Re: [NSW] Dorrigo (was: 6042 in south australia?)

[James Brook <ajmbrook@ozemail.com.au>]

Trevor,

I probably could have worded my original post a bit better and if I offended
anyone I'm sorry.

Trevor Edmonds wrote:

> Let me know if you untend to visit and I will try to get you in. I am in
> Dorrigo about once a month, but we have work groups there most weekends.

Its a bit far away from Melbourne, so I probably won't get the chance to visit
for quite a while.

> <<It has been on TV a number of times and I have seen reports about it over
> the years in a number of railway magazines.>>
>
> You need to ask what the TV programs are trying to achieve. Most are looking
> for scandal and intrigue. They walk past rows of rolling stock in good
> condition looking for something in poor condition. The most popular target
> is CPH33. It was wrecked in a collision with a locomotive while in railway
> service. We took it as a source of parts. That doesn't matter when the TV
> shows pictures of CPH33 and it is presented as typical of Dorrigo.
>
> One of the programs you may have seen was The Investigators on ABC. Waht you
> were never told was that one of our members made a formal complaint about
> the program and it was formaly investigated by the ABC complaints unit. The
> findings were highly critical of the presentation of the segment, calling it
> biased and unbalanced foot in the door journalism. There were numerous
> instances sited where the program presentation failed the ABC standards. The
> Investigators chose not to highlight their deficiencies.

I saw the Investigators report on Dorrigo when it was on TV and it is
unfortunate if they did present an incorrect image of Dorrigo but this isn't the
only reason I said my initial comments about Dorrigo. Over the years I have
heard many unfavourable comments about Dorrigo. A bad reputation is a really big
obstacle to overcome.

> As for the railway magazines, we make information available to the
> magazines. We get good coverage in The Railway News, but for some reason in
> recent years Railway Digest has not seen fit to print anything we have
> supplied. Even when we have been criticised in Railway Digest, our requests
> for a reply have been refused.

Even if the editor of Railway Digest doesn't like the DSR&M he should at least
give you the chance to reply to any reports. Railway Digest should present a
balanced view of the NSW railways whether the editorial staff like them or not.

> We think we are doing a reasonable job at the moment. Obviously we could
> always use more volunteers and more money. What preservation group doesn't?

> <<so I don't know how you will manage to get enough volunteers when you
> aren't showing any significant signs of progress to the general railfan
> community.>>
>
> We have about 700 members. As is usual, only a small fraction are active. We
> are not (and have never been) the one man band that has become an urban
> myth. If you saw the amount of work that is being done you would be
> staggered.

I have visited your web site on a few occasions and there isn't much on it. If
you could find a volunteer who would be willing to maintain it then this would
be an excellent way to show the rest of Australia what you are doing. Down here
in Melbourne the only reports I have heard about Dorrigo have been negative. A
web site is a relatively inexpensive way of letting many people know about what
you are doing.

> <<In Railway Digest and other magazines we keep reading about locos and
> rollingstock being purchased by Dorrigo, but we never hear of any
> restoration of these items.>>
>
> None of them are being restored. They are being conserved, so they will be
> able to be restored in the future. We need to establish our static display
> site and move the rest of our rolling stock to Dorrigo first.

This is fair enough but you could also say this is like jumping out of a plane
and hoping someone will invent a parachute before you hit the ground. When you
have 61 locomotives (according to the list on your site) and a large collection
of rolling stock, is it really wise to buy any more? It will be enough work for
a volunteer organisation to conserve and maintain these, even in non-operational
condition.

> We do keep buying rolling stock, but is there anything we have purchased
> that you think should not have been preserved?

Is electric locomotive 4602 really appropriate for your location especially when
there is another example in Sydney? The DSR&M is running the risk of collecting
way too much and not actually preserving anything at all because its doubtful
that you have the resources to maintain and look after all of what you
have. Also when you are 500km's from the Brisbane (which is the nearest capital
city) how do you hope to attract enough tourists to make a huge railway museum
viable. Something like this might have a better chance of success if it was
closer to Sydney.

--
- James Brook -

----------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail:
mailto:ajmbrook@ozemail.com.au
Victorian Railfan Web Site:
http://www.railpage.org.au/vr/
----------------------------------------------------------------