The link below addresses a view point on issues to consider about preservation. While it focuses on preservation in El Paso, Texas, you can find similar conflict in many parts of the US. El Paso as a crossroads for travel is also a crossroads of culture. As such some of the stresses from that mixing shows in how things were shaped. The article expresses a view point that I think one can find in dealing with certain issues of preservation including railroading.

Robby Peartree


https://academics.utep.edu/LinkClick.as ... mid=123747

If anyone is a member of the Henry Ford, (and I recommend it to everyone!) their membership magazine has some excellent articles in the current issue about just this question.

One article mentions the Rosa Parks Bus... the decision had to be made to preserve all of the original pieces, which would have included missing seats, etc. Or to restore the bus to give visitors the opportunity to see the bus as it would have appeared at the time Rosa Parks boarded it.

Another article talks about the restoration of the floating Dymaxion house and how some had suggested they simply build a foundation underneath the house.

"Throughout the repair process it was a tight balance between the need to conserve the object's original intent and the desire to restore it to an interactive museum exhibit."

"The fact that the deck is hovering off the floor is fundamental... As conservators we have to stand back and say: What is significant about this object? What are the elements we will do everything in our power to preserve and what can we change?"

Indeed, but within reason.



So you advocate running everything? What about the "Memnom" at the B&O Museum, perhaps the most intact example of a mid-19th century locomotive? It would be financially and logistically impossible to run everything that has been saved from the cutting torch. If something isn't or can't be run does it has no value, or isn't preserved? What about electric locomotives? No museum could afford to string catenary wire or build the electrical infrastructure necessary to run, say, a GG1. Since they can't run, should they be scrapped? Are they not preserved?

Absolutely we should run equipment to show people the sights and sounds and smells of railroading past, but it has to be illustrative and an example. Otherwise we will use up all the preserved examples eventually and then we'll have nothing to interpret in the future.



Perhaps, only if you tell people the story. To declare it grandpa's ax without an explanation is disingenuous.

The argument that a piece of railroad equipment can only be interpreted in an operating situation raises the question what do you really see in an operating environment? l suggest we make a case study of two rotary snow plows at one property the C&TS. The rotary snow plow was definitely a tool of importance but there are significant differences between the OM and the OY The most significant is in the design of the wheels themselves. The OM being an early rotary (builders plate 24 or 25?) has the early wheel. OY built much latter in 1923 has the newer wheel, How can you tell the differences when they are spining? The evolution in design is much easier to see when they are near one another. The C&TS is lucky to have the two beast and the other pieces of historic snow fitting equipment. When you read John Norwood's books or the October 1968 Trains Magazine article on snow removal operations on Cumbres you realize that not just the locomotives and the Snow plows made the story possible. The cook car plays a predominate role in his discussions. So do cars of coal and strong labor. Operators and section gangs each played their roles. Most of the support equipment used in this story started life as something else and were converted for use as work train equipment latter. So which is more important, the cars start in life, what it was converted into, or its the fact it survived at all. For me the conversion caused the survival and therefore the two eras of significance are important but that is not always seen.

The survival of the standard gauge Rio Grande 2-8-0 at the Colorado Railroad Museum occurred because of its sale to the San Luis Valley. The Rio Grande fought Mr. Richardson on many levels and his move to get a locomotive tariff to move 346 in federal Court in Salt Lake City instead of Denver showed his understanding of not only the daily operation of the railroad but its varying level of influence between communities. Knowing the history of the 106 allowed this now rare example to be preserved. You see a similar move with the 25 in Flagstaff when local citizens set up a California company to purchase it without the owner knowing that they were selling it to local people which they said they would not do. Today those working on locomotive rosters for today's railroads are providing the start of the documentation for future preservation efforts. Rio Grande locomotives have made it to the UP roster and the efforts of some to such as Don Strack at http://utahrails.net/index.php are making efforts easier to find each locomotives history.

In East Ely I was looking at a car body in a private residence that I assumed that it was an iced reefer as it had all of the general appearance at a distance of being one. But one day when I looked at the roof I realized there were no ice hatches. Ok so what is this thing? Upon discussing it with a couple of friends of mine one sends me the ICC study on powder cars and another confirms that body is that of the powder car. Understanding how important the regular delivery of powder would have been to the mine operations it becomes both an important and unique piece. The copper industry wants to use railroads similar to how a conveyor belt works where the needed thing is delivered at a constant rate. Smelter furnaces are picky about ore chemistry. You will find different operating schemes to match furnace performance. This is why the steady steam of furnace feed materials is particularly important to copper producers. The speed of the transit is not as important as the consistency of deliveries. In that service need puts different demands on the transportation system as it is better to have a few cars every day than many all at once and then stock pile material and suffer environmental loses. The early locomotive purchases on the Nevada Northern set up such a pattern. The ore movements were held to a certain train length to avoid congestion. Even as larger power latter arrived the additional power of newer locomotives was only utilized to reset any imbalances in the system which was often a empty move.

When you read railroad files or talk to railroaders you do not see this. Instead you often find it in the correspondence files of the affected industry such as copper companies. The inability of both the Southern Pacific and the Santa Fe lead to the creation by phelps dodge that became the EP&SW. Although train speeds were not particularly fast the attention to train delays and reducing both unneeded delays and issues of overly conservative temporary speed restrictions by track men and a locomotive engineers not slowing like they should was a factor in getting the Flaman Tachograph to record locomotive speeds

Other things change over time that we do not always think of. Reading accident reports from the ICC it is amazing to see the type of accidents they investigated. But when doing so it is important to remember that the role book of today is not the rule book of yesterday. In AT&SF rule 93 it states

Rule 93 yard limit rule

Stations having yard limits will be designated by special rule in timetable. Within yard limits all trains and and engines may use main track, not protecting against second or third class or extra train but will give way as soon as possible on their approach. All except first class trains will move within yard limits at restricted speed; the responsibility for accident for second third class or extra trains rests with the approaching train.

The definition of restricted speed is interesting;
AT&SF
Restricted speed is "proceed prepared to stop short of Train, obstruction, or anything that may require the speed of a train to be reduced.

It is interesting how it differs with the definition of restricted speed today. The El Paso & Northeastern had a different yard rule and here it is.

EP&NE
All except first class trains will approach yard limits under full control and be prepared to stop within the limits of vision. The responsibility of accidents at such points will rest with the approaching train.

I love the use of the term under full control as a rule book term that can be seen on many railroads but does not always mean the same thing. It is interesting to me how the terms have changed over the years but how the group of rules are to work together have also changed over the years. These are things that are not told by a operating machine. There understanding comes from doing research at many levels. pieces of equipment develop personalities and quarks that take a long time to learn. While I will agree that a live piece of equipment can create a special experience it is also limited by the fact it has no memory or way to communicate. Fortunately there are a lot of sources for telling each story but only if we communicate it ourselves.

A recent "discovery" at an effort to tell a "story" occurred on the C&TS. A long time historian was surprised to read in the interpretation documentation about the wood burning locomotives of the Rio Grande and the resultant clear cutting of Cumbres area. None of it true or based on anything he could think of. The interpretive information ignored locomotive rosters, the 1879 fire that raged thru the area and many other writings. The damage of bad information should be clear to everyone. While the question for me in this case is how did this get this far the equal question is are we make sure to communicate the history we do know? When things are learned do we share them? Earlier in this thread it was mentioned talked about having only certain things in the newsletter but isn't honesty the best policy? Being open about success and failures allow's one to grow. Hiding issues and not encouraging communication creates issues. I remember a college professor being upset that the college president in a communication committee meeting said that it was the inappropriate place to discuss something. Two professors from different colleges both asked if not there then when was a good place to address the issue and they did not get a response. Communication is a key to solving problems and educating everyone. We have talked preservation standards but how many organizations educate their members on these or the standards they choose to ad hear to? I have seen groups divide themselves into subgroups that have little cross discussion or coordinated focus. As groups age new members come in. Are they understanding what the organization is and what its goals are? For the organization are the goals consistent or are they constantly subject to change? When issues are difficult are they addressed or are they ignored with the hope they will just go away? For those of us looking at the possibility of operating EP&SW #1for the Texas Sesquicentennial, I believe Mr. White both challenged and expanded our understanding of preservation. It is easy to allow emotion to drive what we do as we are passionate about our projects but the true challange is to keep emotions in check and keep to a standard.

Robby Peartree

I think the term used was "dirty laundry." I agree that airing dirty laundry isn't what a newsletter is for, but accurate reporting on different points of view during a board meeting with all cases presented leading up to any subsequent decision isn't dirty laundry - it's demonstrating a working board doing their work. It's also showing the membership who the people they voted for really are and whether they are working for the greater good or a narrow agenda of their own. This is valuable information and needs to be available to everybody concerned. If a situation is permitted to devolve into "dirty laundry" it demonstrates the need for a new board that will do it's work, which is even more important information.

D&RGW Rotary OM is indeed Cooke C/N 24:


Thank you, Mr. Peartree. You've given us much to think about here.

Best regards,
-Philip Marshall

After my recent post on this subject a friend said I am making this complicated. My response to him was that preservation was complicated. While many people focus on the equipment railroads brought many changes to the way people lived, the development of regulatory process, and evolution of legal issues and technology development. Railroads lead many of the advancements in the industrial revolution. When EP&SW #1 was built engineering was moving beyond civil or military to include mechanical and metallurgical engineering. Corporate law differences between states created many companies to get trains over state lines. Texas is a classic example of this with its head quarters requirement for railroads operating in the state. If you follow the funding of many railroad you see not one but many companies set up for various reasons. While the average visitor may not care it is still apart of history. The Southern Pacific Collection at the UTEP Library Special Collections Department has had not only a lot of users but but not the average rail fan. The users come for many reasons. This has included a class from the College of Business. The effect of railroads on society continues to this day but it effect is not just the train running thru the neighborhood.

The National Park Service uses a term "Period of Significance" to label when something was important There are a few national historic land mark railroads in the US. In the determination of what is significant there is a determined focus on the "Period of Significance" and weather something "contributes" to it or not. What is a railroads period of significance? The period chosen for the C&TS is 1879 to 1930. Yet when you look at the list the Rio Grande's improvements from 1924 they only spent their first six years of their 45 year ownership under the Rio Grande in the period of significance. The 497 is said to contribute to the "Period of Significance" but the boiler was not placed upon a narrow gauge frame until 1930 at the end of the period.. Furthermore things like the pipe cars that came out of modifying existing rolling stock do not contribute because of their changes occurred after the period of Significance. A railroad such as the San Juan Extension experienced boom and bust cycles through its life. The pipe business that the Rio Grande experienced delayed the eventual abandonment of the mainline to a point where society could see its importance as a unique treasure and save it. Why is that not important? The concept of an artifact only having a certain period of significance seems strange to me. When a rare item survives unlike many of its contemporaries does that not make it unique and significant in a certain way?

The application for the C&TS and its NHL status can be seen here. http://www.historycolorado.org/sites/de ... 65_NHL.pdf

The period of significance can play an interesting role in the presrvation of artifacts. At the south rim of the Grand Canyon stood a building the Santa Fe built for steam heat supply. The building was built latter than most of the other buildings and therefore of more modern construction. The reason the building had been built was to supply stationary heat to cars in the yard. The need for the building was due to evolutions in both the parks and railroads infrastructure. But today the building is gone because the building was not apart of the "period of significance" for the park. So for something like the C&TS does that mean you can take out the water stand at Cumbres because it was not there during the period of significance? Is the yard extension at Chama or the extended siding a Toltec not historic? The changes were made because of the changes in train length due to new business. The extension of life allowed many people to find the railroad. Its story has been told many ways from several perspectives. Even the Friends of the C&TS worked hard to set up the pipe gond display. By the measure of the "period of significance" that display is at least unimportant to the preservation effort by the measure of "Period of Significance". If things out of a period of significance are not as important just what history could be lost? when you ask Americans and Japanese about the events that caused WWII the oil embargo is rarely mentioned by Americans versus Japanese citizens. The Significant events are in this case determined by the point of view. Why choose an arbitrary point of view?

When the Car restoration Facility was first proposed for Antonito the Colorado SHiPO had a lot of concerns about the proposed prefab structure in spite that the entire Antonito terminal is non-historic. The SHiPO's position was described as wanting a Swiss ski lodge on the railroad. The building built today was done on adjacent property not on the site. But I wonder how many visitors know there is a property line between the yard and the Car Restoration Facility? In discussions of period of significance are we using something that was chosen arbitrarily to determine what is or is not historic?

An issue that concerns me about the preservation world is the idea that certain people are only qualified to be preservationist. History has always been important to the human race but unlike most of human history when technological items are to be preserved why do we disqualify people trained in technological studies for others who receive little science, math, or engineering type training? Engineers are required to take history courses to help round their educational experience should industrial preservationist need a understanding of technology they propose to preserve? The act of preservation is at odds with the typical engineering notion of improving things but at the same time if you do not understand all aspects of the time that an artifact existed? This is why I asked about just what are we preserving and why I said how many 1860's boilers do you see welded staybolts in? The welding of SP 3420's front tube sheet to the boiler coarse created many questions. Field metallography and other testing procedures lead to speculation that the weld was done with little preheating. This can be confirmed by the way the boiler coarse was affected by the welding process (it bulges outward). This research of the steels condition was done by people with modern technology and tech experience to evaluate the weld. While archival searches has told us a lot about the locomotive including its conversion from oil to grease lubrication of the driving axles to reduce axle cutting, the searches are limited by what was initially documented and preserved. By understanding NDT we have an idea of how they did the weld. While it is history that we are preserving it is engineering and other skills that developed railroading. Advancements such as the knuckle coupler and the air brake made major improvements in safety and efficiency of operations. overtime other technologies have had their impact as well.

The simplification of an artifacts period of significance or who can preserve something ignores the affect of a diverse and complicated industry on society and the diverse specialization of tasks that came out of railroading. While the different departments theoretically worked together for the company, the skills developed for each department and even tasks within each department. The issues that many railroad museums face with accreditation I believe come from a lack of education of how a railroad both operated and maintain their infrastructure. This point was first driven home to me when I tried to get a historic overlay for EP&SW #1 with the city of El Paso when the locomotive sat on the UTEP campus but I was told I could not as it was on wheels (on an isolated piece of track) while SP 3420 continues to sit on trackage tied into the general system and has a city overlay that the City of El Paso wanted me to pay for the registering of its historic status with the county (a Texas Law thing). Industrial systems including railroads are a complicated structures that are not well understood. Railroads have become more efficient with technology and the result of this efficiency can be sen with the smaller percentage of the US work force working for railroads. Railroads pushed the development of many skills including engineering, business and law. It is said that for many history started the day before I showed up on a historic site. With this thinking we see a number of changes before we realize the changes to a historic site. For me the question of preservation is not what is the period of significance but what is its history is and the impact on the human endeavor.


Robby

I have to agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Peartree. Preservation is complicated when it comes to something as vast railroading. Like he said, the history of RRing is much more than hardware. Without railroading, everything about this country, and many others, would be much different today in every respect - from technology to corporate greed. I don't think that makes it impossible to quantify and establish workable guidelines for the preservation of it's history. There are museums out there that already have policies, both written and unwritten, that address what equipment is for demonstration and which is for operation. It's not hard to understand that trying to operate an 1830-style locomotive, whether original or an early repro, would be impractical and irresponsible. That said, in England there are modern and very accurate repros of several early locos like Trevethick and Rocket in operation to provide all the sites and sounds for interpretation to the masses. You can call them 'props' like the Golden Spike engines if you want, but it's an effective (and non-destructive) method of presenting history. It's also not hard at all to see the difference in impact on a visitor between dead iron and a hot, greasy, breathing locomotive that smells like coal smoke and hot oil with the generator whining and the compressor panting. And the younger the visitor, the easier it is to see.

With railroading's all-encompassing influence on the country's development, saying something like D&RGW's narrow gauge period of significance only covers a portion of its existence is hogwash. It's like saying my pickup was only significant for the first day I drove it to work and put a load in the bed. What about the other 3000 times after that I drove it to work and moved things with it? Were Monet's paintings only significant during the establishment of the impressionist movement? NPS is a government agency with a limited amount of dollars to preserve, interpret and present, so establishing and narrowing a period of significance reduces their costs. It also, unfortunately, has the effect that Robby alluded to of dumbing-down and over-simplifying history. Think of the revisionist movement in our school's history curriculums. When I was a kid all the founding fathers were heros in the history books. George Washington couldn't tell a lie about cutting down the cherry tree and Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence seemingly by himself during the evenings when the Continental Congress wasn't meeting. Today we know the cherry tree story is so much rubbish and Jefferson, while he did write much of the original drafts himself, was part of a committee and the drafts were much debated and modified before it was adopted. So I think we need to take NPS with a grain of salt and push to ensure that our preservation guidelines and efforts are all-encompassing. I see the vast range of topics available in RR history as an opportunity to periodically upgrade and change what we present for interpretation, particularly in museum settings, to keep our patrons engaged and prevent staleness. Imagine how much fun it could be for our patrons, given all the colorful characters you've met and crazy stories you've heard in RRing.


This is particularly troubling and an indication of what I was just talking about. NPS apparently based the decision to remove the power house because of 'period of significance'. Just what is Grand Canyon about, anyway? It seems to imply that NPS is preserving the Park, not the Grand Canyon. I'd have been much happier had they said it was removed because it was no longer necessary to visitor's enjoyment of the canyon. While the railroad may have played an important role in bringing more visitors to the canyon, why did it? Because there was money to be made. More story to tell, and we should be looking to tell it all as accurately and consistently as possible.

These are some of the criteria used to determine the period of significance, Robby.... if it is done well. The idea that it would reflect some arbitrary crap shoot is disturbing, but unfortunately not out of the question given some other conditions present in a few places I know about, and potentially others as well.

Detainer, the use of "props" to help tell a story in a meaningful way is centuries old if not older and we shouldn't even think abut finding it offensive. I wish we had more and better ones, and more and better definitions of the stories we want to tell. Lots of us don't even have stories, just collected piles of stuff and at least one separate agenda per person with no common ground.

Preston, Chris McDermott wrote a book on the 251 design process and self-published it in 2014. He relied heavily on Fred Tromel's notes and conversations w/him at Alco.

My copy is at home, but I can find it and post the ordering information. There was a very *tiny* ad for it in the Winter Classic Trains Mag, that was hard to read without 20x magnification.... :-)

Walter, Thanks for mentioning the excellent book Chris wrote about Fred and the 251 engine. My copy lives right here by the desk next to the computer. It was printed by the Altamont Enterprise. Unfortunately no address given. ISBN Number is 978-1-61539-675-7.

I don't normally bring up the names of people I know in the industry, but in this case I will make an exception. Chris, who was Service Manager at Alco and subsequently CMO of the D&H, is an outstanding example of a person with the firsthand knowledge and the stories that contribute to proper interpretation of railroad history. I think it is greatly to his credit that he is sharing his experiences in the industry through his writing.

PC