Conservation DistList Archives [Date] [Subject] [Author] [SEARCH]

Subject: Mount Rushmore

Mount Rushmore

From: N.J. Bud Goldstone <budgoldstone<-a>
Date: Wednesday, November 23, 2005
    Open Letter
    To: South Dakota SHPO

    Dear Mr. Rogers,

    A group of us in art and historic conservation science has
    worried that Mt. Rushmore personnel may have bought a 'pig in a
    poke', FREE, from Germany. Even the article in 'Cleaning Times'
    printed below (after your kind reply to me in July 2005) has not
    soothed our concern but brought out new questions.

    Our interest remains high so please keep us apprised of any
    problems with losses of materials from the awesome mountain
    faces or particularly losses from the massive foundation of
    artwork-support materials, immediately below the faces in the
    mountain sides.

    Some of us are appalled for several reasons, including the fact
    that no RFP was offered to us and no tests were done on any
    adjacent area of Mt. Rushmore, say for a year before- to check
    out any serious seasonal effects of the environment after
    application of the cleaning process used for free!

    We hope and pray there are no adverse effects in coming years
    but 'hope and pray' is not necessary if a test or two had been
    done! A test is worth a thousand expert opinions, after all.

Stephen.Rogers<-a t->state< . >sd< . >us wrote:

    1.  We received notification from Mount Rushmore that they had
        determined this to be an undertaking that was a programmatic
        Exclusion under the 1995 Programmatic Agreement with NPS.
        The notification stated that it was excluded from review
        under stipulation B.1 Preservation Maintenance.  Of course,
        the fact that we received it on 5 July and the work started
        on 5 July rather precluded us from arguing the point.  It
        states in the documentation that PMIS #67562 "MZW Preserve
        and Clean Mount Rushmore Sculpture" identified power wash of
        the sculpture as part of the 3 year work plan.  The project
        was evidently approved by the Regional Office in December
        2001.  I do not remember ever seeing this document.

    2.  I do believe there is a plausible concern over the growth on
        the monument. The cracks that are formed can continue to
        grow and expand in South Dakota's freeze-thaw cycle. Whether
        power washing was appropriate, I am still not sure. In fact,
        the info I received never discussed the amount of pressure
        to be used, but did say test areas were completed in April.

    3.  I do not know who may have been consulted.

N. J. Bud Goldstone, writer, art conservation engineer

                  Conservation DistList Instance 19:28
                Distributed: Tuesday, November 29, 2005
                       Message Id: cdl-19-28-013
Received on Wednesday, 23 November, 2005

[Search all CoOL documents]