I'm with Rick and Daniel on this one. There's a case to be made for putting certain locomotives on the register, but the fact that #111 is being pursued before those other locos reveals the politics behind this game. I don't mean to condemn out-of-hand any process that could put #111 back under steam, but I maintain a quixotic delusion that a place on the National Register should have some meaning in and of itself and not just be used as a grant-getting tool.
"A tourist railroad pulling people around in gondolas is not what I call historically significant." What an interesting statement. My question is, what are the standards for historical significance? I realize this is a hard one and that such standards aren't easily quantifiable. A tourist railroad seems so pithy next to the glory days of stock rushes and triple-headed freights over Cumbres Pass, but did any of the employees back then think that a hundred years later a bunch of foamers like us would be hanging onto every word John Templeton posts from old crew books (books that, after a decade or two, probably would have become kindling)? Did any Warner Bros. or Universal filmmaker look at "Eureka" or NCNG #5 and think of it as anything more than big old prop? In the end, the majority of the K-28s weren't even valued as much as that.
But does a tourist railroad make near as much difference in the development of an area as the D&RG, C&S, et al. did? They've sure made a big difference to Chama, Antonito, Durango, Silverton and Georgetown. If routing or expansion plans for I-70 have ever been affected by the revival of the Georgetown Loop right-of-way, you could argue it's still having an effect on a major transportation corridor, with attendant consequences for other towns along the highway.
But is moving touristas from Point A to Point B and back again "real work?" It sure is to the crews who have to push their trains up and down 4% grades while hewing to even greater standards of safety and service than you might have found in General Palmer's time. The Georgetown, D&S and C&TS trains strike a balance between museum pieces and working railroads; no one's threatening to scrap them if the railroad folds, but it's the revenue they earn that keeps them running, and the communities that depend on them.
A friend of mine once said he wanted to get down to Disneyland to see the two (soon to be three) antique Baldwins they operate. Then he thought about it for a second, and added that the other two engines running there, scale replicas built by the Disney shops, were also of interest to him. Would you believe that there's a group dedicated to preserving the history of the Fort Wilderness Railway, which ran in Disneyworld's Fort Wilderness Resort during the 1970s using all-replica equipment? There's another one, the Carolwood Pacific Historical Society, dedicated to preserving "Walt Disney's railroad legacy." I understand they were instrumental in constructing a temporary exhibit on the Disney railroads at the CSRM a few years back. If Disneyland ever gives up one of their Baldwins, could the CPHS apply for a grant to acquire and restore it? Could the engine's Disneyland heritage be deemed historically significant enough to preserve it in Disneyland Railroad livery?
I'm sure a lot of people cringe at the thought. Tourista touches like bright paint and fake stacks, or even just a tourist railroad name on the tender, ugh . . . best to get the poor thing back into its original black (or lake, or olive green) and reduce its tourist railroad service to a footnote, something left in just to fill the gap between the original and present owners.
But times change, and history smiles on people like Bob Richardson, who have the foresight to imagine what will be valued down the line. What did a lot of railroaders think of our prize pieces? Not much. Those old Mikados are dirty, slow, outdated . . . let's just abandon the whole thing as quickly as the ICC will let us.
What are the standards? What are the priorities?
What is worth preserving?
