Re: Dorrigo 19th Century Treasures

["Trevor Edmonds" <trevor_edmonds@dingoblue.net.au>]

James Brook wrote...

> However, I do think it is short sighted to say "probably no"
> to selling rolling stock to other societies or railway companies,

I did say probably, not definitely. We certainly have no current intention
of selling 6042. Its even getting closer to the top of the list for moving
to Dorrigo.

> especially when they have more than one of that type. I think all
> preservation groups should work together, not compete with each other.

We do try and cooperate with other groups. As an example, there have been
nuerous instances where we have supplied parts for running locomotives.

> If Dorrigo have two AD60's and another group wanted one of them, I don't
> see why Dorrigo should keep both if the other group is willing to make a
> reasonable offer for it. Of course, this is all hypothetical unless
> another group actually makes an offer for one of the 60's.

But it is still our decision on wether we take up any offer. The reality is
its DSRM property, so DSRM has the right to decide if it is kept or sold. In
any case, the only group that have broadcast a desire to run a Garratt is
ARHS Canberra, and the last time I checked they already had one.

> I may be wrong, but I think the museum at Menzies Creek has always been
> a much smaller size than Dorrigo.

It is. This just reflects a different focus. While Puffing Billy is
obviously the premier tourist railway in Australia, that does not mean that
every other preservation group should strive to be a PB clone.

> They never collected anything other
> than "steam objects".

You really need to have a look at Menzies Creek!!! There are diesels there,
as well as non-railway items. They have items from interstate and overseas.

> Dorrigo has collected steam locomotives, diesel
> locomotives, carriages, goods vehicles and probably some other items.
> The fact that the PB museum stuck to collecting just steam meant that
> they didn't have such a large collection that it was unmangable.

We are managing OK. If we had not had a decade of being tied in legal knots
we would be doing even better. Our collection is a challenge, but its one we
have happily taken on. With the legal problems, we had no choice. They were
imposed upon us, and forced us to divert much of our resources to defending
ourselves.

> They may not go belly up, but they are risking losing some of their
> collection if they don't put a stop to their continuing aquisition of
> items before they put what they've got undercover. Everyone here has
> concentrated on the condition of the locomotives.

Then its strange that they have paid so little attention to the actual
condition of the locomotives. None of these detractors has been on/in/under
our locos, so their knowledge of their condition is mostly imagination.

> I haven't visited Dorrigo,

Then perhaps you should find out the truth for yourself, rather than giving
credibility to the armchair critics who probably have not visited Dorrigo
either.

> but I would be interested to know what the condition of their
> other items are. Carriages are much harder to weatherproof than
> locomotives, especially the old wooden cars with the canvas roofs. Even
> if they are in reasonable condition at the moment, the task of
> maintaining such a large collection out in the open would be enormous. I
> think everything is important, including carriages and freight rolling
> stock.

You believe that preserving these items is worthwhile. We are doing that,
and are being criticised for it. If you want these thing preserved, then
support those who are trying to do it!

As for the carriages, 90% of the passenger stock at Dorrigo has had a new
ormanoid or tarp roof within the last 10 years. They have been painted. We
are working to establish our static display area where we can put our
rolling stock under cover.

You criticise us for spending money on new acquisitions. What about the half
million we were forced to spend on legal costs? How much further ahead would
we be without that? We have been continually tied up in red tape in our
attempt by the local council. We are a volunteer group, which has most of
its labour available on weekends. Our development application for the
earthworks for the display site was approved with a string of conditions,
including a ban on weekend work. We own the only bulldozer in the shire
which is not allowed to operate on Saturday and Sunday! And still we have
made good progress.

I don't know what more you could reasonably expect of us. In reality, we
have no obligation to meet your expectations anyway. If you think you can do
it better then go to it.

Trevor