the main benefactor of the 4890 demanding a check for "his" share of the $5,000 purchase price be rebated to him by Green Bay, at least in a moral sense.

This is one example. Multiply that by several dozen or hundred places, dozens or hundreds of pieces of rolling stock. Such stuff is probably the major instigator of "turf wars" and personality clashes and feuds at museums and operations ("Sorry, we don't want your 0-6-0T anymore, even though it saved our butts for many years.....").

Looking at this subject a bit more outside the box, its perfectly understandable how many of these museums in the 1950's, 60's and 70's, were quick to grab items that were either given to them by railroads or were purchased, traded or obtained through other sources. No different than other preservation artifacts ( planes, boats, homes etc ), things that once had "little" value, today are somewhat treasured, all because they still exist today. However, indoor storage at most locations ( museums, NRHS chapters, private owners ) is a premium, and the fortunate pieces that have survived have made it undercover or even better indoors.

No matter which NRHS group, or major museum we discuss, we likely can find examples of neglected cars, locomotives and such that either detract from the visual experience at a location, or really is outside of the scheme or mission of the institution. Now if we stop for a minute, let me relay an experience I recently witnessed about a year ago. When visiting the CSRM in Sacramento, I personally witnessed a m useum location, where everything looks presentable, and in some case the equipment looks so good, its hard to imagine it was ever used. The visitor is not able to see the tired old RPO with rust or the rotted day coach that was on the last train to .... The overall impression is excellent, and cast a favorable impression to the outside world who has not idea what a cab forward is or why it is important.

Now, most people on this forum wilill now say "money money money" thats all it takes. Yet it is certainly more than that. Each location, no matter if its Strasburg or Green Bay, St. Louis or Galveston, has to deal with the location it was dealt. Yet I am a believer in the less is more theory, and that by walking around track after track or rusted artifacts with steps falling off, would not a museum be better suited with one Pullman in lieu of 5, or 2 cabooses in lieu of 8 ? I am not saying "scrap it all", or "give it away", I am saying at somepoint, and perhaps its today, when are we going to realize that it is unlikely that as an example "that MP-54 in Strasburg" will ever be restored". or that RPO which was in M&W service for 25 years and sideswiped will ever be repaired ?

I offer my "thank you" to museums and NRHS chapters who work hand in hand to horsetrade what exists and redefine, refocus or "groom", the collections so restoration is then a possibility. I fully understand like Mr. Mitchell said that some people will be unhappy with certain decisions, however in using his example, can anyone really debate that the GG1 which was in Baltimore is not better off than where it is in Green Bay ( restored looking like it just got built ) ? and for those who disagree, are there not 5 or so GG1's within 150 miles of Baltimore ? I believe anyone who disagrees has not seen the GG1 in person, and seen his or her reflection in the paint.

Although I question if it could ever happen, I am a firm believer that each museum / NRHS chapter should look at these 50-100 year old objects and say "perhaps its time to acknowledge that we would be better off with 35,000 then we would with this rotting Tourist Sleeper etc etc etc. " I guess there are politics no matter what group you belong to, however I would surely welcome seeing a shuffle of the deck, then to visit places where the weather and time are not working in their favor. One thing that exists no matter if there are politcs are not, is the need to raise money, so isn't it time to use the assets that exist today, and "cleanup" the last 30 years of "hey do you guys want a ..." I also understand that for it to work, it will require putting your money where your mouth is, however if many places were more open minded, it would be easier to write that check, or find that volunteer. However many places should lead by example and if its money it will take to resore that last wooden CB&Q caboose, start fund raising, find corporate sponsers or donated or sell off excess equipment etc, and I am sure the results will be better than seeing it crumble.

I guess this discussion lends itself to "opinions", yet the common goal is the overall betterment of each item. In the short term, we should be thankful for the accomplishment at each location, no matter if its an army hospital car in Ogden Utah, or a GP-30 in Boulder City NV.

[nitpicker]



Ah, but the 4890 represents the only example of the GG1 as rebuilt by the PRR with upper-level air intakes to confront the snow-crystal problem that was discovered sometime in the early 1960s when a "snow fog" shorted out almost every GG1 in service.

This message brought to you by Slobbering Pennsy Foamers Anonymous, Baltimore Chapter.

>:-D

[/nitpicker]

Alexander, its good we can have a good laugh about much of this, as this hobby or industry should be fun and not so serious that we lose perspective on why we enjoy and care for the artifacts in question. Although I am not affiliated with any museum or NRHS chapter, its rewarding to be able to have a discussion regarding the "pros" and "cons" of what do we do with "all this stuff".

I believe we sell ourselves short in the "fund raising" department, and perhaps could do more to gain more corporate sponsorship. Is it to hard to believe that the Union Pacific would not donate to the Ogden Museum a paint job on the Turbine ( just a totally random example ), or that the BNSF would not make a donation to the restoration of the Najavo at the Colorado Railroad Museum ? ( as it was a Santa Fe car ) Or that Coors in Golden wouldn't make a charitable donation to repaint say the "Coors Billboard Reefer" ?... especially since their operations are in Golden. I would think that corporate America donates quite a bit to non profits, does this preservation community get much of it ?

Now, I realize that money is not per say "in buckets being handed out by corporate America", however I personally witnessed at a meeting I attended the UP hand out a check for $10,000.00 to a worthy steam locomotive cause ( even though they refused to let it run on their railroad ), and the list of non profits the UP (just an example ) gives to is staggering. ( I previously saw the list, and you would be surprised on what they give and to whom. )

I guess alot of this falls into the image cast by many of the museums and NRHS chapters. Favorable image lends itself to a more likely scenario of obtaining gift or grant dollars. However preservation minded corporations, approached correctly, would likely lend itself a check. I have seen it happen on more than one occasion, and the public relations it generates far exceed the dollars typically offered.

If it always comes down to money and labor ( or one or the other ), I imagine if we could get more money, finding the labor would be the easier of the two necessities.

Dean A Levin

In some ways I wish we had the problem Bob K. mentioned about having an "unbelievable volume of potential acquisitions...on an almost continuing basis." I'm assuming most of these "opportunities" are passenger cars or maybe locomotives. Except for the first pieces (donated in 1977 and 1978), everything that has come to Thronateeska has been sought out and targeted for aquisition, and although everything has thus far been a donation (with one minor exception), there has been no endowment coming with the pieces for their long-term preservation.

Interestingly enough, we have been focusing on acquiring a representative collection of mostly freight equipment. Why? Primarily because the costs associated with passenger car restoration are considerably greater than most freight cars (although I have had to spend a good sum of money to get a caboose looking like an exhibit piece rather than a basket case). Now, if a passenger car came available that didn't need much restoration, it would be much more likely to be accepted for the collection. I've been able to stretch my lump-sum restoration budget pretty far, but it is a finite sum, and new additions to the collection will require funding from other sources.

Secondly, freight equipment from the 50's and 60's is going away fast. If we don't grab what we find now, we will probably not be able to build this representative collection. Most of what we find is MOW or private owner equipment that has no use to them any more and would be scrapped but for our inquiry and interest. It's rusted out, beat up, and generally requires a lot more than a quick coat of paint to make it presentable. We've added 5 40-foot boxcars, using the worst of a group of 4 as a parts source to restore a different class body, sold a caboose that did not fit in the collection, added another that will require a significant rebuild, and acquired an early 1960's vintage insulated tank car. All of this has happened in the last 7 years. In the works is the addition of 8 more pieces of freight equipment and a gutted passenger car that has a future use at the museum. And all of this fits within the collection management plan. I'm just not sure it will all fit within our track plan! Actually, with planned additions, we will have plenty of room. As long as that happens, we will not need to store anything off-site, and I can then get some volunteer help in the restoration work on-site.

We had 2 pieces of head-end equipment in the collection when I became actively involved with the museum, a Southern baggage express car and a gutted RPO. We have since added a wood-bodied combine that was gifted to us by MOT. Accepting this car was a major, long-term committment. Talking with some of the folks at Mid-Continent about restoration costs scared the *%*# out of me, but knowing this was one of only 2 extant (well, mostly) revenue passenger cars that operated on the Georgia Northern was sufficient for the museum BOD to jump in feet first.

Are there any heavyweight passenger cars (or lightweight, for that matter) out there that are looking for a good home, that don't need a major rebuild to be a display piece, that won't cost an arm and a leg to move, and wouldn't be snatched up by one of the larger "established" museums? I doubt it. But just in case there are such creatures out there, please contact me for a possible home at Thronateeska. My wish list might include a coach, a sleeper and a diner. Of course, the "GOLD COAST" would be an excellent addition to our Georgia Northern Railway collection! :>) (Sorry, Kyle...I couldn't resist.)

According to several good fundraising books, corporate sponsorship nationwide amounts to between 6-11% depending on who you talk to. Now, that increase to any budget would be nice, but what effort is required to garner it. A good grantwriting program helps, but the government accounts for a far higher percentage. Private donors are by far the best bet. Estate planning and as said in the other thread offering perks and specials often to your donors.

To answer your question about endowments, we have not been successful in getting additional funds for long term maintenance and upkeep of any particular car. However, in the last five or so years I have gotten corporate sponsorship for three additional freight cars. By asking and being open about realities, they have been well supported by the corporations.

In one case, the sponsor donated the car, paid for transportation, had the car restored at a shop, which included extensive work such as hot rivetingand frame rebuilding, new wheels, a working K brake system, painted the car, moved it to our site and provided sufficient additional funds to cover the cost of display track AND inside storage!!

So it is not impossible, yet clearly an event to be celebrated when it happens, like finding a rare coin in your change.
It takes work and effort, of the type that often intimidates the volunteer who prefers to tackle rust over negotiations and lunch meetings. The deal making alone can take a year or more, yet the opportunity will often not wait that long.

Bob Kutella