Re: Dorrigo 19th Century Treasures

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

James Brook wrote...

> You admit that you have very
> few resources and there are restrictions placed on what you can do.

I have never said we have very few resources.

> Collecting more and more items will only add to your problems as you
> will need to spread your very small resources over an even larger
> collection, and you will need a larger storage facility.

We beleive we have adequate resources to conserve what be are buying.

> Although it would be nice to save everything
> ever built, it just doesn't make good business sense to do it,

Preservation does not make good business sense. None of us are in this to
get rich.

> Even if Dorrigo hadn't had these legal problems, I
> still think the size of the collection is far too big for a volunteer
> organisation to manage properly without significant input from the
> government or other sources.

Maybe you shoul have a look at our collection before you make these
statements.

> I am not saying that every group should be a Puffing Billy clone. Down
> here in Victoria, if you look at the VGR, CHTR, SRHC and PB, these four
> societies have very different aims. The VGR aims to be a steam hauled
> broad gauge branchline. The CHTR aims to preserve broad gauge
> railmotors. SRHC is preserving mainline equipment and the PB railway are
> preserving narrow gauge equipment. However, all these groups do have one
> important thing in common. They haven't collected a huge amount of
> rolling stock. They have speciallised in their area, and as a result
> these groups have a much more manageable collection.

Its a matter of to each his own. If you think we should not have collected
industrial steam, then you are saying our RODs, SMR 13, Corby, Marion,
Badger and the rest should have been allowed to go to scrap. Is this your
position?

> If you look at static museums, I think Port Dock in South Australia is
> one of the most successful in Australia.

Agreed.

> AFAIK their collection is significantly smaller than Dorrigo's.

It is.

> They also got a $2 million dollar grant to put their collection undercover
in the late 80's.

Nice to see some governments supporting railway museums. Doesn't happen in
NSW. Ask RTM.

> For years Dorrigo has
> made many claims about creating a museum, but we have never seen any
> accomplishments other than moving rolling stock and your claims of
> earthworks.

You have not seen because you have not been to Dorrigo. What do you mean
"claims" of earthwaorks? Are you calling me a liar? Go and have a look.

> One of each type of locomotive you have
> should be enough for a static display. The only reason for more than one
> locomotive of the same type would be if you intend to restore it to
> operating condition.

Taking out potential runners, there are only a couple of duplicates left in
our collection. The BHP diesels were a gift. 2 RODs are perhaps an
extravagance, but given the significance of the class, would you really like
to have one less in preservation?

> If the ARHS museum in Canberra are having trouble
> finding the resources to restore their 60, I don't see how Dorrigo would
> ever be able to do it.

Running a Garratt is something we would like to do, but this is in the
"wouldnt it be nice to..." category. But remember that 6039 has only steamed
for about 200 miles since its last heavy overhaul. Its in very good
mechaniacal and boiler condition.

Trevor