Leave the Reiling Dredge to its own devices (column)
Leigh Girvin wrote an article on NOT restoring the Reiling Dredge. I agree with her. To reiterate, in speaking from a cost vs. benefit basis the cost of saving the dredge is just too great while the benefit is very small.
The dredge destroyed the environment and now nature is beginning to reclaim the area. From the cost basis, the cost to the environment to restore completely negates natures effort. Rather than trying to “glorify a destroyer”, as Girvin says, let’s take the monetary cost of the effort and spend it on restoring the river, the riparian area and the surrounding environment which the dredge probably destroyed in the first place. In restoring the dredge even more of the hard won natural process would be negated.
The benefit would only be useful to a few people viewing the derelict. There is then the need to continue maintaining the dredge post restoration.
The benefit of building the proposed museum, in my opinion, is not useful either. We have an existing museum in a historic building right in Frisco. They have already incorporated symbolic displays showing the processes of mining. Do a photo study for preservation and exhibit in the museum or the court house.
Partnering with the Swan River Restoration project or the French Gulch would be a greater benefit to people and the river.
Rather than spending $60K to study the derelict, redirect the money to restore the environment. Even an educational biological study of how the environment reclaims areas and reduces relics would be of greater value. “Only the rocks live forever”.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.