Living 

Istorical Fair 

Handbook 

John T. Schlebecker and Gale E. Peterson 

& 2 ^»~^^tOh-««-»*U'-^«**-^"**-t J ' "d*—*'"•'"*' • ii«-;iniiMi««i m in mnn.i . »•• ••„..,_ ^^^.^^^j^.^ ^ ^amamaam 

'4 "IwMihr Ml -t^» JrtHlifii'l'.^:. ':yig<atolft-' <tl*«'Mi<»'i-»i naifV*.^^ • .. _ .. 

fcfiVV*'-

.^fSiO^U, ^ ;;jiH 

-"•-» < «* * „>•. 

*^f!: • '-•»' -*i» ***». **u*u >?" lv

'*v' . v. "" " * * ' ''"F'^'sCTlBi Ai'sfeTi 

SMITHSONIAN STUDIES IN HISTORY AND TECHNOLOGY • NUMBER 16 

a DO 

John T. Schlebecker and Gale E. Peterson 

SMITHSONIA N INSTITUTIO N PRESS 

CITY OF WASHINGTON 

1972 
SERIAL PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION 

The emphasis upon publications as a means of diffusing knowledge was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. In his formal plan 

for the Institution, Joseph Henry articulated a program that included the 

following statement: "It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an 

account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year 

to year in all branches of knowledge." This keynote of basic research has been 

adhered to over the years in the issuance of thousands of titles in serial publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active 

series: 

Smithsonian Annals of Flight 

Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology 

Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics 

Smithsonian Contributions to Botany 

Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences 

Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology 

Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 

Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology 

In these series, the Institution publishes original articles and monographs 

dealing with the research and collections of its several museums and offices and 

of professional colleagues at other institutions of learning. These papers report 

newly acquired facts, synoptic interpretations of data, or original theory in 

specialized fields. These publications are distributed by mailing lists to libraries, 

laboratories, and other interested institutions and specialists throughout the 

world. Individual copies may be obtained from the Smithsonian Institution 

Press as long as stocks are available. 

S. DILLON RIPLEY 

Secretary 

Smithsonian Institution 

Official publication date is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies 

and is recorded in the Institution's annual report, Smithsonian Year. 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

WASHINGTON 1972 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 65 cents (paper cover) 

Stock Number 4700-0185 
Contents 

Pages 

Introduction 1 

Chronology of the Living Historical Farms Movement 2 

Starting a Living Historical Farm 3 

Financing 21 

Historical Research 26 

Staff and Equipment 29 

Visitors and Interpretation 31 

Capital and Overhead 34 

Income 41 

State Directory of Historic Farms and Museums 43 

Directory of Persons Interested in Living Historical Farms 59 

Index 81 

Living 

istorical Fi 

INTRODUCTION 

On living historical farms men farm as they once did during some 

specific time in the past. The farms have tools and equipment like 

those once used, and they raise the same types of livestock and plants 

used during the specified era. The operations are carried on in the 

presence of visitors. 

The interest in such farms has resulted in the forming of the 

Association for Living Historical Farms and Agricultural Museums 

to which individuals and institutions may belong. Many of those 

engaged in the creating of living historical farms are starting fresh, 

with neither personal nor institutional experience to guide them. 

This handbook is intended to provide them with information gained 

by the experiences of others. The information here contained may be 

useful in helping them get started or in keeping going. 

Some of those interested in living historical farms have had considerable experience in museum work and for them much of the 

information in this handbook is elementary. Indeed, it is from their 

experiences that the handbook has been composed. Even these museologists, however, from time to time like to know the location of 

others engaged in efforts like their own. The lists of persons and of 
enterprises provided herein will facilitate direct contact and exchange 

of information. 

Popular interest in living historical farms has generated a large 

quantity of inquiries which have been nearly impossible to handle 

in the regular course of business. This handbook may answer most 

of the commonly asked questions. 

CHRONOLOGY OF THE LIVING HISTORICAL 

FARMS MOVEMENT 

1919 Agricultural History Society founded on February 14. 

1924 Agricultural History Society incorporated on June 6. 

1943 Farmers' Museum, Cooperstown, New York, founded. 

1945 "Living Agricultural Museums," by Herbert Kellar, published in Agricultural History, in July. 

1952 Freeman Farm, Old Sturbridge Village, Massachusetts, dedicated on June 28. 

1965 "Living Historical Farms: A Proposal for Action," by Marion 

Clawson, published in Agricultural History in April. 

1966 Resources for the Future made grant to the Smithsonian Institution to study the Living Historical Farms Proposal, 

October 31. 

1967 Living History Farms, Iowa, incorporated on August 8. 

1968 Living Historical Farms: A Walk into the Past, published in 

September. 

Department of Historical Agriculture formed at Old Sturbridge Village. 

1969 House of Representatives Bill 13909 presented by Congressman Wright Patman, September 19. 

Senate Bill 3124 presented by Senators Miller and Hughes, 

November 6. 

1970 Grain Harvest Festival opened at Living History Farms, Iowa, 

July 31. 

Association of Living Historical Farms and Agricultural 

Museums founded at Old Sturbridge Village on September 

17 and formally organized on November 20. 

First issue of Living Historical Farms Bulletin published on 

December 1. 
STARTING A LIVING HISTORICAL FARM 

Successful living historical farm projects do not begin in some 

singularly different way from unsuccessful efforts. Were that the case, 

providing a blueprint for success would be fairly uncomplicated. 

The task is more difficult than that because there is no way to simply 

categorize the greatly diverse organizations that are developing living 

historical farms. As noted elsewhere in this handbook, local and state 

historical societies, the National Park Service, county and state parks 

systems, restoration developments, foundations, and other groups are 

developing various interpretations of what constitutes a living historical farm. 

Yet, after visiting several historical farms and corresponding with 

the developers of many others, we have noted certain patterns that 

are worth recommending. Given the difficulty of accommodating a 

single essay to diverse groups and situations, the approach here is to 

begin with the most unorganized and unstructured situation and 

proceed through several early phases. For the most part, the considerations discussed in the first section of this chapter can be made 

before any money is raised. However, it may be desirable to visit 

other historical restorations and it may be necessary to spend money 

to hold onto a possible site even before completing studies of the 

early phases. Early demands for small amounts of money are discussed 

in the second section of the chapter. An organization which preexists a living historical farm project may want to alter some of the 

early steps. Indeed, every project v/ill require accommodating these 

general suggestions to each specific, and thus unique, situation. 

Formulating the Project: Some Preliminary 

Considerations 

The Originators 

Several projects have begun with a few people being interested in 

some type of living historical farm or restoration project. They have 

been, variously, members of a local historical society, prominent citizens seeking to develop a high-caliber tourist attraction, and heirs of 

a name, prestige, and, though less often, of money from a former 

prominent citizen. In short, they are generally historically conscious 
and interested people who nearly always lack any formal training in 

historical research or restoration. A living historical farm is not necessarily the first concern of such people. More often they seek to 

restore a particularly significant building in the community or want 

to preserve the site of some locally famous person's residence. 

Such persons often lack perspective and are unable to distinguish 

that which is historically significant from the unique, grand, or 

merely unusual in their locality. These people are invaluable preservers and collectors of local history artifacts and documents that 

professionals need. They can, indeed, do fine work so long as they 

remain on guard against myopic provinciality and consult with professionals and others outside their community. 

Type of Project 

Probably the first matter the originators of a project should consider is just what kind of project they desire to develop. The originators must formulate a fairly specific notion of what their living 

historical farm project is to be. In making these determinations, the 

group should attempt to focus on a project that can have as broad a 

base in the community as possible but still be of sufficient importance 

so that people outside the community (tourists) will be interested in 

visiting it. Since the project will never become self-supporting, the 

anticipated expenses beyond income will have to be at an acceptable 

level. To expect otherwise may mean disappointment, and perhaps 

failure. 

In determining the type of living historical farm project that would 

be best for their community, the organizers shall consider several 

factors. 

Would the farm stand alone or should a museum be part of the 

development ? 

Would additional restoration work or reconstruction efforts, such 

as a village, be included in the project? A larger facility may logically 

draw more visitors. More visitors will make the site's costs increase, 

but they also will leave more money in the community as a whole. 

Is there already a restoration project in the community to which a 

farm could be added ? 

Are there other tourist attractions nearby? If so, a farm alone 

might be enough to attract people. who are already coming to a 
popular vacation or camping spot. Major cities, of course, provide 

visitors and generate tourists in themselves. In quite isolated places, 

however, it may take more than just a farm with its uneven level of 

activity to pull people from very far. At noted elsewhere, costs increase with the visitation, but some costs are largely fixed, and more 

people are generally desirable. 

Would a restoration or a reconstruction be better? The Pioneer 

Arizona Foundation adopted the fairly common view that it is 

"better to preserve than to repair; better to repair than restore; better 

to restore than reconstruct." Local conditions may indicate that a 

reconstruction is best in a specific situation, however. 

The project that begins with only a museum or a farm may well 

evolve and grow. Should a restored village with crafts and costumes 

be hoped for somewhere in the future? The organizing group must 

take that into consideration as it approaches other decisions about 

site location and time period for the farm. 

Selecting the Time Period 

Because it dictates so many other things, selection of the time 

period will probably be the biggest single decision the organizing 

group will make. It will largely define the appropriate kind of agriculture to be shown; the kinds and numbers of buildings to be 

located and restored or reconstructed; and the types of antiques and 

furnishings to be acquired and stored away for later use. 

To a great degree the time period determines the type of farming 

operation. Thus, the size of the site, costs of operation, and attractiveness to tourists are all affected. The time setting could also indicate 

unusual interpretation problems, such as slavery or bonanza wheat 

farming, that should perhaps be avoided. In selecting the time period, 

the originators should carefully think about the significance of agriculture to the community's past, and, conversely, the community's 

contribution to the development of agriculture. 

One matter that must be observed is that each community began 

with the pioneer farmstead, and some people will suggest recapturing 

that time period. Such developments very often are of considerable 

interest to local people, but generally not to tourists. There are 

several such developments around the country, and they tend to be 

much alike. When associated with the life of a famous person, how-
ever, the routine becomes unique. For example, the reconstruction 

of Tom Lincoln's pioneer farmstead in southern Indiana where 

Abraham grew up has an inherent interest that most pioneer log 

cabin farms do not. It might be possible to satisfy the legitimate 

interest of local citizens by having the pioneer farm as part of, yet 

separate from, the site of a more advanced and commercial farming 

operation. The pioneer farmstead does not require a particularly 

extensive outlay of capital, nor does it require many employees for 

its operation and interpretation. Several examples are now in varying 

degrees of existence, so already much research has been done and 

experience accumulated. For the most part, problems of interpretation 

have been dealt with by others. To find the subtle uniqueness of a 

"typical" cabin in a specified community, however, would still require 

some work. Thus, while it is not necessary to dismiss the development 

of a pioneer farmstead, it probably should not be the main focus of a 

living historical site. 

After having evaluated the earliest (pioneer) farmstead, the organizing group should consider other time periods. The development 

of commercial agriculture across the nation and across time is a principal focus of those interested in a network of nonrepetitive living historical farms. With as broad a perspective as possible in mind, the 

organizing group should consider the phases through which local 

agriculture has moved in order to determine how to create an inherently interesting, yet broadly important, story. 

A "Memorial" or a "Typical" Farm? 

Related to the consideration of the broad versus the narrow perspective is the frequently occurring desire to memorialize some locally 

important citizen by re-creating his specific farm. Certainly, almost all 

restoration efforts illustrate the home, furnishings, and life-style of 

a specific, usually prominent person of the community. This may be 

more acceptable in the house-museum realm than it is in the living 

historical farm area. Apparently, to many people a house where someone important once lived or a building where something important 

occurred has an intrinsic historicity. Often, the logic proceeds that 

the land such a person farmed and his methods of farming also may 

be worth restoring or, more precisely, "re-creating." This, however, is 

debatable. In moving from memorializing someone by preserving his 
home to creating a living history pageant-play, the outlay of money 

and effort is greatly increased. Its legitimacy must be examined accordingly, and the pros and cons weighed. Some of these considerations might involve the following questions. 

Does the period when the person was alive coincide with what is 

otherwise felt to be the best time period to be recaptured by a significant living historical farm ? If not, is it really desirable to sacrifice 

what is otherwise considered most valid for the memory of this 

person ? 

How important was the person? Was he known only in the community, or was he known throughout the state, or nation? Who 

remembers him? Is it really historically valid to so memorialize this 

person or family, or has provincial myopia clouded historical 

perspective ? 

Was agriculture important to the life of this person, or was it 

really quite incidental to his life and accomplishments? Obviously, 

re-creating someone's farm is questionable if he himself was associated in name only with the operation. 

How typical was this person's farm? In terms of what the group 

considers to be historically important about local agriculture, did the 

owner's operation of his farm fit that broader scheme? Practically 

any specific farmer would be atypical to some degree, but how much 

could be told about agriculture generally while telling the specific 

story of this man ? Is the sacrifice to the general story worth the cost ? 

It is always possible to create fictional histories to go with a house or 

farm so that the visitor is told a specific story. 

Do adequate records exist to authenticate the specific story of this 

man or family? These would include written records of what he 

owned; what he bought and sold over the years; when he had the 

barns built; when he added a wing to the house, and so on. The 

historical evidence should also indicate why he did certain things at 

particular times. Further, there must be some archeological evidence 

to indicate certain sites, such as where a second barn was located after 

the first had burned or was abandoned to the hogs. 

In short, if both an authentic, historically valid project and the 

re-creation of some person's personal history are the goals, the organizing group must evaluate early the extent to which it will be necessary to improvise with the "truth" in the process. 
Frequently, the impetus for a project comes from the heirs of a 

prominent family. If their money and their support make the difference between developing a living historical farm attraction or not 

having one at all, then it may be necessary to make the best of the 

situation. But no one should be misled. The pedagogical advantages 

of telling the typical story versus the monetary easements that come 

with memorializing someone's grandfather must be weighed with care. 

Committing the project to the re-creation of a home and farm 

belonging to a previous day's leading citizen may not tell anyone, 

even in the same community, much about how average people (the 

"forgotten Americans" of that day?) really lived and farmed. The 

visitor from a distance will frequently sense this, so the heirs might 

well be forewarned that the insensitive tourist is likely to comment: 

"I wonder how the old coot made all his money?" Worse yet, in some 

cases, someone from the community might tell. 

Autonomy versus Affiliation 

By now the organizing committee will have considered and decided 

several important issues about the project. Pretty clear evidence should 

have emerged and decisions reached about the type of living historical 

farm desired. Fairly complete reports concerning these matters should 

be prepared in this "study phase" to record why the decisions about 

the type of development and its time setting were felt preferable to 

the alternatives. 

To proceed further will require some funds. Perhaps members of 

the organizing committee can finance personal trips to restoration 

projects that seem relevant to the type of project the originators have 

in mind. Should a certain piece of property seem ideal, one of these 

persons might take steps to keep if from being lost from future use. 

Otherwise, these preliminary considerations can be made without 

expending funds. 

To actually get the project under way, some money must be available. At this point, then, the originators may want to evaluate the 

desirability of creating a new organization to develop the living historical farm or of working through some existing body; in short, to 

make a delineation between autonomy and affiliation. The organizers 

might list and evaluate the possible groups with which it could 

affiliate. This list might include a local or state historical society, 
municipal or other governmental officials, a parks system, and other 

such groups. A local or state historical society might make the proposed farm a society project. There may be advantages in having the 

project made a community one in some official way, and thus become 

tax supported. If such sponsoring groups are unacceptable, an alternative would be to form a new organization at the appropriate time. 

A decision to go it alone does not really close the matter. The issue 

will repeatedly assert itself, and the advantages and disadvantages 

must be weighed anew. 

All of the noted alternatives have merit but the appropriate move 

almost certainly will depend on local conditions, which are impossible 

to predict. The Pioneer Arizona Foundation and Living History Farms 

in Iowa have elected to develop projects and raise funds in their own 

names. They thus retain their identity and need not compromise plans 

and goals through absorption into a larger body. They have chosen 

their own sites and have raised their own money—which is not dispersed to other programs by some parent organization. 

Other groups have, to some degree at least, merged with preexisting organizations. A new project in Cleveland, Mississippi, is 

associated, to some extent, with the local Chamber of Commerce, 

thus making its private-municipal status vague. However, it has 

seemingly moved along faster this way than it may have otherwise, 

and apparently without sacrificing much autonomy. Similarly, the 

project of Westville Handicrafts in Lumpkin, Georgia, has been a 

part, to some degree, of the Stewart County Historical Commission; 

however, it has its own nonprofit education corporation and so far 

has been a community-wide effort. Perhaps in smaller communities 

there is more opportunity for living historical farm projects to develop 

with rather vague relationships to other public and private organizations. 

Abandoning to a large organization a living historical farm project 

when it is only in the formative or "idea" stage may put off any 

development for several years. The development may be accomplished, 

but only after that organization—a park system or historical society, 

for example—has the budgetary resources to "afford" the luxury of a 

major restoration project. Unless the director of such an organization 

has himself been one of the originators of a project, no examples 

have been found where the society or park system moved very fast to 
develop a living historical farm, even where the organization received 

the land "gratis." If the project seems important, the originators 

should try to hang onto it themselves. They care the most about it, 

and they will be more successful in initial funding efforts than would 

a larger body. 

The principal exception is in relatively rural areas where the 

originators can make their idea the prime project of the organization 

with which it is considering affiliation. The advantages of using an 

established and, presumably, well-respected organization are considerable. Two current living historical farm projects have evolved 

out of the restoration efforts of such organizations. For both the 

Spartanburg County (South Carolina) Historical Society and the 

Tipton-Haynes Historical Society (Johnson City, Tennessee) such 

an agricultural interpretation of restored farmsteads has been a 

logical, even necessary, progression. There has been no need for a 

separate organization, and the projects have not been diluted by 

being a small part of a large organizations's program. 

If a project can acceptably become the principal activity of a 

preexisting group, then that may be the best solution. But if it were 

to become just one activity in a large, yet tightly budgeted organization the drawbacks likely would be too great. Those who feel that 

the living historical farm project is important would be unhappy 

turning over the decision-making functions to a body for whom it 

would become just another demand on its budget. Fortunately, given 

the local situation and the origin of the project, the appropriate 

organizational status generally becomes self-evident. 

Incorporation 

If there is no organization with which to affiliate acceptably, the 

organizing group should seek to become a private, nonprofit educational corporation. This tax and legal status is not difficult to qualify 

for, and generally it is a necessary prerequisite for accepting contributions of money or antiques. It will be necessary to draw up a 

list of officers and a board of directors to serve the new corporation. 

Depending on how broadly based the group of originators is already, 

it is often thought a good idea to get well-known people to serve, 

and thus lend their endorsements to the new organization. 

10 
The Press 

The announcement of the new corporation may be the first formal 

news item to the press and to other interested organizations. The 

plans for a living historical farm and the names of those who are 

serving on the project's board of directors should be of considerable 

interest to the local community and, very possibly, to the larger newspapers in the state. There is no need for major promotional or 

endorsement coverage at this phase of the project, but the existence 

of the project in a formal way should thus be noted. 

As the project develops, good press coverage will be invaluable. 

Later on it can assist with the fund raising and can generate visitors. 

Access to the media is important and should be planned for well 

ahead. A publisher or a senior editor might make a fine choice for 

the corporation's board of directors. 

Initial Funds 

Before getting started, some funds are needed. Probably $10,000 

would cover the intermediate expenses that are encountered before 

serious fund raising begins. The new tax-exempt/tax-deductible 

organization should secure these first funds and get the project 

under way. 

Visiting other Sites 

Before all the matters raised in the first part of this section have 

reached final conclusion, participants of the organizing group should 

visit other historical sites. The amount of the traveling will vary, 

depending greatly on the extent and diversity of the planned development. In a 1967 report the Pioneer Arizona Foundation noted that 

"the experience of over 400 conservation and historic areas in eight 

countries personally visited by our staff and volunteers has been the 

basis of P.A.F. planning." Most groups will not be able, or need, to 

travel that much. This handbook should help groups select sites 

from which they can learn the most. 

The originators themselves often absorb the costs of travel. An 

institutional affiliation, such as a college, often contributes toward 

such expense, and sometimes a state legislature may provide money 

for a project that will represent the history of the entire state. 

11 
In planning visits to other sites, it usually is helpful to write ahead 

so that representatives of the site can help with questions. However, 

it is sometimes desirable to visit quietly and see things just as other 

visitors do. That way, reactions are not based on information and 

interpretive assistance from the resident staff that other people do 

not receive. 

It usually takes but little time to visit most historical sites, which 

generally are geared to tourists who have only a few hours before 

driving farther down the road. Of course, the large restorations are 

exceptions, but usually a half day at a site will suffice. 

People react differently to projects, so there may not be absolutes 

in regard to what is well done or badly done. Some historic places 

are better than others because they are more carefully planned and 

are more accurate. But different people like different things. Most 

visitors apparently prefer to see an 1840 village or farmstead composed, as much as possible, of 1840-ish buildings and antiques. 

Logically, however, there is no reason the visitor cannot be brought 

to visit an 1840 site with quite new buildings that simulate the 

structures that existed in 1840. A restoration or a reconstruction can 

be presented well or badly, but the visitor may have preferences which 

transcend the quality of a given presentation. The organizing group 

will have to decide whether to restore or to reconstruct, and that 

decision may become self-evident by visiting both types of sites. 

The visiting of pioneer farmsteads—those which memorialize 

famous people and others which tell more general stories—may help 

in making some of the preliminary decisions. Thus, when visiting 

various sites, those who are spearheading the plans for a project 

will have to react both as a tourist and also as a planner. Some of 

the things such persons should note include the following. 

How is the parking of cars handled so as not to intrude into the 

historic areas? 

How do the visitors get from the parking lot into the site, and 

how are their tickets collected? 

What is the quality and effectiveness of the "visitor preparation," 

if any? There may be a small museum, dioramas, a slide show, movie, 

talk, or nothing at all. The adaptability and the quality of the 

presentation should be kept in mind. 

Is it best for the visitor to see things in some particular order to 

get the most from the presentation? If so, has the site been set out 

12 
in such manner that it is easy for the visitor to do this, or must he 

check the handout-brochure to keep on the trail? Which techniques 

help, which confuse? 

Are self-guided or "stay-with-the-group" tours best? If the latter, 

is the collective pace comfortable or is the visitor manipulated in the 

manner used by the operators of many pavilions at world's fairs? 

The critical visitor should also watch for bottlenecks or where people 

get backed up, and he should consider how such situations might 

be avoided. 

A visitor planning a project should look rather critically at the 

site for things that might escape the casual tourist. Anachronisms 

are unfortunate, though sometimes unavoidable. Electric lines, smokestacks, water towers, and railroad spur lines commonly conflict with 

the "atmosphere" of projects. Other anachronisms are supervisory 

problems rather than structural ones—for example, costumed guides 

wearing glasses with plastic frames. 

The visiting planner in search of ideas should observe the variety 

of ways in which service and safety facilities are handled. Fire 

hydrants frequently are necessary, but they should be hidden. They 

sometimes are located under unobtrusive covers or even in privies 

that are provided for atmosphere and not for use. Heating and air 

conditioning equipment frequently is skillfully camouflaged, as are 

supplementary electric lights. In learning about the hows and whys 

of these things, a special guide frequently helps. 

Evaluation of the guides and hostesses will be a part of the critical 

visitor's attention. Spiels sometimes may come as well from recordings, and at less cost, than from guides, though recordings do not 

answer questions. 

Before leaving, the visiting planner should check the gift shop. 

Shops tend to blur in the mind as collections of junk, but very nice 

gift shops are operated at some restorations. Names of manufacturers 

and suppliers often are obtainable to a visitor having legitimate 

reasons for knowing them. Similarly, sources for some of the historic 

building materials might be obtained. 

Traveling to a variety of sites clearly can be a very useful part in 

the planning of a project. A budget of $10,000 for travel would 

allow the planner to visit some of the more famous open air museums 

in Scandinavia and Great Britain. A very restricted list of such places 

to visit abroad might include Skansen, Stockholm, Sweden; Museum 

444-709 O - 72 13 
of English Rural Life, Reading, England; Ulster Folk Museum, Belfast, Northern Ireland; Welsh Folk Museum, Cardiff, Wales; and 

Frilandsmuseet, Lyngby, Denmark. 

Selecting the Site 

In attempting a chronology for the developing of a living historical 

farm project, nothing could be more arbitrarily placed than the 

matter of site selection. In many projects the location is obvious, 

especially if the project is tied to an historic person or is to be a 

part of a larger restoration already in existence. Yet in other projects, 

determining and obtaining the proper location becomes a major task. 

Certainly by the time the "preliminary considerations" have received 

attention and other projects have been visited, the organizing group 

should begin evaluating possible sites. Generally, however, the 

sooner a good site can be agreed upon and options taken on the 

property, the better. As a cardinal and perhaps very obvious rule the 

project should be developed on the best possible site, not simply 

where someone will donate the land. The National Audubon Society 

has developed a list of criteria it considers in evaluating property 

for development as outdoor education and nature centers. If carefully 

adapted, parts of it might apply to living historical farms.1 

The National Audubon Society assigns points from "unsuitable 

(0) " to "superior (5) " for such categories as accessibility, location 

of land, size of the area, terrain, size of community, community 

need, soil, geology, wildlife resources, water resources, and ground 

cover, with each category weighted equally. The average indicates the 

desirability of the site. While some categories do not fit very well, 

the considerations for a living historical farm are surprisingly similar. 

Consideration might be given to weighting the categories unequally, 

say by multiplying "location of land" by 1.8 and its "geology" by 

0.5. Yet, this may be unnecessary as there is an inherent redundancy 

in the list that tends to allow the more important considerations to 

be considered in the rating of several categories. 

Regardless of its precise form, such a checklist should be helpful. 

Then, when alternative sites are weighed against each other, the best 

1

 A Survey and Plan for the Plains Conservation in Arapahoe County, Colorado, prepared by Nature Center Division, National Audubon Society, New 

York [1964]. 

14 
site should emerge with a "mathematical verification." The Audubon 

Society sets ratings as follows: unsuitable, 0; poor, 1; fair, 2; good, 3; 

excellent, 4; and superior, 5. 

Accessibility. This is a very important consideration where high 

visitation is desired or expected. Being close to cities, major highways 

(with convenient interchanges), and proximity to other tourist attractions or other camping and vacation facilities would increase the 

rating for accessibility. 

Location of the land. Land in the middle of a row of hotdog 

stands or near a busy highway, unscreened from sight, is a serious 

disadvantage. The land should be located where zoning regulations 

can be brought to bear to protect the project from its neighbors. 

Many of the best projects now under development are located in large 

parks where the agency developing the site can control not only the 

access but the environmental surrounding. 

Size of area. Generally, the larger the area the better. This reinforces the "location of the land" criterion. Having space and opportunity to expand the development is a considerable plus. 

Terrain. Eighty acres of flat, treeless land poses many more problems than twenty acres of hilly land with bushes and trees. Foliage 

screens parking lots; so do hills. Where multiple interpretations are 

planned, each historical time period must be isolated from the others. 

Where this is impossible, an alternative is the "evolutionary approach" 

used at Upper Canada Village with its farm. There, the first crude 

"settler's cabin" is inhabited by livestock; the hired man lives in 

the 1820 house, and the farmer and his family live in the I860 

dwelling. The agriculture in such situations must be interpreted at the 

most recent of the time period represented. Even where the entire 

development is of the same time period it may be desirable to have 

the farm isolated from the restored village. After considerable search, 

Pioneer Arizona Foundation found desert land that allowed such 

isolation. 

Size of community and community need. In general, populous 

areas can better afford restoration projects. If local tax monies help 

with the operating budget, a broad population base is an advantage. 

Even if this is not being considered, cities will generate many paying 

visitors to the site. Located in Nassau County, New York, Old 

Bethpage will never have a problem of too few visitors; and it could 

easily have the reverse problem of too many. Another aspect of 

15 
community size is the number of school children who may benefit 

from a living historical farm. School systems can be a good supporter 

of educational programs and even provide some funding for them. 

At the very least, children stimulate the development of appropriate 

educational materials and programs, which every living historical 

farm should try to do. 

The remaining factors are somewhat less important, but certainly 

warrant some consideration. 

Soil. This cannot be regarded as unimportant for a farm. However, in most cases fertilizers can hold quite infertile land productive 

enough for an old farm. 

Geology. This factor is probably of little importance in most 

situations. If there is something very interesting about a given site's 

geology, it might be interpreted separately from the farm. This 

would provide a supplementary tourist attraction at the same site. 

Wildlife resources. This consideration is less significant for a 

farm than for a nature center. However, living historical farms and 

children's farms often are secondary factors where an outdoor or 

nature educational center is the primary focus. For such projects it 

may be very important to consider the wildlife resources. 

Water resources. Water for the use of visitors may demand an 

amount greater than a simple country well can provide. A good 

stream may be necessary if a grist mill or saw mill is being planned 

for the project. 

Ground cover. Sometimes the ground cover can compensate and 

supplement the "terrain" consideration. Groves and bushes help 

keep visitors where they belong less obtrusively than fences and more 

artificial barriers. As the property is to be held static, erosion problems 

should be considered both on the farm and where the parking lots 

will be constructed. Conservation must be a consideration, hybrid as 

these developments are between parks, museums, and demonstration 

farms. 

In summary, groups should make sure the land fits the project; 

not needlessly alter the project to fit the land. Once the site is 

located, ways will have to be found to pay for it or to hold options 

on it. Perhaps one or more of the "originators" will be able to 

provide some money for this purpose. Perhaps the major fund drive 

will have to be conducted to get money for the land, and in this 

case it may be difficult to hold onto the property long enough. 

16 
A Director for the Project 

Before fund raising and much antique collecting take place, there 

should be an interim director for the project. Very often one of the 

"originators" does this job on his own without salary from the 

project. Probably some of the expense associated with the position, 

if not the salary itself, will have to be met by the organization. 

Along with travel costs, these expenses will be among the preliminary funds the organization will have to secure. Where a living 

historical farm project is the one concern of a large organization, 

certain people will have to be made responsible for the development. 

Because of the diverse responsibilities of the interim director, a 

variety of backgrounds can qualify a person for the job. In some 

cases, it may be necessary to hire additional employees at the same 

time the director is hired; in other cases, such hiring may be unnecessary for quite a while. Such additional employees should compliment 

the director by providing backgrounds of experience for which the 

director himself is least prepared. In general, a secretary and one 

assistant can form a skeleton crew to assist the director at this time. 

The interim director's capacity to conduct public relations work 

may well be more important than his historical or museum training. 

He will present the project to business people, civic leaders, philanthropists, and museum-related professionals in seeking endorsements 

and funds. He will have to prepare, or at least supervise, the preparation of material for the public and the press. If the director lacks 

experience he should visit many restorations personally to learn 

firsthand about such projects. 

Other types of work that the director may or may not be qualified 

to handle include museum planning, historical research, and the 

acquisition of antiques. There is need for continually refining the 

focus of the project. Someone must determine what items are needed 

for the first phase of the farm development and what things will be 

required in the more distant future. While the director is working 

to obtain money and antiques, the assistant, if qualified, can arrange 

not only for their storage but their repair. Some determinations 

might also be made about what buildings should be constructed or 

moved into the site and restored. 

As has been indicated, the size of the crew needed at this point 

will vary, depending on the resources of time and talent available 

17 
from the organizing committee. Projects get valuable help from 

professional people interested in the project, and some of these may 

be on the corporation's board of directors. A certified public accountant can perform bookkeeping functions that would otherwise require 

the director's time. Lawyers and tax consultants may facilitate grants 

and gifts to the organization. A newspaper man, active or retired, 

may get publicity in papers which would require much work and 

time by a director who lacks appropriate contacts. Board members 

may address some of the civic organizations, freeing the director 

from carrying the entire burden. Volunteer committees can produce 

decisions and informative research reports about the proposed educational programs of the development, determine what antiques are 

needed, and locate buildings to move onto the site. Thus, if the 

organizing group is broadly based, it can reduce the staff needs and 

thus minimize preliminary expenses. 

Office and Storage Facilities 

If a site has not been acquired, the director should make arrangements for acquiring a place which can serve as the office. Having a 

place to store and restore antiques may be even more important. 

Project Presentation 

One of the director's first jobs is to put together a folder with 

information about the proposed site. Once the information has been 

brought together, there may be some expenses for artwork and 

printing for this project presentation. Where the project is the 

program of a parent organization, this presentation may become a 

budget estimate and justification in the form of a master plan. 

While there is great latitude in the nature of the prospectus to be 

prepared, certain types of information are generally found. The 

preparing of two such project proposals—one as an expansion program of an existing restoration and the other as the purpose of a 

new organization—may clarify the nature and purpose of these 

compilations. 

When Old Sturbridge Village sought funds to expand the Pliny 

Freeman farm it commented on the values an expanded farm program would have. These included the introducing of young people 

18 
and adults to a rural way of life, creating a point of contact with 

the project's history for all visitors, and preserving species of plants 

and animals. The corporation's report listed the buildings that would 

compose the farmstead, named the activities that would be demonstrated (including a month-by-month schedule of what a visitor 

would be able to observe through the course of a year), and estimated 

the budgetary demands both for the farm's expansion and for its 

annual operation. Old Sturbridge, of course, had a resident professional staff to draw up the plans. 

At the outset of its fund drive, Iowa History Farms explained its 

purpose as being "to give an exciting, authentic, and vivid picture 

of farming and farm life in the Cornbelt from the time the land 

was settled 150 years ago up to the present with a peek into the 

future.2 The report proceeded to explain a little about what each 

farm would depict and what activities and crafts the "County Seat 

Town" would contain. Again, suggestions of seasonal activities 

indicated what the year-round program could encompass. This 

prospectus did not contain estimates of the cost of the entire project. 

With these examples in mind, information about the following 

items might be included in a report. 

Drawing on the conclusions resulting from the "preliminary considerations" and the reports prepared by volunteer committees, the 

nature of the completed project should be explained with a fair 

amount of detail. This might well include listing activities which 

would occur daily and those which would occur seasonally. 

As the presentation probably will be used outside the community 

when seeking funds and endorsements, the benefits accruing from 

the site each month is a valid point; it is primarily of interest to the 

local people. Historical validity and significance and the promise of 

quality may well mean more to those on the outside. This wider 

audience should be kept in mind. 

Sketches of the projected site layout are helpful. A commercial 

artist's efforts to provide this can also be the source for brochures 

and letterheads. Other visual materials might be collected for use 

when making presentations to groups and organizations. For in3

 A Preliminary Outline for Iowa's Living History Farms, prepared [in 1964] 

by William G. Murray, Des Moines, Iowa. (Unpublished; manuscript copy in 

files of Division of Agriculture and Mining, National Museum of Natural 

History.) 

19 
stance, the organizing group might pool the slides which resulted 

from visiting various sites. These can be put together to illustrate 

the kinds of buildings, activities, and crafts that are to become a 

part of the completed project. In the future, the Association for 

Living Historical Farms and Agricultural Museums might be able to 

provide such a slide series. 

A list of the "originators" and the officers of the corporation 

should be included. As some of the names presumably will be well 

known in the community, this may provide a preliminary list of 

endorsements. 

Some of the material from the presentation might go to the press 

at this time. This will acquaint a broader public with the nature 

of the projected development. As meetings with organizations are 

carried out, and as people come to look over the site and evaluate 

the project, more news events are created and more publicity is 

generated. 

Endorsements 

The director should take one further step before launching the 

major fund drive. He should gain endorsements for his project in 

writing and for attribution wherever possible. As just stated, the 

process of getting the endorsements, having meetings, having people 

visit the site, and so on will all generate publicity about the project. 

In the community where a project is planned, some of the 

"originators" might provide endorsements. Certainly if there is a 

college or a museum from which the project anticipates help and 

talent, that potential role can be set forth in an endorsement of the 

project. This would, at the same time, explain part of the program 

to be carried on at the site. In addition, business and civic groups 

could provide endorsements to help show community support. 

Individuals and organizations at the state level can give endorsements and other assistance. The state's historical society and museum 

personnel can comment on the project's significance. Offers to assist 

with the research and the location of artifacts are helpful. The state's 

agricultural organizations, both public and private, can give meaningful endorsements and, perhaps, funds. The economic development 

people and tourism bureau might help publicize the project and 

provide useful contacts with other groups and agencies in the state. 

20 
Given the current interest in the environment, state parks people 

and others such as ecology organizations who are concerned with 

maintaining open spaces can generally be counted upon to approve 

of living historical farm developments. 

After securing such endorsements, the director can look to the 

larger institutions and organizations. Representatives of the United 

States Departments of Agriculture, the National Park Service, and 

the Smithsonian Institution have visited proposed sites and written 

letters of endorsement for use by the director. The National Trust 

for Historic Preservation and Colonial Williamsburg may also provide help and encouragement. Expenses for visits by the personnel 

from the various organizations generally have to be met by the local 

group. If the site is to include (or to be primarily) an outdoor and 

nature educational facility, the National Audubon Society might 

evaluate the plans, perhaps at its own expense. Support by Congressmen and Senators is generally good to have and occasionally turns 

into material benefits. One Senator was responsible for an interstate 

highway interchange being built at the edge of a development. 

Endorsements from national and governmental bodies should 

generally come after endorsements have been secured from local and 

state groups. The local endorsements thus become part of the 

justification for the later ones. After incorporating the endorsements 

into the presentation materials, the director can begin to seek the 

major financial support that will be needed for the project. 

Financing 

Great diversity appears among directors of living historical farms 

and restoration projects about how to raise money and the sources 

from which to seek assistance. As with most other matters, financing 

is so largely dependent on local situations that most generalizations 

are of limited use. 

In cases where the farm or restoration project comes under the 

sponsorship of a public agency, such as a park or historical society, 

there may remain a need for "outside" contributions. In those cases, 

a "Friends of" type of organization may be formed and incorporated. 

Such an agency can accept contributions of objects and funds to 

furnish the buildings in the development. To that degree, the fund 

21 
raising information here may have relevance even for public-supported projects. 

Professional Fund Raisers 

Professional fund raisers help communities build hospitals, 

churches, and cultural facilities. Their usefulness in finding funds 

for living historical farms and other restoration efforts is a matter 

of some dispute. Earl Wallace, the president of Shakertown's board 

of trustees, has been successful in funding that project. However, 

he found that professional fund raisers were not helpful. 

In contrast, William G. Murray, director of Iowa History Farms, 

used a professional fund raiser and was pleased with the results. 

In his case, the professional was already working in central Iowa 

raising money for a cultural center at Iowa State University, and he 

worked for Iowa History Farms only one day a week. It should be 

remembered that professionals charge for their services, however. 

Foundations 

National foundations and companies generally lack interest in 

local projects. While the nationwide significance of a local project 

may seem conclusive to its backers, it is rarely persuasive to a 

foundation. Unless there are contacts in unusually high places, the 

large national foundation probably will not yield anything. 

It may be fruitful to solicit former residents of the community or 

state who have made their fortunes. Nostalgia for "back home" has 

been a particularly productive catalyst in securing money. Of course, 

just because a very wealthy family never left the community should 

not disqualify it from generous giving. Those with family foundations 

through which they can channel gifts are apparently the best prospects. A few people with large fortunes generally can endow a project 

and constitute a preferred and reliable form of assistance. Earl Wallace 

feels that 80 percent of a project's funds for development and for 

operating losses usually comes from ten or fewer donors. 

Businesses and Organizations 

Some projects succeed in getting funds from businesses and 

organizations. As of 1969, Iowa History Farms had 95 pledges for 

22 
$359,000, an average of less than $4,000 per pledge. Many contributors were agribusiness organizations, such as seed corn, feed, and meat 

packing companies and the Iowa Farm Bureau. Other major contributors were electric and gas power companies, insurance companies, 

banks, and a newspaper. 

Similarly, the California Wine Institute and the Lodi Grape Association have indicated support for the Micke Grove tokay grape farm 

in San Joaquin County, California. 

The Pioneer Arizona Foundation (PAF) has developed a particularly successful fund raising approach. While this is a restored 

village development, the idea might have a wider application if 

carefully adapted. The foundation's technique has been to sign sponsors to contracts running about seven years from the date of the 

building's opening to the public, with the contributor holding a 

renewal option. The sponsor provides money for PAF to construct 

and furnish a building, to hire people, and to interpret the restoration 

through the life of the contract. The sponsor gets his name printed 

across the front of the reconstructed or restored building but he 

relinquishes all rights to affect the content of the displays and the 

interpretation, which remain in PAF's hands. Thus, a Phoenix manufacturer agreed to sponsor a building for PAF's tinsmith, a lumber 

company sponsored the lumber yard and carpenter's shop, and so on. 

Businesses were not the only organizations that agreed to these 

contracts; for example, a foundation sponsored a church and a 

woman's club sponsored a school in memory of one of its charter 

members. 

The PAF contracts provide for contributions to meet the costs of 

constructing the building; an annual amount to provide a particular 

level of interpretation (a tape recorder being cheaper than a hostess 

or guide); a proportionate share for the developmental costs of 

landscaping, parking lots, streets, and utility installations; and an 

annual assessment for a proportionate share of PAF's overhead once 

in operation. One sample contract committed the sponsor to contributing more than $140,000, which included $15,000 for curating 

and cataloging an existing collection plus obtaining needed items 

for the exhibit. 

Perhaps the greatest significance of this approach is the psychological one. Many thousands of dollars have to be raised for each project, 

and it may be difficult for sponsors to see where their contributions 

23 
go. If it is possible to label a contributor's gift, even somewhat arbitrarily, that donor might well contribute more. Brochures given to 

the tourists might then indicate that a particular sponsor provided 

the funds for such items as building and interpreting a barn or 

clearing and farming a small field behind the house. 

The Federal Government 

The federal government is a logical place to seek help with 

financing. Unfortunately, not many programs have proven relevant 

to living historical farms. Some of those which have been used in 

the past, such as the Neighborhood Youth Corps, have disappeared 

with the reduction of funds and programs originally included in the 

1964 Economic Opportunity Act. Moreover, surviving programs 

which seem appropriate frequently have lacked funds in recent years 

to assist projects. Each group should begin by consulting the 

Catalog of Federal Assistance Programs produced by the Office of 

Economic Opportunity. 

A few of the programs from which projects might gain assistance 

include the following. 

Economic Development Act loans and grants (P.L. 89-136; 79 

STAT 552). The Economic Development Administration, in the 

Department of Commerce, handles loans for designated historical 

redevelopment areas. 

Farmers Home Administration loans for recreation enterprises, 

administered by the Department of Agriculture. A recreational aspect 

of the project must exist, but need not be the major part of the 

project. 

Soil Conservation Districts have occasionally provided land for 

development as nature and outdoor educational centers. Living historical farms occasionally can qualify as such projects. 

Title III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, has 

provided funds for in-service training programs for teachers and 

students. Such funds may facilitate the development of good educational programs at living historical farms. 

Pioneer Arizona Foundation's resourcefulness in fund raising has 

extended beyond developing sponsor contracts. It secured the assistance of men and equipment from the U. S. Seabees for 120 man24 
hours for dynamiting and so on and from the 9th Engineering 

Battalion of the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve for work on the 

Organized Youth Camping area; and from the Arizona National 

Guard for 180 man-hours and two semitrucks with lowboys to 

move historic buildings. 

State and Local Funding 

In addition to adequate land and control of access, county and 

state parks systems have an advantage over privately funded restoration projects because of their relatively constant budgets derived from 

taxes. The problem of continually raising money from private 

sources proves discouraging to many people. Unless a project is 

generously endowed or has a dependable group of backers, it will be 

necessary to plead for money every year to make up the operating 

deficit. 

Large gifts and fund drives can help in developing and expanding, 

but interest from an endowment fund or a dependable tax source 

for year-to-year operating expenses is almost a necessity. It might 

be possible for living historical farms to tap this resource in more 

situations than they have so far. In Nebraska, for example, a county 

can vote a mill levy on itself to help maintain a public museum. 

The authority for the control of land, operations, and facilities are 

vested in a local museum board. The county board of supervisors 

appoints the five members of this board. Obviously, a 2-mill levy in 

a county with a very significant tax base can provide a considerable 

amount of funds. The Stuhr Museum at Grand Island, Nebraska, 

estimates $186,000 annually from this source. 

Small Donors 

Innumerable devices exist to involve contributions of $10 or less. 

The Tipton-Haynes Historical Society raised money by getting contributions of $1 per split rail for a fence. It gave a pass to the site in 

return. Many places give season passes in return for gifts in the $25 

or less range. Sometimes the device can get quite expensive. Westville 

Community has sold "grants" to property at the rate of $10 per 

square foot. Buying two squares makes one a "citizen," 50 a 

"major," and 1,000 a "small colonel of small militia." Usually, 

25 
however, the purpose of these plans is to involve more people in the 

community, not to raise large amounts of money. 

Historical Research 

Research for living historical farms demands an attention to detail 

seldom encountered in other kinds of historical work. If a general 

historian cannot find all of the details on some aspect of past life 

he can often write around the subject or possibly even ignore it. 

The historian for a farm, however, must somehow or other find out 

such details as the kinds of fences, plants, animals, and equipment 

the original farmer had used. At the very least, the historian must 

come up with a reasonable guess based on the best available evidence. 

The publications listed below are examples of the results of research 

on historical sites. 

BEARSS, EDWIN C. Lincoln Boyhood Home: As a Living Historical Farm. 

Washington: National Park Service, 1967. 181 pages. 

. The Burroughs Plantation as a Living Historical Farm. Washington: 

National Park Service, 1969. 147 pages. 

HATCH, CHARLES E., JR. Chapters in the History of Popes Creek Plantation. 

Washington: National Park Service, 1968. 250 pages. 

PETERSON, GALE E. "Living Historical Farms: A Feasibility Study," The 

Smithsonian Journal of History, 2 (summer, 1967) :72-76. 

More general, but useful at the start of a project, are the following: 

LANDAHL, WILLIAM L. Perpetuation of Historical Heritage: For Park and 

Recreation Departments. Wheeling, West Virginia: American Institute of 

Park Executives, 1965. 40 pages. Deals primarily with the restoration, 

reconstruction, preservation, and stablization of buildings. Contains much 

useful advice, particularly on methods and where to find materials. Has a 

short but useful bibliography. 

RATH, FREDERICK L., JR. (editor), and MERRILYN ROGERS (compiler). 

NYSHA Selective Guide to Historic Preservation. Cooperstown: New York 

State Historical Association, 1966. 133 pages. Mostly a topical bibliography 

on every aspect of the material and artistic remains of Americans. A very 

good primer for originators of a project. 

Every farm presents its historian with particular problems, but 

these may often be approached through some old routes. Some generally useful bibliographies include the following: 

HANDLIN, OSCAR, AND OTHERS. Harvard Guide to American History. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press, 1963. 689 pages. Contains advice as 

26 
well as rather extensive bibliographies, but it may well be most useful for 

the information it gives on travelers' accounts and on local histories. The 

scanty index offers little help, but patient study may turn up many items 

which might otherwise escape detection. 

KAPLAN, LOUIS, AND OTHERS. A Bibliography of American Autobiographies. 

Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1962. 372 pages. Lists many 

autobiographies of farmers. Annotated and well indexed. 

SCHLEBECKER, JOHN T. Bibliography of Books and Pamphlets on the History 

of Agriculture in the United States, 1607-1967. Santa Barbara, California: 

Clio Press, 1969- '183 pages. The listed publications often lead to source 

materials. A good starting place for agricultural research. 

Newspapers and magazines often contain very useful material, 

including illustrations. Other than local journals should be examined, 

for often details on a particular locality are printed in journals of 

regional or even national circulation. Sometimes the old copies of 

local papers no longer are available in the locality but have been 

saved elsewhere. So, even in local research, general bibliographic 

aids may be needed. For listings of periodicals of all sorts the following may be valuable: 

Ayer's Directory of Newspapers and Periodicals. Philadelphia: N. W. Ayer & 

Son, 1880 to the present. An annual which began in 1880 as Ayer's Newspaper Annual and changed in 1910 to Ayer's American Newspaper Annual 

and Directory. Well indexed, and with entries arranged by states and towns. 

All manner of information is given about the various periodicals except 

where copies can be found now. 

Biological and Agricultural Index. New York: H. W. Wilson, 1916 to the 

present. An annual listing that began as the Agricultural Index in 1916. 

Present title since 1964. Contains articles on history. The chronological 

range considerably exceeds the indicated 1916 limit. Very useful for finding 

scholarly and scientific articles on agriculture, including history. 

Union List of Serials in Libraries of the United States and Canada. New York: 

H. W. Wilson, 1965, 3d ed. 4 vols. An alphabetical listing of periodicals 

that indicates the libraries that have copies and whether the libraries will 

lend. Some information on the periodical often is included. An invaluable 

research tool. 

Both primary and secondary materials can be found in a variety 

of books, but the following ones are particularly useful: 

BIDWELL, PERCY W., AND JOHN I. FALCONER. History of Agriculture in the 

Northern United States, 1620-1860. Washington: Carnegie Institution of 

Washington, 1925. 512 pages. Contains illustrations, bibliography, footnotes, 

index. 

27 
BRIGHAM, CLARENCE S. History and Bibliography of American Newspapers, 

1690-1820. Worcester, Massachusetts: American Antiquarian Society, 1947, 

2 vols. 

DANHOF, CLARENCE S. Changes in Agriculture: The Northern United States, 

1820-1870. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969- Includes a bibliography. 

GLASSIE, HENRY. Pattern in the Material Folk Culture of the Eastern United 

States. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968. Includes a 

bibliography. 

GRAY, LEWIS C. History of Agriculture in the Southern United States to I860. 

Washington: The Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1933, 2 vols. The 

bibliography is in volume 2, along with the index. 

HAMER, PHILIP M., editor. A Guide to the Archives and Manuscripts of the 

United States. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964. 

SHANNON, FRED A. The Farmer's Last Frontier, Agriculture, 1860-1897. New 

York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1945 [2d edition, 1961]. 434 pages. 

Includes bibliography. 

STUNTZ, STEPHEN C. List of the Agricultural Periodicals of the United States 

and Canada Published during the Century July 1810-1910. U.S. Department 

of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication 398. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1941. 

Printed reports of the United States Census, 1790 to the present, 

may be consulted. Especially valuable are the reports for the years 

after 1850. Then too, historians can profitably use the census schedules, those pieces of paper on which the enumerators recorded the 

replies to the census questions, which includes names and addresses 

among other things. These, available in the states, tell a great deal 

about specific farmers. 

The annual reports of the Commissioner of Patents (which preceded the Department of Agriculture yearbooks) from about 1837 

to 1856 contain facts and opinions on farming in the various regions 

of the United States. Although not indexed well, the reports tell 

a great deal because they came from farmers living in the areas 

reported on. 

In county courthouses and state depositories historians can find 

records of various kinds, particularly inventories of estates, wills, 

and will books. These manuscript sources can give much information, 

and sometimes they have been fairly well indexed for minor political 

subdivisions. Account books kept by farmers (and by merchants 

dealing with farmers) can tell a great deal, and can be found almost 

anywhere. The Library of Congress, Manuscript Division, has a 

28 
great many of these account books, but mostly for the eastern 

United States. 

Almanacs contain much information. They can be found almost 

anywhere, but the American Antiquarian Society at Worcester, 

Massachusetts, and the Library of Congress have the best collections. 

A useful guide to such publications is Almanacks of the United States, 

compiled by Milton Drake (New York: Scarecrow Press, 1962, 2 

vols.). 

For pictures of machines, animals, and plants, every locality has 

its own resources, but some general and readily available sources 

include the following: 

American Prints in the Library of Congress: A Catalogue of the Collection, 

compiled by Karen F. Beall and others. Baltimore: Published for the Library 

of Congress by the Johns Hopkins Press, 1970. 568 pages. With illustrations 

and bibliography. 

Annotated List of Photographs in the Division of Agriculture and Forest 

Products, compiled by Pauline B. Christian. Smithsonian Institution Information Leaflet 519. Washington: 1968. 126 pages. 

ARDREY, ROBERT L. American Agricultural Implements. Published by the 

author, 1894. 236 pages. Has good illustrations but no index. 

BAILEY, LIBERTY HYDE. Cyclopedia of American Agriculture. New York: 

Macmillan, 1907, 4 vols. 

BUTTERWORTH, BENJAMIN. The Growth of Industrial Art. Washington: 

Government Printing Office, 1892. 199 pages. Illustrated. 

FARNHAM, ALEXANDER. Tool Collectors Handbook of Prices Paid at Auction 

for Early American Tools. Published by the author (P.O. Box 205, RD 2, 

Stockton, New Jersey 08559), 1970. 39 pages. "With 500 Tool Prices Listed 

and 200 Tools Illustrated." 

HUNT, ROBERT, AND F. W. RUDLER. Ure's Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, 

and Mines. London: Longmans, Green, 1878, 2 vols. 

KNIGHT, EDWARD H. Knight's American Mechanical Dictionary. Boston: 

Houghton Mifflin, 1884, 2 vols. 

The above references just scratch the surface, of course, but they 

probably will lead to almost all of the relevant material. Books not 

directly related to agriculture abound, and presumably can be found 

by those interested. The intention here has been to indicate the 

sources particularly valuable in farm research. 

Staff and Equipment 

A living historical farm resembles a theatrical production as much 

as it resembles anything. The people who do the historical farming 

444-709 O - 72 29 
appear on stage from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. and perform real tasks while 

explaining their activities. In the background, and unseen by the 

public, another staff of artisans and farmers keeps the equipment 

in repair and does what must be done of nonhistorical nature. 

Unavoidably, the staff on the fully operating farm has to be larger 

than the force normally used on a real farm. 

The experiences of those involved in such farms indicate that 

the farm must be small enough to be operated by a nonresident staff. 

People cannot be expected to work and live continually in the past. 

All experience to date indicates that the workers expect to enjoy 

present amenities such as television, running water, modern plumbing, and a host of other conveniences that cannot be provided on 

an accurate living historical farm. Consequently, the farmers live 

off the farm and come to work like other workers. 

These farm employees cannot by law or by custom pass simply 

as farmers. They work for a museum. That is, they will not work 

unusually long hours, and the law often will not allow them to 

work more than eight hours a day for five days. Most likely, the 

ratio of workers on a real farm to workers on a historical farm 

would be about 1:3. What one farmer could do on a true farm will 

require about three workers on a museum farm. The ratio results 

mostly from the theatrical aspect of the work and the implied supportive services—costumes, props, etc. 

The number of staff members required on a historical farm increases as the number of visitors increases. Such a farm needs some 

employees to protect implements, plants, and animals from visitors 

and others to conduct visitors around the site. The work tends to 

be seasonal, however, and generally sufficient workers can be found 

for the period of heaviest visitation. 

All experience so far has confirmed that modern workers can 

master and perform the difficult and unpleasant tasks typical of 

earlier farming. They may start awkwardly, but they can learn the 

old jobs, such as milking by hand, provided they receive sufficient 

incentive. The workers often come under state and federal minimum 

wage laws. The federal labor laws always apply if any part of the 

funds for the farm are derived from the federal government. State 

regulations vary, but they all tend to apply minimum wage and 

maximum hour limits. The cheap labor option generally does not 

30 
exist for living historical farms, even though it may seem possible in 

prospect. 

At some stage in its development, a living historical farm must 

have the service of an historian. In addition, legal counsel may be 

required from time to time, and so also the assistance of a veterinarian. The advice of agronomists and other agricultural experts 

may be needed sometimes. Most of these experts cannot be retained 

permanently, and some need not be. Still, they must all be available, 

and mechanics and other craftsmen must be kept on a regular basis. 

Once the farm management knows what the farm needs in the 

way of implements, tools, machines, animals and plants, such items 

have to be located. The Association for Living Historical Farms and 

Agricultural Museums will help members find the needed items, but 

it cannot, of course, guarantee success. The National Park Service 

now acts as a repository of information on the location of such items. 

Inquiries for items should be addressed to Ernst Christensen, National 

Capital Park Service, 1100 Ohio Drive, S. W., Washington, D. C. 

20024. The effectiveness of the system depends on the cooperation 

of the members, who supply the information. 

Visitors and Interpretation 

Visitors to a historical farm have to be protected, guided, informed, 

and regulated. Various methods have been worked out for performing these tasks and all have been successful at one place or another. 

Depending on the type and number of visitors, some methods work 

better than others, but they all cost money. According to a recent 

survey, the costs apparently vary little between one system and 

another in the long run: 

Comparisons of number of visits with operating expenditure indicate a relatively constant cost ratio of about $1 per visit, until the expenses reach 

$250,000. In the $1 million and over range, the 1:1 ratio was again present. 

Thus, the $1 per visitor cost ratio remained relatively constant in the majority 

of expenditure categories.3 

None of the surveyed operations ran farms open to the public. 

Exhibition farming surely costs more than operating a museum. At 

3

 Lola E. Rogers, Museums and Related Institutions: A Basic Program Survey. Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 

(Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1969). Page 56. 

31 
the very least, living historical farms would fall within the one dollar 

per visitor range. Less will inevitably mean more, as losses will 

exceed the cost of adequate protection. 

Protecting the Property 

Some living historical farms have failed, and the failures usually 

resulted from heavy losses sustained by way of visitor theft. If the 

farm cannot afford guards and fences to protect equipment, everything soon will disappear. A passion for collecting souvenirs seems 

to be universal among men. Fences, sometimes two of them, and 

guards in some guise must be present, and the larger the number 

of visitors the greater the need for protection. Losses by theft or 

vandalism can quite literally destroy a living historical farm. 

Usually one fence, historically accurate, will keep visitors away 

from implements, crops, and livestock. Fences must be maintained 

and repaired because visitors will attempt to destroy them. Sometimes a second fence, less easily attacked, can be used, but such a 

fence is hurtful to the air of authenticity. Costumed guards can 

prevent serious damage to the fence and can also keep a watch over 

implements and other items. Farms having large numbers of visitors 

find guards more effective than fences alone. 

In part, the method of moving and regulating visitors influences 

the choice of other protection measures. Visitors moving at random 

have more opportunity to steal than visitors conducted in groups, 

and those carried in vehicles have the least opportunity. People can 

be conveyed on carts, flatbed trailers, busses, and other vehicles. 

They may alight to have a scene explained, or may have it explained 

as they ride by. Many successful enterprises print a map with 

instructions and allow visitors to conduct their own tours. Workers 

on the farm might explain their activities but this reduces their 

farming efficiency. 

Tours conducted in groups are less disruptive to farming operations. 

Conducted groups also cause less destruction, and the leader relieves 

the farmer of explaining as he works. On the other hand, very large 

numbers of visitors require a large staff of leaders. Many visitors 

prefer self-conducted tours so that they may linger at what interests 

them and pass up what does not. Experience indicates that the best 

method of conducting visitors depends on how closely supervision 

32 
is needed. Strong fences and enough guards make the self-conducted 

tour the most rewarding for all concerned. 

Protecting the Visitors 

Farms can be dangerous. Visitors to any farm, historical or other, 

must be protected from the animals, and the animals must be protected from the visitors. Animal diseases must be controlled, especially 

if they threaten human health; likewise, livestock should be protected 

from human diseases, and the animals should be replaced when 

infected. This can become expensive. It also poses some technical 

problems in controlling a disease—such as brucellosis—which farmers 

did not control in the period the farm represents. 

Farms inevitably contain various kinds of tools and machines, and 

almost all of them can hurt people. Visitors must be kept away from 

all such devices. Signs help, but common experience has proved that 

they do not solve the problem. Visitors simply must not be allowed 

to get at tools and machines. 

Explaining the Exhibits 

An extensive literature on the explanation of exhibits has been 

developed. Labels or printed signs can convey much information, 

but for outdoor enterprises, such as farms, they should be heavy, 

legible, and out of reach. If not out of reach, they tend to disappear 

or carry unwanted graffiti. Visitors transported in some kind of vehicle can receive information through taped and recorded messages. 

Such announcements perhaps lack human warmth, but they also 

minimize difficulties that arise from regional speech patterns. No 

inoffensive way of expanding this observation comes to mind. 

The natural shifts of activities with the changing seasons complicates the business of interpretation. Through much of our history, 

a large amount of the processing of farm products took place right 

on the farm. Farmers husked and shelled corn by hand, threshed and 

winnowed their wheat, churned butter, pressed cheese, slaughtered 

hogs, and smoked their own ham and bacon. And the farmers did 

much more besides, including pressing apples and making cider. 

Farmers took care of these jobs as promptly as they could. Wheat 

farmers, for example, finished the threshing as soon as they could 

33 
get to it. Much work, such as corn husking, was done cooperatively, 

but the museum farmer obviously has no museum neighbors to assist 

or to be assisted. A husking bee, if undertaken, would become a 

simple stage presentation. The question arises whether accuracy would 

allow the continuous staging of an event that occurred only once each 

year. In addition to the problem of accuracy, the problem of expense 

also arises. 

Should threshing, husking, and such be extended unrealistically 

across time? Probably not, if for no other reason than the expense. 

A motion picture showing the seasonal events will illustrate the farm 

year, and at less trouble and expense than repeated stagings. In terms 

of accuracy, events should occur in their season as nature requires. 

Slide films with a recorded sound tract cost less, apparently, and can 

substitute for motion pictures, although not as satisfactorily. Experience of some farms suggest that motion pictures make the best 

vehicle for depicting the total round of activity on the period farm. 

CAPITAL AND OVERHEAD 

The Expenses of Development and Operation 

The costs of constructing and operating restoration facilities vary 

widely. The experiences at some historical sites, however, suggest 

the nature and relative proportions of expenses that a project should 

anticipate. 

Beyond the acquisition of the land, labor is the principal expense 

in developing and operating a restoration project. However, the 

initial expenses tend to fall into three categories: public access and 

service facilities; restoration and reconstruction; and designing and 

constructing interpretative facilities and materials.4 

California's Department of Parks and Recreation has made detailed 

estimates of the costs it anticipates in developing the Hackett Ranch 

in Yolo County. These estimates provide a good place to start, for the 

project is of about average size. The state received at no cost some 

buildings and 20 acres of land and purchased an adjoining 80 acres 

for development of farming areas and for staff facilities. This parks 

department also divided the developmental cost into two phases. 

4

 C. Nelson Hackett Ranch Feasibility Study. California Department of Parks 

and Recreation, 1964 (revised, 1969). 

34 
The first phase presumably would be complete before the facility 

was opened. The second phase would be completed as quickly as 

funds allowed, but possibly after the public opening. Roughly 60 

percent of the total development costs appear in the first phase of 

the development. 

Public Access and Service Facilities 

Parks people constantly encounter certain types of expenses associated with a public facility; thus, they should be capable of estimating these factors with some precision. In the case of the Hackett 

Ranch, the California Parks Department has estimated that it could 

apportion $100,000 during the first phase of development among 

the following categories in roughly the indicated percentages: 

Vehicular access and parking 15% 

Water 15% 

Electricity 15% 

Comfort station 17% 

Sewage disposal 20% 

Landscaping and tree planting 5% 

Fencing 11% 

Picnic tables 2% 

An additional $60,000 during the second phase would allow construction of maintenance and storage buildings and a modern residence for a staff member to live at the site. When combined, the 

estimates for both phases of providing public access and service 

facilities account for about 45 percent of the estimated $350,000 

for the developmental costs of the entire project above land and 

antique furnishing. 

Aside from the cost of acquiring antiques and other furnishings 

(which could become expensive), this rather low figure helps make 

a valid point. Interpretative facilities and materials are not generally 

major costs for a living historical farm. When Old Sturbridge Village 

proposed the expansion of the Pliny Freeman farm it estimated the 

costs at better than $70,000. Building fences and a wagon bridge, 

clearing land and providing filling and top soil were among the 

major costs. The reproducing of equipment and farm tools claimed 

only $10,000 of the estimates and additional livestock but $1,750. 

At Old Sturbridge the visitor facilities already existed, so no additional visitor center had to be provided. 

35 
A related aspect is that the costs of individual items of machinery 

and tools appear expensive in themselves. When considered as a 

portion of the developmental costs, however, they become rather 

small percentagewise. It might cost from $150 to $200 to reproduce 

an old plow. That is a lot for a simple, crude tool but a small amount 

when it is considered that thousands of dollars are being spent on 

the restoration project. In addition, farmers "made do" with many 

other simple implements, some of which they made themselves in 

slack season and usually repaired as needed. Cooperstown's farmers 

thus do much of this work as well. In planning for the Carter's Grove 

plantation, Williamsburg officials pointed out they have their own 

craftsmen and equipment with which to make the necessary 18th 

century tools and equipment. Again, the costs will not be particularly 

large, and whatever their size they will be very difficult to estimate. 

Beyond such costs which historical farm projects frequently by-pass 

or cannot meaningfully estimate, the quality of the interpretive program remains an enormous variable. The interpretation of a building 

can be left to the printed brochure carried by the tourist, can come 

from a tape recording in the building, or can be provided by hostesses 

and guides in costume. On living historical farms, nearly all the 

interpretation necessarily is provided by men and women in costume 

and doing farm or household work. Such labor becomes an expense 

on the annual budget, not a developmental cost. 

The construction of an interpretative-education building, however, 

is a potential developmental cost. In the National Audubon Society's 

1964 plans for the Plains Conservation Center near Denver, Colorado, a multipurpose structure costing $225,000 was suggested.5 

This building would serve as a visitor's focal point, with classrooms 

for school groups, exhibits, a small book store, and a library. In 

addition, it would serve as the administrative headquarters for the 

staff. A workshop could also be housed there. The suggested plans 

for the Center allowed for building the structure in stages. 

Labor and Administrative Expenses 

Labor makes up the major expense of all museums, restoration 

projects, and living historical farms. This is true even though many 

5

 A Survey and Plan for the Plains Conservation Center in Arapahoe County, 

California. 

36 
efforts are made to get low-cost labor. It is a common practice to 

use seasonal laborers, either the retired social security recipient or 

the college student. In most cases, minimum wages become maximum 

for these employees. Of course, the peak tourist season and demand 

on labor occurs in the summer when college students seek jobs and 

the elderly return from sunny climates. Beyond cheap labor, volunteer and service groups assist many projects and thus reduce the 

overhead. 

The Hackett Ranch's estimates for staff needs appear as about 50 

percent of first year's operation costs because of initial equipment 

and livestock acquisition expenses. Personnel expenses account for 

roughly 70 percent of the second year's budget, however. 

Restoration and Reconstruction Costs 

The example of the Hackett Ranch is less helpful in estimating 

reconstruction and restoration costs. The California Parks Department 

estimates $15,000 for archeology and preliminary planning, $47,000 

to restore the ranch house and $32,000 to reconstruct the barn in 

the first phase. Additional development would provide a well-house, 

windmill, blacksmith shop, bunkhouse, kitchen, a wagon and tool 

shed, and a pumphouse costing altogether another $57,500. 

Any such set of figures requires many qualifiers. Regional differences in labor costs greatly affect these estimates. Inflation has made 

these 1969 figures too low already. In addition, many living historical 

farms result as an expansion of a restoration project already in existence or as developments within parks. In such cases, some of the 

laborers are already on the budget and some tools and equipment 

are already available for use. 

Perhaps a more useful way to get at reconstruction and restoration 

costs is that which Minor Wine Thomas, the vice president of the 

Farmers Museum at Cooperstown, provides. His "rule of thumb" 

estimate is that it costs 3 to 5 times as much to move in and restore 

an old building as it does to build a new one. The financial officer 

at Old Sturbridge Village endorsed these estimates, recalling how 

some years ago it cost $20,000 to move in a small frame law office 

and $70,000 for a small, one-room brick bank building. 

However, the costs of moving buildings is not particularly expensive for some projects. Westville Historic Handicrafts has had splen37 
did cooperation in Lumpkin, Georgia, and has moved houses at a 

small fraction of the costs experienced by Old Bethpage Village on 

Long Island, New York. Closing a road to move a house, for 

example, is quite a different proposition in the different localities. 

Designing and Constructing Interpretive Facilities 

and Materials 

Planning on help from local groups, the California Parks officials 

made rather low estimates for display materials and facilities. For 

the first phase they planned a wagon trail in addition to some materials, and for the second phase a kitchen garden and an additional 

visitor orientation program. They pegged these costs at less than 

10 percent of the developmental costs. 

The Audubon Society's estimate for the Plains Conservation Center 

staff and labor costs run about 80 percent of the annual operating 

costs after development. This includes the director's and the naturalist's salaries as well as secretarial and staff salaries. This estimate may 

be a little low, for the developmental plans included residences for 

the caretaker and the naturalist, which would thus increase their real 

salaries. 

Writing in a research report for the Accokeek Foundation in 1958, 

Wilbur H. Hunter, Jr., Director of the Peale Museum, observed that 

recent surveys had indicated that the general operating expense of 

a museum came to 40-60 percent of the salary budget.6 Salaries thus 

compose 60 to 70 percent of most museum budgets. However, a 

more recent study by the American Association of Museums known 

as the Belmont Report states that "Salaries absorb between 70 and 80 

percent of the operating budget in major museums."7 

Old Sturbridge Village offers further insight and confirmation of 

this figure of 80 percent. In its budgeting for the Freeman Farm, 

the percentage appears to run well over this amount. It apportions 

money for such staff expenses as administrative, research and supervision; agricultural demonstration and maintenance; and craft demon8

 A Research Report on the Proposed Agricultural Historical Museum at 

Bryan Point on the Potomac River, Accokeek, Maryland. Prepared for the 

Accokeek Foundation, Inc., by Wilbur H. Hunter, Jr., 1958. Pages 40-41. 

7

 America's Museums: The Belmont Report. American Association of Museums, 1969- Page 26. (Hereinafter referred to as Belmont Report.) 

38 
strators. These categories account for roughly 95 percent of the costs 

of operating the farm. However, the budget does not apportion 

percentages of the many tourist facilities, parking lots, and utility 

expenses which would be a portion of most living historical farms' 

budgets. This is probably fair enough, because Old Sturbridge Village 

already had these facilities and the labor costs represent just about 

the only additional costs to its budget. 

Old Sturbridge Village officials suggest another way of estimating 

labor expenses. They believe that doubling the pay-per-hours figure 

for each employee would yield a figure that will cover the Village's 

expenses of costuming and providing tools for that employee as well 

as various other overhead costs. For example, if a person is hired 

to work for about the minimum wage, say $1.65 per hour, the real 

cost of that employee would be $3.30 per hour. Roughly one-third 

of that extra cost is arrived at by adding (1) 15 percent on top of 

salaries to cover payroll taxes, insurance, and so on and (2) another 

15 percent on top of the direct expenses of operating a facility to 

cover administrative, research, and supervisory expenses. For example, 

in a preliminary estimate of the annual operating budget for the 

expanded farm, Old Sturbridge Village estimated salaries of $9,360 

but labor expenses of $10,800. Then, estimates of the farm expenses 

totaling $5,400 were added. To the resulting $16,200 budget, 15 

percent or $2,430 was added to cover administrative, research, and 

supervisory expenses. Thus, in the case of the proposed farm budget, 

71 percent of the total $18,630 went for labor and personnel expenses. 

Although later plans made these figures obsolete, the approach 

devised by such an experienced and well-run operation as Old 

Sturbridge Village bears some careful examination. Seemingly, adding 30 percent to the salaries of the nonadministrative, research, and 

supervisory personnel plus 15 percent of the nonsalary expenses of 

the whole budget will altogether yield the salary expense. This holds 

true provided that the administrative, research, and supervisory personnel claim but 15 percent of the operating budget. 

The labor needs of a living historical farm are without doubt going 

to be the major expenses of the budget. Minor Wine Thomas of 

Farmers' Museum suggests figuring how many people would normally have done a job on a farm or in a household and multiply 

that figure by three to estimate the labor needs in the historical area. 

The estimates of the Hackett Ranch are generally in line with this. 

39 
During the summer its budget provides for having eight persons on 

salary, with all eight at the site on weekends but only three or four 

on duty each weekday. The winter schedule provides for only three 

employees, with two on duty during weekdays and everyone there 

on Sundays. Volunteers are used daily as available. Besides juggling 

days off, attempts are made to have functional duties covered each 

day. Such duties include those of administration; supervision; public 

contact, including fee collection; maintenance; and operations, including handling farm equipment and animals. 

Research is another form of labor and administrative expense. 

The Belmont Report defines a museum as "an institution which performs all, or most of the following functions: collecting, preserving, 

exhibiting and interpreting the natural and cultural objects of our 

environment."8 To make sure objects are authentic and to interpret 

them well requires research. Living historical farms must budget for 

this expense category. 

Another expense is that of developing publications and brochures. 

Small museums, nature centers, and children's farms often send newsletters to school classes about what can be seen at the site each month. 

Of course, producing brochures for tourists and materials for school 

classes are virtually mandatory. Some staff time must go for developing materials usable by local papers and radio or television announcements of current happenings. 

Several other categories of expenses that claim smaller portions 

of the budget must be allowed for. These include costumes, farmoriented expenses, and general operating expenses. 

Costumes. Costumes usually are rather expensive, but not always. 

In many cases it takes considerable research to determine what an 

average person wore at specific times and places in the past. Williamsburg estimated in 1966 that it spent $600 to $800 per person per 

year to costume people. Of course, some of the hostesses wear quite 

elaborate costumes. 

Farm-Oriented Expenses. In addition to personnel, farm expenses 

would include acquiring and replacing livestock, veterinary services, 

and animal-related equipment such as horse furniture. For the crops, 

there would be the expenses of the seed, grains, fertilizers, and such 

wagons, equipment, and tools as are necessary to farm the land. 

8

 Belmont Report, page 26. 

40 
General Operating Expenses. These encompass such normal expenses as office supplies and printing, telephone, utilities (fuel, 

electricity, water), janitorial supplies, pest control, motor vehicle 

operations, recurring maintenance and repair, staff travel and expenses, insurance, and depreciation. 

Living historical farms may have high insurance premiums if they 

follow the practice of the Farmers' Museum in Cooperstown, which 

allows animals to roam among the tourists. Inevitably, a visitor will 

get stepped on or bitten; thus, it is necessary to protect the facility 

against possible law suits. 

About 5 percent of the expenses at some restoration projects, 

such as at Old Sturbridge Village and Plimoth Plantation, is attributed to depreciation. 

INCOME 

It may be expected that each visitor is going to cost roughly $1.00. 

As this statistic holds up remarkably well through museums of 

various sizes and types, the problem is to discover how to recover 

that amount from the visitor.9 This can be accomplished to some 

degree by self-generated income, but a portion will necessarily come 

from outside sources. All living history museums require outside 

sources of income, such as memberships, endowment funds, or tax 

monies. Projects simply cannot generate enough income to meet 

all their expenses. Indeed, if a project accidentally showed a profit, 

losing the benefits of being a nonprofit corporation for tax purposes 

would surely sink it into the red anyway. A few projects do come 

quite close to meeting their own expenses. To meet its needs Old 

Sturbridge Village requires gifts amounting to roughly 3 percent of 

its annual expenses. Plimoth Plantation collects about 5 percent of 

its income from such sources. 

Self-generated income can take the form of admissions, gift shop 

sales, concessions, and outside businesses operated by the project. 

Admissions provide less income than one might assume. The Belmont 

Report notes that of 2,021 museums surveyed only 495 received 

admission income and only 179 or about one-third of these received 

as much as half of their operating income from admissions.10 

9

 Rogers, Museums and Related Institutions, p. 56. 

10

 Belmont Report, page 26. 

41 
For most private facilities, however, admission fees are a major 

source of income. The amounts charged the public vary quite 

widely. House museums frequently charge between 75 * and $1.00. 

Larger projects of course charge more. Shakertown charges adults 

$2.00, students and military $1.00, and school children and teachers 

50*. The Henry Ford museum fee is $2.00 for adults, as is the 

Greenfield Village fee. Plimoth Plantation charges adults $1.00 for 

the plantation and 75* to see Mayflower II, while those under 14 

are charged 50* for each place. This results in about 70* of income 

per visit for the combined facilities. Thus, 64 percent of Plimoth 

Plantation's income is from admission fees. 

Gift shops very often are another important source of operating 

income. Because they vary so greatly in quality, the amount they 

bring from tourists also varies widely. Plimoth Plantation has a 

fine shop, which gets about 35* per visitor. Thus, with admissions 

added to this, Plimoth Plantation collects better than $1.00 per 

visitor. However, costs run to about $1.10 per visitor, so these sources 

combine to account for about 95 percent of the annual income. 

One of the better tactics of gift shops is to sell items that are 

associated with or even produced by the project. The Robert E. Lee 

birthplace, Stratford Hall, sells hams, smoke cured at the site, and 

meal in two-pound bags, ground in the grist mill there. Upper 

Canada Village sells cheese, quilts, and some woolen goods, all made 

in the historic village. Shakertown emphasizes Kentucky-made items 

and Shaker-like lanterns, latches, and furniture. Thus far, visitors 

there have spent practically $1.00 per paid admission in the gift 

shop alone. William L. Landahl notes that some authorities suggest 

that sales revenue should equal admissions revenue, although this 

rarely occurs, and earning better than one-half as much in this manner 

should not be too difficult.11 

Another way to measure the return from selling items produced 

within a historic village is that which Williamsburg suggests. In 1966 

officials estimated that about 80 percent of the $700,000 expended 

in operating craft shops was recouped through selling the items 

produced. These shops are operated by Williamsburg Restoration, 

Incorporated, a profit-making business. It sells mementoes and oper11

 William L. Landahl, Perpetuation of Historical Heritage, for Park and 

Recreation Departments. (Wheeling, West Virginia: American Institute of 

Park Executives, 1965.) Page 35. 

42 
ates a motor lodge, cafeterias, an inn, and other "modern" businesses 

associated with the restoration. The corporation, in turn, is the 

wholly owned subsidiary of Colonial Williamsburg, Incorporated, 

the nonprofit corporation. Old Sturbridge Village has followed a 

similar corporate arrangement in the operation of its gift shop, 

restaurant, and motel. 

Whatever the success of the various income-producing activities 

that are available, and regardless of the size of the endowment or 

tax-derived contribution to the budget, living historical farms are 

primarily educative tools. Showing a profit may not spell success; 

rather, it may indicate inadequate research and educational programs. 

That, however, is turning things upside down. The primary concern 

of most projects is to develop as good an educational program as 

possible on the amount of funds obtainable. 

STATE DIRECTORY OF HISTORIC FARMS 

AND MUSEUMS 

ALABAMA 

No major private projects. The Department of Archives and History 

in Montgomery works with restoration projects, some of which 

may include agricultural aspects. 

ARIZONA 

Pioneer Arizona Foundation, Phoenix. Private nonprofit corporation. 

A remarkable project. Has restored and reconstructed a late 

19th-century Arizona town several miles north of Phoenix. The 

foundation has succeeded magnificently in attracting contributions 

from businesses as well as from individuals. Various historically 

oriented associations have helped the foundation's staff with research and in selecting buildings to be included at the site. According to present plans, a living historical farm will follow. 

University of Arizona, Tucson. Several members of the university 

faculty and the Arizona State Museum staff are interested in the 

proposed Snaketown National Monument of the National Park 

Service. If developed, the site could include some of the agricultural activities of the Pima Indians. 

Arizona State Parks, Phoenix, has preliminary plans for historic 

preservation and restoration in some of the state parks. 

43 
ARKANSAS 

Arkansas Historical Commission, Little Rock, assists in the development of both state-owned and privately owned properties, some 

of which are related to agriculture. 

Plantation Museum, Inc., Scott. A private, nonprofit corporation that 

has a collection of old tools and wooden implements. A large cotton 

plantation surrounds the unincorporated town of Scott. 

CALIFORNIA 

Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento. This state agency's 

principal agriculturally oriented restoration project is the C. Nelson 

Hackett Ranch in Yolo County. Local groups are cooperating in 

planning the development and interpretation of an 1860-1900 

ranch with diversified crops and agriculture. 

East Bay Regional Park District, Oakland. This regional park system 

has considered living historical farm interpretations in some of its 

parklands, with at least one project being keyed to Spanish agricultural development. It presently operates a children's farm. 

Kern County Museum, Bakersfield. This county-operated museum 

displays a large collection of buildings and implements. 

Western Trails Museum, Knott's Berry Farm, Buena Park. Privately 

owned. A popular tourist attraction. 

Micke Grove Park and Museum, Stockton. County-owned. The San 

Joaquin County Historical Society is helping in the development 

and operation of the site, which is on valuable tokay grape land 

bequeathed to the county by its owner. A portion of the property 

may become a living historical farm. 

COLORADO 

Plains Conservation Center, Denver. Private nonprofit corporation. 

The Audubon Society helped develop a master plan in 1964 for 

a historical-ecological center. Plans included a sod house and a 

semi-arid, 19th-century farmstead. Present status is undetermined. 

CONNECTICUT 

Silent Meadow Farm, Lakeville, in Salisbury Township. Private land 

is available for a local living historical farm project. 

44 
The Sloane-Stanley Museum, Kent. Private nonprofit corporation. 

A collection of early American implements is housed on the site 

of an old iron works. 

University of Connecticut, Storrs. Public. The university conducts a 

museum-related graduate program, at the master's degree level, in 

association with Old Sturbridge Village. 

DELAWARE 

The Hagley Museum, Greenville-Wilmington. Private nonprofit corporation. Primarily an industrial museum, the site includes first 

Du Pont family residence. Development of the agricultural aspects 

of the family-company operations has begun. 

FLORIDA 

Tallahassee Junior Museum, Tallahassee. Private nonprofit corporation. An outdoor education center with children's farm. 

Suwannee State Park, Live Oak, and O'Leno State Park, High Springs. 

Either of these state parks is considered a fine place for a living 

historical "cracker" farm interpretation. The state has no current 

plans to budget for such a farm. 

GEORGIA 

Westville Historic Handicrafts, Inc., Lumpkin. Private nonprofit 

corporation. An outstanding achievement accomplished largely by 

the citizens of a small community in the red clay hills of westcentral Georgia. The Stewart County Historical Commission began 

by restoring a town eyesore, the Bedingfield Inn. A Georgia crossroads community of about 1850 is now under construction near 

Lumpkin and eventually it will include a living historical farm. 

A Columbus architect and personnel of the Columbus Museum 

of Arts and Crafts have assisted, but the project now under construction is primarily the accomplishment of the people of Lumpkin. The project's name honors the late Colonel John W. West 

whose collection of tools, machines, farm implements, vehicles, and 

household items will be used throughout the village. 

Georgia Agrirama, Tifton. An agricultural museum now under study 

and development. The project has received some financial support 

from the state legislature. 

45 

444-709 O - 72 - 4 
ILLINOIS 

Bishop Hill Heritage Association, Bishop Hill. Private nonprofit 

corporation. The Division of Parks and Memorials of the Illinois 

Department of Conservation has restored the Old Colony Church 

in the Swedish community of Bishop Hill, and this may lead to a 

private restoration project. If that should happen, the agricultural 

significance of the community would also receive attention. 

The Johnson 1910 Farm, Geneseo. Private, incorporated. A typical 

farmstead with farmhouse, some animals, and a collection of old 

vehicles, equipment, and tools. Open daily through warm weather 

months, it conducts special activities on weekends. Future plans 

include historical farming of the land. 

Lincoln's New Salem Village. The Illinois Department of Conservation is developing this site, which will become a living pioneer 

village. Living historical farming is also planned. 

INDIANA 

Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial, Lincoln City. National Park 

Service. This reconstruction of the Tom Lincoln pioneer farmstead 

leads the way in the National Park Service's development of living 

historical farms. (See below for a more complete description of 

the site.) 

Conner Prairie Pioneer Settlement and Museum, Noblesville. Operated by Earlham College, Richmond, which is in the process of 

re-creating a pioneer farmstead and has plans to farm 15 to 25 

acres of the land in the near future. 

IOWA 

Historic Governor Larrabee Home, Inc., Clermont. Private nonprofit 

corporation. An attractive Victorian house-museum overlooking a 

small town on Iowa's Turkey River. The several acres near the 

house may be operated in the late-19th-century manner that the 

governor was familiar with. Brown Swiss dairy cows will be 

featured. 

Living History Farms, Inc., Des Moines. Private nonprofit corporation. This is one of the most ambitious projects initiated in the 

last several years. It will depict three different time periods of 

Iowa agriculture—a pioneer farmstead of the 1840s, a steam46 
powered 1900 farm, and a futuristic farm of "10-years-from-now." 

The completed project will include a post-Civil War village, a 

small railroad to convey visitors from the parking lots to the 

restorations areas, and a museum. The first public events were 

held in 1970: a harvesting festival in July and a corn-picking 

festival at the end of October. 

KANSAS 

Agricultural Hall of Fame and National Center, Bonner Springs. 

Private nonprofit corporation. The development of a living historical farm is planned. At present the project features a large 

agricultural collection that is particularly good in cream separators 

and wheat harvesting machinery. 

KENTUCKY 

Shakertown at Pleasant Hill, Harrodsburg. Private nonprofit corporation. Several buildings of this Shaker community are restored and 

open to the public. Crafts are demonstrated and hostesses are in 

costume. Shakertown is one of the larger open air museums in the 

country and is still being expanded. Hopefully, some of the 

Shakers' agricultural practices soon will be interpreted at this site. 

Land-Between-the-Lakes, Golden Pond. Tennessee Valley Authority. 

Between Kentucky and Barkley Lakes in western Kentucky, the 

TVA has been developing a large recreational facility. As part of 

the educational interpretation, which already includes considerable 

outdoor education facilities, the TVA hopes to soon develop preand post-power farms to demonstrate what electricity has meant 

to the farmer. 

MAINE 

Maine State Museum Commission, Augusta. This new state agency 

has a small but growing collection and an interest in living history 

developments. 

MARYLAND 

Carroll County Farm Museum, Westminster. This county-operated 

farm museum has a pre-Civil War house and barn situated on 140 

47 
acres. Agricultural implements are displayed and crafts are demonstrated. Special "Farm Craft" and "Harvest" days are held in 

season. 

National Colonial Farm of the Accokeek Foundation, Accokeek. 

Private nonprofit corporation. Located on the Potomac River across 

from Mount Vernon, the Accokeek Foundation is developing a 

1750 farm. In recent years geneticists have conducted research on 

Indian corn. Open primarily by appointment now, in a couple 

years it should be ready to accept visitors to a typical 18th-century 

Maryland farm. 

Alice Ferguson Foundation, Accokeek. Private nonprofit corporation. 

Not far from the Accokeek Foundation land, the Alice Ferguson 

Foundation operates an outdoor education center for use by 

organized school groups from the area. Under consideration are 

plans to include a period farm. 

Oxon Hill Children's Farm, Oxon Hill. National Park Service. The 

establishing of this children's farm represented the first move by 

the National Park Service into living-agricultural interpretation. 

The usual barnyard animals and a small collection of machinery 

are available for school children to see and to get close to in a 

reasonably rural setting. 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Old Sturbridge Village, Sturbridge. Private nonprofit corporation. 

With the Pliny Freeman farm now in operation, one of America's 

finest and largest village restorations now operates one of the 

finest and most active farming operations. (For further discussion 

of this living historical farm see below.) 

Plimoth Plantation, Plymouth. Private nonprofit corporation. Some 

agricultural aspects of the Pilgrim's life in a village of 350 years 

ago are shown. Plans are being made to attempt more demonstrating in the future. 

Hadley Farm Museum, Westford. Private nonprofit corporation. This 

museum, featuring a collection of farm implements, is open during 

the summer months; otherwise by appointment. 

Drumlin Farm, South Lincoln. Massachusetts Audubon Society. This 

is one of the earliest children's farms. 

48 
MICHIGAN 

Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village, Dearborn. Private 

nonprofit corporation. Various agricultural implements and tools 

in the museum and throughout the village make this one of the 

better collections. Work is now going on to better index die 

collection so that others can know more about it. 

Trinity Historical Museum, Mount Clements. Private. A general 

store at the turn of the century is the focus of this living museum. 

A "Heritage Farm" is under development along the lines of other 

children's farms. 

Kalamazoo Nature Center, Kalamazoo. Private nonprofit corporation. 

One of the Audubon Society's more recently established children's 

farms. 

MINNESOTA 

Gibbs Farm Museum, St. Paul. Private. This museum includes a 

house, barn, and schoolhouse. The agricultural collection features 

a well-equipped blacksmith's shop and hand-hewn wooden tools. 

A living historical truck-gardening farm is planned. The museum 

is open various hours, depending on the season. 

Pioneer Log Farm, Alexandria. Private. A pioneer farmstead, largely 

preserved but not restored. 

Oliver Hudson Kelley Farm, Elk River. Owned by the Minnesota 

Historical Society, which plans to develop the site into a living 

historical farm. At present there is a farmhouse, open as a museum, 

and several farm buildings. 

MISSISSIPPI 

Mississippi Farm Implement Museum, Cleveland. Private. Working 

through the Cleveland Chamber of Commerce, a private group 

has proceeded rapidly in formulating specific plans for a major 

living historical farm development in the Mississippi delta. 

Mississippi Ante-Bellum Plantation, Biloxi. Private nonprofit corporation. The organization plans to develop a living historical farm 

appropriate to its name. 

MISSOURI 

Missouri Town 1855, Blue Springs. Jackson County Parks Department. This "town' promises to be a particularly fine restoration. 

49 
Several buildings have been completed, and there is ample parkland 

in all directions for the planned living historical farm. A relatively small staff and work force are solving problems with skill 

and originality. 

MONTANA 

Museum of the Rockies, Bozeman. Montana State University. Agriculture is a major theme of this museum. 

Grand-Kohrs Ranch, Deer Lodge. National Park Service. The property was only recently acquired as a national historic site, and its 

formal development has not yet been publicized; however, a large 

collection of ranch implements that came with the site constitute 

a rich reservoir of artifacts. 

Montana Historical Society, Helena. Private nonprofit corporation. 

The society's museum has a frontier Montana theme with both 

cattleman's and homesteader's sections. 

NEBRASKA 

Homestead National Monument, Beatrice. National Park Service. 

The location of one of the first farms entered under the Homestead 

Act. The site includes a homesteader's cabin, some later buildings, 

tall prairie grass, and a small agricultural collection. 

Stuhr Museum of the Prairie Pioneer, Grand Island. Private nonprofit 

corporation. A living historical farm is planned for this museumrestoration outdoor education center complex. Projected plans include a Pawnee village with neighboring maize field, a reconstructed 

prairie, sod houses, a village center with grist mill, and a later 

farm. 

N E W HAMPSHIRE 

New Hampshire Farm Museum, Inc., Hampton Falls. Private nonprofit corporation. Incorporated in July 1970, this organization 

already has begun to collect equipment, artifacts, and materials 

relating to New Hampshire's rural life. It plans to have a living 

outdoor museum. 

Robert Frost Homestead, Derry. New Hampshire Department of 

Resources and Economic Development, Division of Parks. Hopefully, the orchard, hay fields, kitchen garden, and farmyard will 

50 
be restored to the 1902-1910 period, during which the Frost 

family lived here. 

N EW JERSEY 

College of Agriculture Museum, Rutgers University, New Brunswick. 

This museum has a small collection of farm and household items. 

It is open to visitors by appointment. 

Monmouth County Park System, Lincroft. This parks system is 

developing an 1890 farm. 

N EW MEXICO 

The Pueblo of Zuni, Zuni. Bureau of Indian Affairs. The traditional 

agricultural practices of the Zuni may be developed at Ojo Caliente 

in the Zuni Reservation. 

N EW YORK 

The Farmers' Museum, Cooperstown. Operated by the New York 

State Historical Association, a private nonprofit corporation. A 

pioneer among farm museums, this is one of the best. A fine 

display is backed by an impressive collection. (See below for a 

more detailed description.) 

New York University at Oneonta. Since 1964, this state university, 

in conjunction with Cooperstown, has conducted history museum 

training courses leading to the master of arts degree. 

Old Bethpage Village, East Meadow, Long Island. Operated by the 

Nassau County Historical Museum. In the process of saving significant buildings from demolition made necessary by urban growth, 

the county has created a restored village. An operating farm of 

the 1840-1850 period will be included. "Friends of Old Bethpage," a private educational corporation, has helped furnish the 

buildings. 

Fort William Henry Restoration and Museum, Lake George. Private, 

incorporated. The organization also operates a small Iroquois village adjoining the fort. 

Old Museum Village of Smith's Clove, Monroe. Private nonprofit 

corporation. Several crafts, such as candlemaking and weaving, are 

interesting aspects of this outdoor museum. 

51 
Cayuga Museum of History and Art, Auburn. Private nonprofit 

corporation. Operates the Owasca Stockaded Indian Village, a 

reconstruction based on results of excavation in that area of 

New York. Crops and crafts are represented. 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Department of Archives and History, Division of Historic Sites and 

Museums, Raleigh. This state agency operates several small restorations around the state, several of which could include an increased 

agricultural interpretation. The museum has an agricultural collection. 

Old Salem, Inc., Winston-Salem. Private nonprofit corporation. This 

large outdoor museum restoration includes an agricultural museum 

building. 

OHIO 

Aullwood Children's Farm, Dayton. Private nonprofit corporation. 

The farm is maintained by the National Audubon Society. 

Ohio State Historical Society, Columbus. This state agency has agriculturally related restoration-preservation projects under way. 

OKLAHOMA 

Museum of the Great Plains, Lawton. Private nonprofit corporation. 

Operated by the Great Plains Historical Association. The museum 

display shows how the settlers on the plains adapted their tools 

and weapons to a new environment. A particularly good job in a 

not very large museum. 

OREGON 

Territorial Farm in Howell Territorial Park, Sauvie Island. State 

and county. Operated by the Oregon Historical Society in cooperation with Multnamah County. An 1856 house has been restored 

and the 100-acre farm is being developed. 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Farm Museum of Landis Valley, Lancaster. Operated by the Pennsylvania History and Museum Commission. This museum possesses 

52 
one of the largest collections of agricultural tools and implements, 

which are displayed in several buildings. Period farms are being 

developed to represent the pioneer period and the early and late 

19th century. 

Hopwell Village, Elverson. National Park Service. This restored 

iron works sits in an agricultural setting with some agriculturally 

oriented interpretation. 

Amish Farm and House, Lancaster. Private. An interesting and busy 

place designed to acquaint the visitor with some traditional Amish 

methods and beliefs. The barnyard activities seem more realistic 

than most children's farms which attempt much the same thing. 

Quiet Valley Farm Museum, Stroudsburg. Private, incorporated. A 

Pennsylvania Dutch farmstead operated in a traditional manner for 

200 years. Farm implements and animals are displayed in the 

main barn, equipment sheds, and the farm yard. 

Honey Hollow Watershed Association, New Hope. Private nonprofit corporation. This recently designated National Historic 

Landmark plans an outdoor education center and a colonial farm 

with demonstrations of conservation practices. 

RHODE ISLAND 

Dame Farm, Providence. Private nonprofit corporation. A project of 

ecology action for Rhode Island. Having moved quickly to save 

a farm from urban sprawl, the organization plans a living historical 

farm in connection with an outdoor education center. 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

Walnut Grove Plantation, Roebuck. Private nonprofit corporation. 

A project of the Spartanburg County Historical Society, Walnut 

Grove is a restored 1765 manor house with related farm buildings. 

With the buildings restored and furnished, the need to increase 

the agricultural interpretation has become more important. This 

project is a good example of what local historical societies can 

accomplish. 

Sea Pines Plantation, Hilton Head Island. Private, incorporated. 

Restored, the "Six Oaks" farm site is proposed to add another 

feature to this vacation and residential development. 

>3 
TENNESSEE 

Tipton-Haynes Historical Association, Johnson City. Private nonprofit corporation. An important site in the history of the ' lost 

state of Franklin" is the focus of a restoration project. A living 

historical farm keyed to the late 18th century and early 19th 

century is under development. 

TEXAS 

The Ranch Headquarters, Lubbock. A project of the Texas Tech 

University Museum. Adjoining the museum are 12 acres for 

possible use as a site for a living historical ranch. 

Winedale Inn Properties, Round Top. A project of the University 

of Texas System. Located in Texas' "German Belt," this restoration 

extends now to several buildings. It is open to the public but caters 

to seminar groups. A living historical farm may be included on 

the 131 acres of this development. 

UTAH 

Museum of Man and His Daily Bread, Logan. This new museum, 

operated in association with Utah State University, has a considerable collection. It plans a living historical farm on recently acquired 

property. 

Utah Pioneer Village, Salt Lake City. This project is associated with 

the National Society, Sons of Utah Pioneers, a private nonprofit 

corporation. 

VERMONT 

Shelburne Museum, Shelburne. Private, incorporated. This museum 

consists of a large number of restored buildings. There are several 

fine collections. 

Plymouth Notch, Plymouth. State Board of Historic Sites. The Board 

has acquired most of the buildings in Plymouth, where it now 

operates a farmers' museum. It plans to portray an 1880 farm 

similar to the type that Calvin Coolidge would have known as a 

boy. The Board works closely with the Calvin Coolidge Memorial 

Foundation, Inc., a private organization. 

Kent Tavern Museum, Calais. Private nonprofit corporation. Oper54 
ated by the Vermont Historical Society. This 19th-century inn 

houses a miscellaneous museum collection. A possible site for a 

living historical farm. 

Camel's Hump Park, Moretown. Private. A rural museum that would 

demonstrate northern New England hill country living of the 

rather recent past has been proposed as a part of a large park. 

The status of this Camel's Hump Area Rural Museum (CHARM) 

is undetermined. 

VIRGINIA 

George Washington Birthplace, Fredericksburg. National Park Service. One of the earliest Park Service efforts at historical restoration. 

The interpretation at the site is being broadened to include more 

18th-century agriculture. 

Mount Vernon. Private, nonprofit corporation. Mount Vernon is 

certainly one of the most visited house museums in the country. 

Various buildings associated with an 18th-century plantation are 

interpreted, and agriculture is a part of the story. 

Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., Williamsburg. Private nonprofit corporation. It would be difficult to overemphasize the impact of this 

development and its personnel on the craft and art of creating and 

operating historical restorations elsewhere. A current project holds 

great promise for living historical farms, since part of Carter's 

Grove may become a "working plantation" once again. 

Berkeley Plantation, Charles City. Private nonprofit corporation. A 

preservation of one of Virginia'« oldest plantations. 

Stratford Hall, Stratford. Private nonprofit corporation. The restored 

family home of General Robert E. Lee with surrounding grounds. 

A beautiful place. 

Booker T. Washington National Memorial, Hardy, and Appomatox 

Court House, Appomatox. Both are National Park Service sites 

where greater attention may be given to agricultural interpretations. 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Salem College, Salem. The college is developing a program called 

"The Heritage Arts." One of the crafts being taught is leading to 

the reconstruction on campus of a typical early mountaineer settle55 
ment or village. Agriculture and related crafts are a part of the 

program. 

WISCONSIN 

Stonefield Historic Site, Cassville. Operated by the Wisconsin Historical Society. The Society here houses the McCormick collection 

of machinery and has built a late-19th-century town. 

Little Norway, Blue Mounds. Private. A Norse pioneer homestead 

with cabins dating from 1856. 

CANADA 

Upper Canada Village, Morrisburg, Ontario. Public. Perhaps the 

finest outdoor museum in North America. In addition to a restored 

village which includes a water-powered saw mill and woolens 

factory, there is a historical farming operation and a collection of 

agricultural tools and machinery. (See below for a more complete 

discussion.) 

Fort Edmonton Park Farms, Edmonton, Alberta. Public. Four farms 

are being developed to represent agriculture around the fur post 

of 1846; the prerailroad era, 1885; the postrailroad era, 1905; 

and the predepression years 1920-1930. 

Western Development Museum, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Public. 

An agricultural museum with implements used in developing the 

prairie regions. A branch at Yorkton has a collection of farm 

tractors, harvesters, and other farm implements. 

Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial 

"Lincoln Boyhood" represents the most advanced agricultural 

demonstration in the National Park Service's living history program. 

Located at Lincoln City in southern Indiana on the edge of a state 

park and campground, the site includes a fine visitor reception center, 

several reconstructed buildings, and a small pioneering farm operation. Part of the interpretation-administration building was constructed several years ago through private contributions. More 

recently the National Park Service expanded the facility to include 

additional museum displays and a small theater. 

56 
A visitor can "walk back into history" quite effectively here. The 

interpretation is keyed to how the Tom Lincoln family, as more or 

less typical Indiana pioneers, probably lived in the years 1827-

1830. The site includes a cabin, small smokehouse, toolshed, corncrib, barn, and chicken house. With a fairly large garden and a 

growing orchard nearby, the well-interpreted cabin area comes off 

quite successfully. 

A 10-acre patch downhill from the cabin serves as the farm. As 

the visitor approaches the cabin, the field, with its tobacco, cotton, 

flax, and corn, establishes the proper mood. Thus far, officials have 

carried out a low-key interpretation of the farming operation that 

may be inadequate for some visitors. However, this informality allows 

remarkable flexibility. For example, when the staff is not too pressed 

it sometimes allows visitors to walk behind a plow and thus experience "participatory history." Such opportunities for the visitor help 

make this living historical farm a successful operation. 

Upper Canada Village 

The construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway has resulted in the 

building of Upper Canada Village, which contains many buildings 

the Seaway would otherwise have destroyed. With more than 40 

structures in the village, this large restoration depicts Upper Canada 

through 1867, the year of confederation. 

Two separate farms are depicted on one edge of the village. The 

first is a pioneer farmstead dating about 1780. Two crude log structures, interpreted but uninhabited, show how the new settler would 

have lived. Adjoining these two buildings is a field "just under 

cultivation." It is populated with burned-off tree stumps and a 

newly sown grain crop—all looking weedy, rough, and primitive. 

Upper Canada Village hauled in and "planted" the tree stumps, put 

rubber tires around the the stumps, and started small fires. The 

resulting soot-blackened stumps look authentic, and they can be 

replaced as they rot away. 

The second farm shows how a farmstead looked after almost 100 

years of settlement. An 1800 house is a chicken coop; a hired man 

occupies the 1820-1830 house, and the farmer and his family live 

in Victorian era comfort in the newest (about 1850) structure. In 

57 
addition to the appropriate farm buildings and animals, a rather 

large machinery collection is displayed in the barn. 

As most tourists must travel a considerable distance to visit Upper 

Canada Village, officials have decided they must display farming 

methods each day, insofar as it is possible. Thus, a few minutes of 

grain threshing occurs each afternoon at an announced time, rather 

than just once or twice over the course of several days. 

Old Sturbridge Village 

In the late 1960s, Old Sturbridge Village concentrated its expansion efforts toward developing the Pliny Freeman farm. Thus, in 

recent years that farm has changed from a largely static farmstead 

into possibly the most complete living historical farm now in operation. Some of the planning that has gone into this effort is treated 

elsewhere in this handbook. 

Even before the expansion occurred, however, officials at Old Sturbridge Village realized that tourists regarded the farm as one of the 

village's most popular attractions. Now, people can see much more 

activity in and around the farm buildings. There are a large number 

of animals, including oxen, milking cows, hogs, sheep, and barnyard 

fowl; and split rail fencing outlines the several acres under cultivation downhill from the farmstead. 

The process of developing the farm stimulated considerable research into many aspects of southern Massachusetts farming methods 

in use around 1840. Everyone knew that there had to be a garden 

next to the house. What no one knew, and what was very difficult 

to find out, was what crops usually were planted in that garden. 

The amount of research that eventually determined the answers to 

such questions suggest again the type of work that is so valuable in 

creating living historical farms. 

The Farmers' Museum at Cooperstown 

The Farmers' Museum at Cooperstown, New York, has pioneered 

in many of the museum-related efforts that are a part of living 

historical farms. Its professional staff has inaugurated new programs 

and has worked to upgrade the professionalism in the entire museum 

field, but especially with agricultural and folk-history interpretations. 

58 
The museum reflects the staff's discipline and intelligence in the 

carefully selected artifacts on display. After learning that, like it 

or not, the museum required a two-hour visit by the average tourist, 

the staff streamlined the displays of farm equipment by putting about 

80 percent of it in storage. By displaying much of the rest in terms 

of what a farmer would use in the course of a year, the staff has 

created a museum that is educational for even the casual tourist. 

In addition, the New York State Historical Association has moved 

in and restored a crossroads community to the appearance it had 

about 1840. The Lippitt homestead is the focus of the living historical farm display. As early as 1952 The Farmers' Museum demonstrated 19th-century farming techniques by using old tools on small 

patches of crops. More farming has been done over the years since 

that time, and there are plans for an earlier period farmstead elsewhere on the site. 

DIRECTORY OF PERSONS INTERESTED IN 

LIVING HISTORICAL FARMS 

Mr. and Mrs. Raymond C. Abbe 

Villa Vista Abbe-Gail 

1408 Enfield Street 

Enfield, Connecticut 06030 

Gordon Abbott, Jr., Director 

Trustees of Reservations 

224 Adams Street 

Milton, Massachusetts 02186 

William K. Ackroyd, President 

New Hampshire Farm Museum, 

Inc. 

Sanborn Road 

Hampton Falls, New Hampshire 

03844 

William K. Alderfer, Director 

Historical Society of Michigan 

309 Civic Center 

Lansing, Michigan 48933 

William T. Alderson, Jr., 

Director 

American Association for State 

and Local History 

1315 Eighth Avenue, South 

Nashville, Tennessee 37203 

Clyde A. Arbuckle, Secretary 

Historical Landmarks Commission, City of San Jose 

988 Franquette Avenue 

San Jose, California 95125 

Dale Archibald, Chief Curator 

The Museum 

Oregon Historical Society 

1230 S. W. Park Avenue 

Portland, Oregon 97205 

Harold Avery, Assistant to the 

President 

Cottey College 

Nevada, Missouri 64772 

Richard C. Bailey, Director 

Kern County Museum 

3801 Chester Avenue 

Bakersfield, California 93301 

59 
Mrs. W. D. Bain, Jr., President 

Walnut Grove Plantation 

194 Westminster Drive 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

29303 

Robert G. Baker, Chief Curator 

Arizona State Museum 

University of Arizona 

Tucson, Arizona 85721 

Rollin H. Baker, Director 

The Museum 

Michigan State University 

East Lansing, Michigan 48823 

Mrs. Chauncy Baldwin 

403 Prospect 

Elkhart, Indiana 46514 

Mrs. Lesley Frost Ballatine 

129 E. 10th Street 

New York, New York 10003 

William B. Ballard 

Department of Horticulture 

Clemson University 

Clemson, South Carolina 29631 

Albert W. Banton, Jr., 

Superintendent 

Lincoln Boyhood National 

Memorial 

Lincoln City, Indiana 47552 

John J. Baratte, Director 

B. Carroll Reece Museum 

East Tennessee State University 

Johnson City, Tennessee 37601 

Frank Barnes 

Regional Chief of Interpretation 

and Visitor Services 

National Park Service, Northeast 

Region 

143 S. Third Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19405 

Dr. H. Lewis Batts, Executive 

Director 

Kalamazoo Nature Center, Inc. 

7000 N. Westnedge Avenue 

Kalamazoo, Michigan 49001 

Edwin C. Bearss, Historian 

National Park Service 

Washington Planning and 

Service Center 

1730 N. Lynn Street 

Arlington, Virginia 22209 

Mrs. Clara Beatty, Director 

Nevada Historical Society 

Reno, Nevada 89101 

D. John Beck, Chief, OutdoorRecreation Planning 

116 Mitchell Street, S. W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 

Isaac K. Beckes, President 

Vincennes University 

Vincennes, Indiana 47591 

W. H. Bennett, Director 

Extension Service 

Utah State University 

Logan, Utah 84321 

Val R. Berryman, Curator of 

Historical Artifacts 

The Museum 

Michigan State University 

East Lansing, Michigan 48823 

James E. Betts, President 

Early American Society 

1001 BevridgeRoad 

Richmond, Virginia 23226 

George W. Bible 

Mountain Cove Farm 

R. R. # 1 

Kensington, Georgia 30727 

E. H. Blackstone 

Greenwood Chamber of 

Commerce 

Greenwood, Mississippi 38930 

60 
Ben H. Bolen, Commissioner 

Division of Parks 

501 Southern States Building 

7th and Main Streets 

Richmond, Virginia 23219 

Mrs. Edith F. Bondi, Director 

Timma Foundation, Inc. 

6226 Rockwell Street 

Oakland, California 94618 

Miss Margaret J. Bouslough, 

Education Sales Coordinator 

National Trust for Historic 

Preservation 

748 Jackson Place, N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20006 

David R. Bowen 

Office of the Governor 

State of Mississippi 

Jackson, Mississippi 39201 

Robert Braunberg, Curator 

Montgomery County Historical 

Society, Inc. 

103 W. Montgomery Avenue 

Rockville, Maryland 20850 

R. F. Bretall, Secretary 

Anderson Chamber of Commerce 

2970 E. Center Street 

Anderson, California 96007 

Arthur Bright 

Bright's Nursery 

5246 S. Plainsburg Road 

LeGrand, Californa 95333 

John D. Briscoe 

Silent Meadow Farm 

Lakeville, Connecticut 06039 

Miss Ann Brock 

Mississippi Research and 

Development Center 

P. O. Drawer 2470 

Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

Miss Joan Brookes-Smith 

Kentucky Historical Society 

Old State House 

BoxH 

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 

T. A. Brown 

National Museum of Canada 

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 

Richard S. Brownlee, Director 

and Secretary 

State Historical Society of 

Missouri 

Columbia, Missouri 54201 

James Buchanan 

Spartanburg County Historical 

Association 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

29302 

Frank T. Buckley 

Commissioner of Agriculture 

State of New Hampshire 

Concord, New Hampshire 03301 

H. E. Burchfield, President 

Banner County Historical Society 

Route # 2 

Bayard, Nebraska 69334 

Bob Cain 

County Park and Recreation 

Monmouth County Parks System 

Newman Springs Road 

Box 326 

Lincroft, New Jersey 07738 

John Calef 

National Park Service 

Resources Planning 

450 Golden Gate Avenue 

San Francisco, California 94102 

Dayton W. Canady, Director 

South Dakota State Historical 

Society 

Pierre, South Dakota 57501 

Edward D. Carpenter, Curator 

Stonefield Historic Site 

Cassfield, Wisconsin 53806 

444-709 O - 72 61 
Director 

Carroll County Farm Museum 

Westminster, Maryland 21157 

Pierce A. Chamberlin, Curator 

for Museums 

Arizona Pioneers' Historical 

Society 

949 E. Second Street 

Tucson, Arizona 85719 

Miss Margaret Chapman, 

Executive Secretary 

Florida Historical Society 

University of Florida Library 

Tampa, Florida 33620 

Dr. Daryl Chase 

Museum of Man and His Daily 

Bread 

Utah State University 

Logan, Utah 84321 

George M. Chinn, Director 

Kentucky Historical Society 

BoxH 

Old State House 

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 

Ernst Christensen 

Room 353, NCR Building 

1100 Ohio Drive, S. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20024 

Dr. Marion Clawson 

Land Use and Management 

Program 

Resources for the Future, Inc. 

1755 Massachusetts Ave., N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20036 

Donn Coddington, Supervisor, 

Historic Sites 

Minnesota Historical Society 

Fort Snelling Branch, Bldg. 25 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55111 

James L. Cogar, President 

Shakertown at Pleasant Hill 

Route 4 

Harrodsburg, Kentucky 40330 

Frank Coleman 

Spartanburg County Historical 

Association 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

29302 

Mrs. Elizabeth Cooke, Regent 

The Mount Vernon Ladies' 

Association of the Union 

Morristown, New Jersey 07960 

Ernest W. Cooler, Executive 

Director 

Pickens County Planning and 

Development Commission 

P. O. Box 37 

Pickens, South Carolina 29671 

Everett L. Cooley, Director 

Utah State Historical Society 

603 E. South Temple 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 

James D. Cornett, Superintendent 

Zuni Indian Agency . 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Zuni, New Mexico 87327 

T. L. Coulthard 

British Columbia Farm Machinery Museum Association 

University of British Columbia 

Vancouver, British Columbia, 

Canada 

Peter H. Cousins, Curator of 

Agricultural Collections 

Henry Ford Museum and 

Greenfield Village 

Dearborn, Michigan 48120 

Janson L. Cox 

History and Historic 

Interpretation 

Department of Parks, Recreation, 

and Tourism 

Box 1358 

Columbia, South Carolina 29202 

62 
Mrs. Thomas M. Craig 

Spartanburg County Historical 

Association 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

29302 

Mrs. Amy Bull Crist 

Restoration Committee of the 

Hill-Hold-Bull Jackson House 

Montgomery, New York 

12549 

Robert S. Crites 

Farmers Home Administration 

U. S. Department of Agriculture 

Washington, D. C. 20250 

Richard Cropp, Curator 

Museum of Pioneer Life 

Mitchell, South Dakota 57301 

Hon. John Culver 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

Ben Cummings, President 

School of the Outdoors 

Branchville, New Jersey 07826 

Elbridge Currie, Curator of 

Agriculture 

Mactaquac Historical Program ». 

Frederickton, New Brunswick, 

Canada 

Robert L. Damm, Director 

Maine State Museum 

Commission 

State House 

Augusta, Maine 04330 

S. Lothrop Davenport, Director 

Worcester County Horticulture 

Society 

30 Elm Street 

Worcester, Massachusetts 01608 

Hon. John W. Davis 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

Miss Susan M. Davis 

Plimoth Plantation 

Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360 

Dr. Peter R. Day 

Connecticut Agricultural 

Experiment Station 

123 Huntington Street 

New Haven, Connecticut 06504 

Charles Debusk, Director 

Dickson Mounds Museum 

Lewistown, Illinois 61542 

Mrs. Alice DeLong 

Camels Hump Area Rural 

Museum 

Moretown, Vermont 05660 

Robert W. Doherty, Superintendent of Buildings and Grounds 

Sleepy Hollow Restorations 

Tarrytown, New York 10591 

James J. Donald 

Center for Innovation in 

Education 

University College at Brockport 

Brockport, New York 14220 

Robert L. Dortch 

Plantation Museum, Inc. 

P. O. Box 38 

Scott, Arkansas 72142 

Jack C. Dozier 

520 Wells Fargo Bank Building 

Stockton, California 95202 

L. J. Drake, County 

Administrator 

Courthouse Room 707 

222 E. Weber Avenue 

Stockton, California 95202 

Leslie C. Drew, Director 

Museum of the Rockies 

Montana State University 

Bozeman, Montana 59715 

63 
Mrs. Emily Driscoll 

Custis-Lee Mansion 

1400 Wilson Boulevard 

Arlington, Virginia 22209 

Irving T. Duke, Resident 

Superintendent 

Robert E. Lee Memorial 

Foundation 

Stratford Hall 

Stratford, Virginia 22558 

Dean Lowell Eklund 

Division of Continuing 

Education 

Oakland University 

Rochester, Michigan 48063 

Mrs. Lloyd H. Ellis 

238 Forest Boulevard 

Hastings, Nebraska 68901 

Richard Ellis 

Fish and Game Department 

Box 515 A 

Bozeman, Montana 59715 

Spencer P. Ellis, Director 

Department of Forests and Parks 

State Office Building 

Annapolis, Maryland 21404 

Vincent Ellis, Superintendent 

Kennesaw Mountain Battlefield 

National Park 

Box 1167 

Marietta, Georgia 30061 

Sterling D. Emerson 

Shelburne Museum, Inc. 

Shelburne, Vermont 05482 

Wayne H. England, Academic 

Dean 

Salem College 

Salem, West Virginia 26426 

Doris J. Enright, Acting 

Administrator 

Agricultural Hall of Fame and 

National Center 

Box 295 

Bonner Springs, Kansas 66012 

Miss Monica Ann Evans 

Kalamazoo Nature Center, Inc. 

7000 North Westnedge Avenue 

Kalamazoo, Michigan 49001 

A. P. Fatheree, Director 

Division of Vocational and 

Technical Education 

Department of Education 

P. O. Box 771 

Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

John L. Ferguson, Executive 

Secretary 

Arkansas Historical Commission 

Old State House 

Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 

J. C. Finlay, Director 

Historical Development and 

Archives 

City of Edmonton 

Edmonton 15, Alberta, Canada 

Dr. Joseph L. Fisher, President 

Resources for the Future, Inc. 

1755 Massachusetts Avenue, 

N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20036 

William F. Fitzgerald, Director 

of Library 

Kentucky Historical Society 

BoxH 

Old State House 

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601 

Robert Flacke, Director 

Fort William Henry Restoration 

and Museum 

Canada Street 

Lake George, New York 12845 

64 
Miss Margaret A. Flint, 

Assistant State Historian 

Illinois State Historical Library 

Centennial Building 

Springfield, Illinois 62706 

George E. Fogg 

Bureau of State Parks 

Department of Forests and 

Waters 

P. O. Box 1467 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 

Henry Follett, Secretary 

Historic Governor Larrabee 

Home, Inc. 

Clermont, Iowa 52135 

Dr. Bernard L. Fontana, 

Ethnologist 

Arizona State Museum 

University of Arizona 

Tucson, Arizona 85721 

John S. Forrest, Executive 

Director 

Western Forestry Center 

920 S. W. Sixth Avenue 

Portland, Oregon 97204 

Robert E. Foster 

Mississippi State Park System 

1102 Woolfoik Building 

Jackson, Mississippi 39201 

Dr. Joseph B. Frantz 

Texas State Historical Association 

P. O. Box 8059 

University Station 

Austin, Texas 78712 

Charles E. Fraser, President 

Sea Pines Plantation Company 

Hilton Head Island, South 

Carolina 29928 

David B. Freeman, Director 

Plimoth Plantation 

P. O. Box 1620 

Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360 

John C. Freeman 

American Life Foundation and 

Study Institute 

Yorker Yankee Village 

Irelandville Road 

Watkins Glen, New York 14891 

Clifton French 

Hennepin County Park Reserve 

District 

Route #1 , Box 32 

Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 

Richard K. Frevert, Director 

Agricultural Experiment Station 

University of Arizona 

Tucson, Arizona 85721 

George E. Frick 

Economic Research Service 

U. S. Department of Agriculture 

University of New Hampshire 

Durham, New Hampshire 03824 

Russell W. Fridley, Director 

Minnesota Historical Society 

Cedar Street and Central Avenue 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 

Joseph R. Froehlich, Director 

Drumlin Farm 

South Lincoln, Massachusetts 

01773 

Robert Garvey 

National Trust for Historic 

Preservation 

748 Jackson Place, N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20006 

Mark Gasden, Director of Parks 

Texas Parks and Wildlife 

Department 

John H. Reagan State Office 

Building 

Austin, Texas 78701 

6S 
Gordon V. Gay, Acting 

Superintendent 

Booker T. Washington National 

Memorial 

Route #1 , Box 195 

Hardy, Virginia 24101 

Jonathan Gell 

Hartwick College 

Oneonta, New York 13820 

Lamar Gibson, Director 

State Parks and Recreation 

Commission 

P.O. Drawer 1111 

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70821 

Daniel H. Giffen, Director 

New Hampshire Historical 

Society 

30 Park Street 

Concord, New Hampshire 03301 

Mrs. Charles Gignilliat 

Spartanburg County Historical 

Association 

Spartanburg, South Carolina 

29302 

Vernon C. Gilbert, Jr., Chief, 

Office of Environmental 

Interpretation 

U. S. Department of Interior 

National Park Service 

Washington, D. C. 20240 

Sam Gilluly, Director 

Montana Historical Society 

225 N. Roberts 

Helena, Montana 59601 

F. A. Gould, Superintendent 

Appomattox Court House 

National Historical Park 

Appomattox, Virginia 24522 

Mrs. JoAnn Graham, Executive 

Director 

Pioneer Arizona Foundation 

111 W. Monroe 

Phoenix, Arizona 85003 

Albert B. Gray, President 

Columbia Historical Society 

Columbia, Connecticut 06237 

Hon. Edith Green 

U. S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

Mrs. Arthur M. Greenwood 

Time Stone Farm 

Marlborough, Massachusetts 

01752 

Westervelt Griffen, Assistant 

Dean 

College of Agriculture and 

Environmental Science 

Rutgers University 

New Brunswick, New Jersey 

08903 

Dirk Gringhuis, Curator of 

Exhibits 

The Museum 

Michigan State University 

East Lansing, Michigan 48823 

Mrs. Helen Grissett, Director 

Tallahassee Junior Museum 

Tallahassee, Florida 32301 

Per E. Guldbeck, Research 

Associate 

New York State Historical 

Association 

The Farmers' Museum 

Cooperstown, New York 13326 

Philip Gurney, Development 

Manager 

Joslyn Art Museum 

2218 Dodge Street 

Omaha, Nebraska 68102 

J. Lee Gyldenvand 

The American Lutheran Church 

422 S. Fifth Street 

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 

66 
Joseph Habeger, Director 

Prairie Village Historical Society 

Madison, South Dakota 57042 

Henry Hagge, Manager 

Ogallala Chamber of Commerce 

Ogallala, Nebraska 69153 

D. Mathew Hall 

The Windham Foundation, Inc. 

Grafton, Vermont 05146 

John W. Harbour, Jr., Executive 

Director 

Sleepy Hollow Restorations 

Tarrytown, New York 10591 

T. R. Harlow, Director 

Connecticut Historical Society 

1 Elizabeth Street 

Hartford, Connecticut 06105 

Miss Carroll Hart, Director 

Department of Archives and 

History 

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 

George B. Hartzog, Director 

National Park Service 

Department of the Interior 

Washington, D. C 20240 

Wylie J. Harvey, Landscape 

Architect 

State Parks and Recreation 

Commission 

P. O. Drawer 1111 

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70821 

Rev. Allen M. Hastings 

738 E. Cherry 

Cushing, Oklahoma 74023 

Eric Hatch, Chairman 

Connecticut Historical 

Commission 

75 Elm Street 

Hartford, Connecticut 06115 

Dr. Emil Haury 

Department of Anthropology 

University of Arizona 

Tucson, Arizona 85721 

Edward L. Hawes 

History Department 

Lake Forest College 

Lake Forest, Illinois 60045 

Richard Helwig, President 

Defiance County Historical 

Society 

527 Nicholas Street 

Defiance, Ohio 43512 

Paul C. Henderson, Park 

Historian 

Wyoming State Parks 

Commission 

Shoshoni, Wyoming 82649 

John S. Hewins, Governmental 

Relations Coordinator 

Maryland National Capital Park 

and Planning Commission 

8787 Georgia Avenue 

Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 

Bob Hickman, Executive Director 

Department of Parks, Recreation, 

and Tourism 

Box 1358 

Columbia, South Carolina 29202 

F. Hal Higgins 

33 Meadowview Road 

Orinda, California 94563 

Elbert Hilliard 

Department of Archives and 

History 

P. O. Box 571 

Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

Raymond H. Hillman, Curator 

of History 

Pioneer Museum and Haggin 

Galleries 

1201 N. Pershing 

Stockton, California 95203 

67 
Dr. Brooke Hindle 

University College of Arts and 

Science 

New York University 

University Heights 

New York, New York 10453 

Asher Hobson 

Little Norway 

Blue Mounds, Wisconsin 53517 

Roger Hoeh 

Political Science Department 

University of New Hampshire 

Durham, New Hampshire 03824 

Harold G. Hoffman 

New Jersey Historic Sites Council 

397 Millburn Avenue 

Millburn, New Jersey 07041 

Lee Hoffman 

Ivy Hill Forest 

Cockeysville, Maryland 21030 

Gen. Robert Hogaboom 

St. Mary's City Commission 

St. Mary's City, Maryland 20686 

William Hollomon 

George Washington Birthplace 

National Monument 

Box 679 

Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401 

Miss Harriet Holt 

National Trust for Historic 

Preservation 

748 Jackson Place, N. W. 

Washington, D. C 20006 

Carroll J. Hopf 

Farm Museum of Landis Valley 

2451 Kissel Hill Road 

Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601 

S. Reynolds Hopkins, Director 

The Amish Farm and House 

R. D. #4, Box 87 

Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17602 

Mrs. W. Cabell Hopkins 

6106 Waterford Road 

Columbus, Georgia 31904 

Prof. Patrick Horsbrugh 

Department of Architecture 

University of Notre Dame 

Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 

James G. Horsfall, Director 

Connecticut Agricultural 

Experiment Station 

123 Huntington Street 

New Haven, Connecticut 06504 

Mrs. Walter Hoskins 

School House Lane 

Morristown, New Jersey 07960 

D. R. Hough, Curator, Buildings 

and Machinery 

Upper Canada Village 

P. O. Box 550 

Morrisburg, Ontario, Canada 

Mrs. C. P. House, Jr. 

Mississippi Farm Implement 

Museum Committee 

Chamber of Commerce 

Cleveland, Mississippi 38732 

Joseph R. Hovance, Director, 

Educational Services 

Morris County Park Commission 

Court House 

Morristown, New Jersey 07960 

Milo B. Howard, Jr. 

Department of Archives and 

History 

Montgomery, Alabama 36104 

Robert M. Howes, Director 

Land Between the Lakes 

Tennessee Valley Authority 

Box 27 

Golden Pond, Kentucky 42231 

Senator Harold Hughes 

U. S. Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

68 
Ivor N. Hume, Director 

Department of Archeology 

Colonial Williamsburg 

Williamsburg Virginia 23185 

Carlisle Humelsine, President 

Colonial Williamsburg 

Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 

James L. Hupp 

Department of Archives and 

History 

State Capitol 

Charleston, West Virginia 25305 

Donald A. Hutslar, Associate 

Curator 

Ohio Historical Society 

Columbus, Ohio 43210 

Thomas T. Irvin 

Department of Agriculture 

Agriculture Building 

Capitol Square 

Atlanta, Georgia 30334 

Edward D. Ives, Professor of 

Folklore 

Department of Anthropology 

University of Maine 

Orono, Maine 04473 

Renwick Jackson, President 

St. Mary's College 

St. Mary's City, Maryland 20686 

Joseph Jaeger, Jr., Director of 

Parks 

Missouri State Park Board 

1204 Jefferson Building 

Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 

Malcolm Jamieson 

Berkeley Plantation 

Charles City, Virginia 23030 

John Melville Jennings, Director 

Virginia Historical Society 

P. O. Box 7311 

Richmond, Virginia 23221 

Mrs. Mary Gregory Jewett 

Georgia Historical Commission 

116 Mitchell Street, S. W. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 

Dr. John C. Johnson, President 

Plains Conservation Center 

1495 S. Clayton Street 

Denver, Colorado 80210 

Mrs. Medora Johnson, Museum 

Director 

San Joaquin County Historical 

Society 

Route 4, Box 161 

Lodi, California 95240 

Ralph E. Johnston, Curator 

Museum and Heritage Center 

South Dakota State University 

Brookings, South Dakota 57006 

Dr. H. G. Jones, Director 

Department of Archives and 

History 

P. O. Box 1881 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 

Dr. Louis C. Jones, Director 

New York State Historical 

Association 

Cooperstown, New York 13326 

Robert L. Jones 

Cooperative Extension Service 

County Office Building 

Westminster, Maryland 21157 

Mrs. Joye E. Jordan 

Division of Historic Sites and 

Museums 

Department of Archives and 

History 

Box 1881 

Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 

69 
Donald D. Juchartz, County 

Extension Director 

Cooperative Extensions Service 

of Michigan State University 

5455 Wayne Road 

Wayne, Michigan 48184 

William K. Kay, Historian 

National Park Service 

P. O. Box 10008 

Federal Building 

Richmond, Virginia 23240 

James A. Keillor 

Hillcrest Farm 

Wading River, New York 11792 

Darwin Kelsey 

Research Department 

Old Sturbridge Village 

Sturbridge, Massachusetts 01566 

Richard Kenah, Chairman, Farm 

Committee 

Alice Ferguson Foundation, Inc. 

Route #1 , Box 618 

Accokeek, Maryland 20607 

Mrs. Muriel Kenoyer, Curator 

Matthew Farm Museum 

Fairground 

Union, Maine 04862 

Donald W Kent, Jr. 

48 Main Street 

Byfield, Massachusetts 01922 

Charles A. Kerr 

Jackson County Park Department 

Lake Jacomo 

Route 2, Box 408 

Blue Springs, Missouri 64015 

Frank P King. Resident Director 

Coastal Plain Experiment Station 

University of Georgia College of 

Agriculture 

Tifton, Georgia 31794 

Dr. Gary King 

Kellogg Foundation 

Battle Creek, Michigan 49017 

Eugene Kingman, Director, 

Exhibits and Program 

Texas Tech University Museum 

Lubbock, Texas 79409 

Ronald J. Kley, Research 

Associate 

State Museum Commission 

State House 

Augusta, Maine 04330 

Steven Knudsen 

Film Production Unit 

Alice Norton House 

Iowa State University 

Ames, Iowa 50010 

Miss Kari Koester 

Office of Environmental 

Interpretation 

National Park Service 

Washington, D. C. 20240 

Delmer M. Kolb 

Museum of New Mexico 

P. O. Box 2087 

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 

Prof. Wabun C. Krueger 

College of Agriculture Museum 

Rutgers University 

New Brunswick, New Jersey 

08903 

Lloyd S. Kurtz 

Mutual Benefit Life Insurance 

Company 

2414 Kellogg 

Ames, Iowa 50012 

Byrle Kynerd, Director 

State Historical Museum 

Department of Archives and 

History 

P. O. Box 571 

Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

70 
William L. Landahl, Director of 

Parks 

Jackson County Parks 

Department 

Lake Jacomo 

Route 2, Box 408 

Blue Springs, Missouri 64015 

Ralph C. Lasbury, Jr. 

Old Ferry Farm 

East Windsor, Connecticut 06028 

Steve S. Lawrence, Executive 

Secretary 

Tennessee Historical Commission 

State Library and Archives 

Building 

Nashville, Tennessee 37219 

Ernest E. Leavitt, Jr. 

Arizona State Museum 

University of Arizona 

Tucson, Arizona 85721 

Miss Abbie LeCrone 

Cave Springs, Arkansas 72718 

Charles E. Lee, Director 

South Carolina Department of 

Archives and History 

P. O. Box 11188 Capitol Station 

Columbia, South Carolina 29211 

Dr. Deane Lee 

Department of Agricultural and 

Food Economics 

Draper Hall 

University of Massachusetts 

Amherst, Massachusetts 01002 

Dr. Nelson LeRay 

Department of Resource 

Economics 

Morrill Hall 

University of New Hampshire 

Durham, New Hampshire 03824 

Frank Lessiter 

1414 Buckthorn Drive 

Prospect Heights, Illinois 60070 

Edward Lettermann, Curator 

Gibbs Farm Museum 

2097 W. Larpenteur Avenue 

St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 

Stanley Levingston, President 

First National Bank 

Cleveland, Mississippi 38732 

Robert E. Lewis, Governor, 

Pueblo of Zuni 

Division of Resources 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Zuni, New Mexico 87327 

Prof. W. K. Long 

Owasco-Iroquois Research Center 

Cayuga Museum of History and 

Art 

203 Genessee Street 

Auburn, New York 13021 

Robert M. Lunny, Director 

New Jersey Historical Society 

230 Broadway 

Newark, New Jersey 07104 

Clinton Macauley 

Hampton Arms, Apt. D-17 

Hightstown, New Jersey 08520 

Dr. William D. McCain, 

President 

University of Southern 

Mississippi 

Hattiesburg, Mississippi 39402 

Dennis McCarthy 

Arizona State Parks 

1688 W. Adams 

Phoenix, Arizona 85007 

Glen E. McCaskey 

Institute of Environmental and 

Leisure Studies 

Sea Pines Plantation 

Hilton Head Island, South 

Carolina 29928 

71 
Robert C. McConnell 

Maryland National Capital Park 

and Planning Commission 

8787 Georgia Avenue 

Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 

Allister F. MacDougal 

Box 142 

Westford, Massachusetts 01886 

Senator George McGovern 

Senate Office Building 

Washington, D. C. 20510 

Kermit McKeever, Chief 

Division of Parks and Recreation 

Department of Natural Resources 

Charleston, West Virginia 25305 

William Y. McLean 

215 N. Central Avenue 

Tifton, Georgia 31794 

Dr. R. A. McLemore 

Department of Archives and 

History 

P. O. Box 571 

Jackson, Mississippi 39205 

Joseph B. Mahan, Jr., Director 

Department of Education and 

Research 

Columbus Museum of Arts and 

Crafts, Inc. 

1251 Wynnton Road 

Columbus, Georgia 31906 

Dan Malkovich 

Department of Conservation 

102 State Office Building 

Springfield, Illinois 62706 

James E. Mallow 

Department of Forests and Parks 

State Office Building 

Annapolis, Maryland 21404 

Harold R. Manakee, Director 

Maryland Historical Society 

201 W. Monument Street 

Baltimore, Maryland 21201 

Cyril L. Marshall, Curator of 

Technology and Crafts 

Plimoth Plantation 

Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360 

W. E. Marshall, Executive 

Director 

State Historical Society of 

Colorado 

Colorado State Museum 

Denver, Colorado 80203 

James G. Martin, Jr. 

Texas State Historical Association 

P. O. Box 8059 

University Station 

Austin, Texas 78712 

Ray H. Mattison 

State Historical Society 

Liberty Memorial Building 

Bismarck, North Dakota 58501 

Mrs. Wendy Mazer 

Friends of Quiet Valley 

Association 

R. D. #3 , Box 254 

East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 

18301 

Miss Barbara A. Melzer, 

Assistant Site Director 

Fort de Chartres 

Prairie du Rocher, Illinois 62277 

Louise McA. Merritt 

Department of Historic 

Properties 

National Trust for Historic 

Preservation 

748 Tackson Place, N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20006 

John H. Michael, Supervisor, 

Interpretive Services 

Department of Parks and 

Recreation 

P. O. Box 2390 

Sacramento, California 95811 

72 
Robin L. Michel, Curator of 

Technology 

Mactaquac Historical Program 

Frederickton, New Brunswick, 

Canada 

James N. Miles, Executive 

Director 

Great Plains Historical 

Association 

P.O.Box 1122 

Lawton, Oklahoma 73501 

Senator Jack Miller 

U. S. Senate 

Washington, D. C. 20510 

N. E. Miller, Director 

Board of Parks 

101 W. Gaines Street 

Tallahassee, Florida 32301 

Neal E. Miller, Director 

Archives and History Department 

State Office Building 

Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001 

Nyle Miller, Secretary 

Kansas State Historical Society 

10th and Jackson Streets 

Topeka, Kansas 66612 

Clifford P. Monahon, Director 

Rhode Island Historical Society 

52 Power Street 

Providence, Rhode Island 02906 

Harold Van Morgan, Chief. 

Program Planning Staff 

Land Between the Lakes 

Box 27 

Golden Pond, Kentucky 42231 

William Morris, Director 

State of Connecticut Historical 

Society 

75 Elm Street 

Hartford, Connecticut 06115 

Charles T. Morrissey, Director 

Vermont Historical Society 

Montpelier, Vermont 05602 

William Penn Mott, Director 

Department of Parks and 

Recreation 

P. O. Box 2390 

Sacramento, California 95811 

Mrs. L. M. Moye 

R. F. D. 

Lumpkin, Georgia 31815 

Dr. William G. Murray 

Department of Economics 

Iowa State University 

Ames, Iowa 50010 

Helmuth J. Naumer, Executive 

Director 

Fort Worth Museum of Science 

and History 

1501 Montgomery Street 

Fort Worth, Texas 76107 

Edward W. Neal 

1353 13th St. 

Columbus, Georgia 31901 

Christian Nelson, Chief, 

Interpretive Department 

East Bay Regional Park District 

11500 Skyline Boulevard 

Oakland, California 94619 

Ron Nelson 

Pine County Historical Society 

Finlayson, Minnesota 55735 

Ronald Nelson 

Old Colony Church 

Bishop Hill, Illinois 61419 

Mrs. James H. Newton 

Ipswich Historical Society 

Ipswich, Massachusetts 01938 

John E. Norton 

American-Scandinavian 

Foundation 

Augsburg College 

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 

73 
Mr. and Mrs. Gary Oiler 

Quiet Valley Farm Museum 

R. D. # 2 

Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360 

Y. A. Paloheimo 

Old Cienega Village Museum 

614 Acequia Madre 

Santa Fe, New Mexico 87051 

Hon. Wright Patman 

Rayburn Building 

U. S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

W. J. Patterson, Superintendent 

of Historic Sites 

Upper Canada Village 

P. O. Box 550 

Morrisburg, Ontario, Canada 

Harry Patton 

Alice Ferguson Foundation 

Route # 1 

Accokeek, Maryland 20607 

Dave L. Pearce, Commissioner of 

Agriculture 

Capitol Building 

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70804 

Carmen Perino 

Board of Supervisors 

Courthouse 

222 E. Weber Avenue 

Stockton, California 95202 

Dr. William J. Petersen 

State Historical Society of Iowa 

Centennial Building 

Iowa City, Iowa 52242 

William B. Pinney, Director 

Board of Historic Sites 

Montpelier, Vermont 05602 

Pioneer American Society, Inc. 

626 S. Washington Street 

Falls Church, Virginia 22046 

Herb Plambeck, Assistant to the 

Secretary 

Office of the Secretary 

U. S. Department of Agriculture 

Washington, D. C. 20250 

David Poinsett 

Historic Sites Council 

Department of Conservation and 

Economic Development 

John Fitch Plaza 

Trenton, New Jersey 08625 

L. S. Pope, Associate Dean 

College of Agriculture 

Texas A & M University 

College Station, Texas 77843 

Daniel R. Porter, Director 

The Ohio Historical Society 

Columbus, Ohio 43210 

Jack E. Porter 

Historic Preservation Program 

Arkansas Historical Commission 

Old State House 

Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 

Charles E. Pound 

Department of Parks, Recreation, 

and Conservation 

County Office Building 

White Plains, New York 10601 

Thompson Pound, Executive 

Director 

Tombigbee River Valley Water 

Management District 

City-County Building 

Tupelo, Mississippi 38801 

Joseph Prendergast, Executive 

Director 

National Trust for Historic 

Preservation 

748 Jackson Place, N. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20006 

74 
Nelson O. Price 

Heritage Plantation of Sandwich 

Grove Street, Box 566 

Sandwich, Massachusetts 02563 

Mrs. Granville T. Prior 

South Carolina History Society 

Fireproof Building 

Charleston, South Carolina 

29401 

John H. Randolph, Assistant 

Professor of Art 

Salem College 

Salem, West Virginia 26426 

Dr. Wayne D. Rasmussen 

History Branch 

U. S. Department of Agriculture 

500 12th Street, S. W. 

Washington, D. C. 20024 

Mrs. Clay Rayner 

Mississippi Farm Implement 

Museum 

Cleveland, Mississippi 38732 

Mrs. Blanche K. Reigle, Chief 

Curator 

Farm Museum of Landis Valley 

2451 Kissel Hill Road 

Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17601 

William N. Richards, Director 

of Museums 

Pennsylvania History and 

Museum Commission 

Box 1026 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 

Mrs. C. R. Richardson, Jr. 

West Implement Company, Inc. 

P. O. Box 880 

Cleveland, Mississippi 38732 

J. C. W. Riddle, Superintendent 

Hooewell Village 

R. F. D. # 1 

Elverson, Pennsylvania 19520 

Dr. Edward M. Riley, Director 

of Research 

Colonial Williamsburg 

Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 

Miss Elizabeth Ring, Vice 

President 

Maine Historical Society 

Portland, Maine 04101 

Dr. Barnes Riznik, Vice President 

Old Sturbridge Village 

Sturbridge, Massachusetts 01566 

Francis W. Robinson 

The Detroit Institute of Arts 

5200 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, Michigan 48202 

Mrs. Irwin V. Robinson 

Cultural Heritage Center 

P. O. Box 1303 

Dodge City, Kansas 67801 

Jerry L. Rogers, Director 

The Ranch Headquarters 

Box 4069 

Lubbock, Texas 79409 

John F. Rohn, Jr., Superintendent 

Homestead National Monument 

Route # 1 

Beatrice, Nebraska 68310 

Robert J. Romani 

Box 2020 

Davis, California 95616 

Jim B. Ross, Commissioner of 

Agriculture 

State of Mississippi 

Jackson, Mississippi 39201 

Robert Ruskin 

Alice Ferguson Foundation, Inc. 

Route #1 , Box 618 

Accokeek, Maryland 20607 

R. A. Sampson, Director 

Conner Prairie Pioneer 

Settlement and Museum 

Noblesville, Indiana 46060 

75 
Dr. Frederic O. Sargent 

Department of Agricultural 

Economics 

University of Vermont 

Burlington, Vermont 05401 

Jerry Savitis 

County Parks and Recreation 

Monmouth County Park System 

Newman Springs Road, Box 326 

Lincroft, New Jersey 07738 

John A. C. Schulte 

Department of Conservation 

102 State Office Building 

400 S. Spring Street 

Springfield, Illinois 62706 

Dr. Paul B. Sears 

Department of Biology 

Osborn Memorial Laboratories 

Yale University 

New Haven, Connecticut 06520 

Dr. T. L. Senn 

Department of Horticulture 

Clemson University 

Clemson, South Carolina 29631 

Harry E. Serfass, County 

Agricultural Agent 

Rutgers Cooperative Extension 

Service 

Court House 

Belvidere, New Jersey 07823 

James B. Shaeffer, Director 

Stuhr Museum of the Prairie 

Pioneer 

Box 636 

Grand Island, Nebraska 68801 

John F. Shanklin, Assistant 

Director 

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation 

U. S. Department of the Interior 

Washington, D. C. 20240 

George H. Shirk, President 

Oklahoma Historical Society 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105 

Dr. Alfred L. Shoemaker 

Lenhartsville, Pennsylvania 

19534 

Dr. James R. Short 

Division of Interpretation 

Colonial Williamsburg 

Williamsburg, Virginia 23185 

Dr. W. Ralph Singleton 

1841 University Circle 

Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 

William B. Singer 

Westville Historic Handicrafts, 

Inc. 

Lumpkin, Georgia 31815 

R. S. Sivesind, Director, Historic 

Sites 

State Historical Society 

816 State Street 

Madison, Wisconsin 53706 

Daniel Smiley 

Lake Mohonk Mountain House 

Mohonk Lake 

New Platz, New York 12561 

George M. Smith 

Belle Grove 

National Trust for Historic 

Preservation 

Middletown, Virginia 22645 

James M. Smith, Director 

State Historical Society of 

Wisconsin 

816 State Street 

Madison, Wisconsin 53706 

Hon. Neal Smith 

Rayburn Building 

U. S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 20510 

Norman W. Smith 

History Department 

Rhode Island College 

Providence, Rhode Island 02908 

76 
Edward J. Smits, Director 

Nassau County Historical 

Museum 

Muttontown Road 

Syosset, L. I., New York 11791 

Lowell Solterman 

Outdoor Laboratories 

Southern Illinois University 

Carbondale, Illinois 62901 

Horace A. Sorensen 

Pioneer Village Museum 

2998 Connor Street 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84109 

Mrs. Faith Stahl 

Tipton-Haynes Historical 

Association 

Route # 8 

Johnson City, Tennessee 37601 

Geoffrey N. Stein, Associate 

Curator, History 

Office of State History 

Albany, New York 12224 

Prof. A. Ray Stephens 

North Texas State University 

Denton, Texas 76203 

Dr. S. K. Stevens, Executive 

Director 

Pennsylvania History and 

Museum Commission 

Box 1026 

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17108 

Milo V. Stewart, Associate in 

Education 

New York State Historical 

Association 

Cooperstown, New York 13326 

Robert W. Straus 

Accokeek Foundation, Inc. 

525 School Street, S. E. 

Washington, D. C. 20024 

Douglass Strickland, Chief 

Bureau of Land Acquisition and 

Development 

Division of Recreation and Parks 

Larson Building 

Tallahassee, Florida 32304 

Quentin C. Sulzle 

Land Operations Office 

Zuni Indian Agency 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Zuni, New Mexico 87327 

John F. Sutherland 

Institute of Local History 

Manchester Community College 

Manchester, Connecticut 06040 

Marvin Sutherland 

Virginia Department of 

Conservation and Economic 

Development 

State Office Building 

Richmond, Virginia 23219 

Hans Syz 

11 Clapboard Hill Road 

Green Farms, Connecticut 06436 

Jarold D. Talbot, Director 

Old Museum Village of Smith's 

Clove 

Route 17 

Monroe, New York 10950 

Floyd D. Taylor, Superintendent 

Custis-Lee Mansion 

1400 Wilson Boulevard 

Arlington, Virginia 22209 

Lonn Taylor 

Winedale Inn Properties 

Round Top, Texas 78954 

James C. Thomas, Assistant to 

the Director 

Shakertown at Pleasant Hill 

Route # 4 

Harrodsburg, Kentucky 40330 

444-709 O - 72 77 
Minor Wine Thomas, Jr., 

Assistant Director 

New York State Historical 

Association 

Cooperstown, New York 13326 

Mrs. Sally Thompson, Executive 

Secretary 

Calvin Coolidge Memorial 

Foundation 

P. O. Box 462 

Woodstock, Vermont 05091 

John Tiff, Park Historian 

Lincoln Boyhood National 

Memorial 

Lincoln City, Indiana 47552 

Russell B. Tobey, Director of 

Parks 

State House Annex 

Concord, New Hampshire 03301 

Bernard T. Trinity 

Trinity Historical Museum 

47460 Sugarbush Road 

Mount Clemens, Michigan 48043 

Richard Trudeau, General 

Manager 

East Bay Regional Park District 

11500 Skyline Boulevard 

Oakland, California 94619 

James J. Truncer, Director 

County Parks and Recreation 

Monmouth County Parks System 

Newman Springs Road, Box 326 

Lincroft, New Jersey 07738 

Thomas Vaughan, Director 

Oregon Historical Society 

1230 S. W. Park Avenue 

Portland, Oregon 97205 

Wallace Vegors, Assistant 

Director 

Arizona State Parks 

1688 West Adams 

Phoenix, Arizona 85007 

Prof. James Verde 

Ecology Action for Rhode Island 

281 Thayer Street 

Providence, Rhode Island 02906 

J. Leonard Volz, Director, 

Southeast Region 

National Park Service 

P. O. Box 10008 

Richmond, Virginia 23240 

William J. Wagner 

500 Hubbell Building 

Des Moines, Iowa 50309 

James R. Walker, Park Manager 

George Washington Birthplace 

National Monument 

Virginia 22575 

Alexander J. Wall, President 

Old Sturbridge Village 

Sturbridge, Massachusetts 01566 

Charles C. Wall, Resident 

Director 

Mount Vernon, Virginia 22121 

Earl D. Wallace 

Shakertown Board of Trustees 

1211 Richmond Road 

Lexington, Kentucky 40502 

Clyde R. Walter 

The Johnson 1910 Farm 

Geneseo, Illinois 61254 

David D. Warden 

Danville, Vermont 05828 

Henry T. Ware 

Mississippi Antebellum 

Foundation 

111 Jefferson Davis Avenue 

Biloxi, Mississippi 39530 

G. B. Wareham, Executive 

Director 

Alice Ferguson Foundation 

Route #1 , Box 618 

Accokeek, Maryland 20607 

78 
P. Alston Waring 

Honey Hollow Watershed 

Association 

R. D. # 1 

New Hope, Pennsylvania 18938 

Mrs. Edgar Wayburn 

30 Seaview Terrace 

San Francisco, California 94121 

Silas B. Weeks 

New Hampshire Cooperative 

Extension Service 

University of New Hampshire 

Durham, New Hampshire 03824 

Merle W. Wells, Historian and 

Archivist 

Idaho Historical Society 

610 N. Julia Davis Drive 

Boise, Idaho 83706 

Dr. James W. Whitaker 

Department of History 

Iowa State University 

Ames, Iowa 50010 

Norman B. Wilkinson, Director 

of Research 

The Hagley Museum 

Greenville, Delaware 19807 

Joseph E. Williams 

Department of Education and 

Research 

Columbus Museum of Arts and 

Crafts 

1251 WynntonRoad 

Columbus, Georgia 31906 

Dr. R. Coke Wood, Executive 

Secretary 

Conference of California 

Historical Societies 

University of the Pacific 

Stockton, California 95204 

Wesley R. Woodgerd, Chief 

Recreation and Parks Division 

Department of Fish and Game 

Sam W. Mitchell Building 

Helena, Montana 59601 

Gilbert Woods 

Mississippi Farm Implement 

Museum 

Cleveland, Mississippi 38732 

Hon. Wendell Wyatt 

U. S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

79 
INDEX 

Access, 14, 15, 34 

Account books, 28 

Accokeek Foundation, 38, 48, 74, 77 

Administration, 17 

Admission fees, 41 

Affiliation, 8 

Agricultural Hall of Fame and National Center, 47, 64 

Agricultural History, 2 

Agricultural History Society, 2, 75 

Agricultural Yearbooks, use of, 28 

Alabama, 43, 68 

Alberta, 56, 64 

Almanacs, use of, 29 

Alice Ferguson Foundation, 48, 70, 75, 78 

American Antiquarian Society, 29 

American Association for State and Local History, 59 

American Association of Museums, 38 

American Life Foundation and Institute, 65 

American Lutheran Church, 66 

America's Museums: The Belmont Report, 38 

American-Scandinavian Foundation, 73 

Amish Farm and House, 53, 68 

Animals, 31, 33 

Anthropologists, 67, 69 

Appomattox Court House, 66 

Architect, 68 

Ardrey, Robert, 29 

Arizona, 9, 11, 43, 60, 62, 65, 66, 67, 71, 78 

Arkansas, 44, 63, 64, 71, 74 

Artisans, 30 

Association for Living Historical Farms and Agricultural Museums, 

1, 2, 20, 31 

Audubon Society, 14, 36, 44, 48, 49, 52 

Aullwood Children's Farm, 52 

Ayer's Directory of Newspapers and Periodicals, 27 

B. Carroll Reece Museum, 60 

Bailey, Liberty H., 29 

80 
Beall, Karen F., 29 

Bearss, Edwin C, 26 

Belle Grove, 76 

Belmont Report, 38, 40, 41 

Berkeley Plantation, 55, 69 

Bethpage. See: Old Bethpage Village 

Bidwell, Percy W., 27 

Bibliography, historical, 26, 27, 28 

Biological and Agricultural Index, 27 

Bishop Hill Heritage Association, 46 

Booker T. Washington National Memorial, 55, 66 

Brigham, Clarence S., 28 

Bright's Nursery, 61 

British Columbia Farm Machinery Museum Association, 62 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 51, 62, 71, 77 

Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, 76 

Buses, 32 

Butterworth, Benjamin, 29 

C. Nelson Hackett Ranch, 34, 35, 37, 39 

Cafeterias, 43 

California, 44, 59, 61, 63, 67, 69, 72, 73, 74, 75, 78, 79 

California Department of Parks and Recreation, 34, 44, 72, 73 

California Historical Landmarks Commission, 59 

California Wine Institute, 23 

Calvin Coolidge Memorial Foundation, 54, 78 

Camel's Hump Area Rural Museum, 63 

Camel's Hump Park, 55 

Canada, 56, 57, 58, 61, 62, 63, 64, 68, 72, 74 

Carroll County Farm Museum, 47-48, 62, 69 

Carter's Grove, 36, 55 

Carts, 32 

Catalog of Federal Assistance Programs, 24 

Cayuga Museum of History and Art, 52, 71 

Census, U. S., 28 

Chamber of Commerce, by states: California, 61; Mississippi, 9, 49, 60, 68 

Nebraska, 67 

Children's farms, 16, 44, 45, 48, 49, 52 

Christensen, Ernst, 31 

Christian, Pauline B., 29 

Clawson, Marion, 2 

Colleges and universities, alphabetically by states: Arizona, 60, 65, 67, 71 

California, 79; Connecticut, 76, 77; Florida, 62; Georgia, 70; Illinois, 67 

77; Indiana, 60, 68; Iowa, 70, 73, 79; Maine, 69; Maryland 69; Mas 

sachusetts, 71; Michigan, 60, 64, 66, 70; Minnesota, 73; Mississippi, 71 

Missouri, 59; Montana, 63; New Hampshire, 65, 68, 71, 79; New Jersey 

66, 70; New York, 63, 66, 68, Rhode Island, 76; South Carolina, 60, 76 

81 
South Dakota, 69; Tennessee, 60; Texas, 65, 70, 72, 74, 77; Utah, 60; 

Vermont, 75; West Virginia, 64, 75 

Colonial Williamsburg, 21, 36, 42, 43, 55, 69, 75, 76 

Colorado, 36, 44, 69, 72 

Columbus Museum of Arts and Crafts, 45, 72, 79 

Commissioner of Agriculture, 61 

Conference of California Historical Societies, 79 

Congress, U. S., 63, 66, 74, 76, 79 

Connecticut, 44-45, 59, 61, 63, 66, 61, 68, 71, 73, 76, 77 

Conner Prairie Pioneer Settlement and Museum, 46, 75 

Construction, 23, 24, 34 

Cooperstown, Farmers' Museum, 2, 58, 59 

Corn, 33 

Costs, 31-32, 36, 40 

Costumes, 36, 40 

Counties, as source of funds, 25/ 

Crafts, 42 

Crops, 40 

Cultural Heritage Center, 75 

Custis-Lee Mansion, 64, 11 

Dairy farming, 46 

Dame Farm, 53 

Danhof, Clarence S., 28 

Delaware, 45, 79 

Department of Agriculture, 21, 24, 63, 74, 75 

Department of Commerce, 24 

Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 24 

Department of Historical Agriculture, 2 

Depreciation, 41 

Detroit Institute of Arts, 75 

Dickson Mounds Museum, 63 

Director of project, 16-17 

Diseases, 33 

District of Columbia. See Washington, D. C. 

Donations, 22 

Drake, Milton, 29 

Drumlin Farm, 48, 65 

Early American Society, 60 

East Bay Regional Park District, 44, 73, 78 

Ecology action of Rhode Island, 53, 78 

Economic Research Service, 65 

Edmonton, Alberta, 64 

Education, 16 

Electrification, rural, 47 

82 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 24 

Endorsements, uses of, 20 

Equipment, 30, 31 

Estate inventories, 28 

Extension Service, alphabetically by states: Michigan, 70; New Hampshire, 

79; New Jersey, 76; Utah, 60 

Falconer, John I., 27 

Farmers Home Administration, 24, 63 

Farmers' Museum, Cooperstown, 2, 36, 37, 41, 51, 58, 59 

Farm Machinery Association, 62 

Farm Museum of Landis Valley, 52-53, 68, 75 

Farms, alphabetically by states and countries: Canada, 68, 74; Connecticut, 

61, 71; Georgia,' 60; Illinois, 78; Indiana, 75, 78; Iowa, 73, 79; Kentucky, 

68, 77, 78, Maryland, 68, 70, 74, 75, 77, 78; Massachusetts, 65, 66, 70, 

72, 75, 78; Minnesota, 67; Nebraska, 75; New Hampshire, 59; New 

Mexico, 77; New York, 66, 69, 70, 77; Ontario, 74; Oregon, 78; Pennsylvania, 68, 72, 78; South Carolina, 76; Tennessee Valley Authority, 68, 73", 

Utah, 62; Vermont, 78; Virginia, 72, 75, 76; Wisconsin, 68; Zuni 

Indian, 62. See also State directory of historic farms and museums. 

Farnham, Alexander, 29 

Federal government, 24 

Fences, 32, 35 

Fertilizers, 40 

Financing, 11 

Florida, 45, 62, 66, 73, 77 

Food processing, 33-34 

Ford. See Henry Ford Museum 

Fort Edmonton Park Farms, 56 

Fort William Henry Restoration and Museum, 51, 64 

Fort Worth Museum of Science and History, 73 

Foundations, 22 

Franklin Pierce Homestead, 78 

Friends of Quiet Valley Association, 72 

Frilandsmuseet, Lyngby, Denmark, 14 

Frost, Robert, 50-51 

Fundraisers, 21, 22 

Gardens, 49 

Geology, 16 

George Washington Birthplace National Monument, 55, 68, 78 

Georgia, 9, 25, 37, 38, 45. 60, 64, 61, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 76, 79 

Georgia Agrirama, 45 

Genetics, 76 

Gift shops 42 

Gibbs Farm Museum, 49, 71 

83 
Glassie, Henry, 28 

Grand-Kohrs Ranch, 50 

Grants, 30-31 

Gray, Lewis C, 28 

Great Plains Historical Association, 52, 73 

Greenfield Village, 49, 62 

Guards, 31, 32 

Guides, 13, 32 

Hadley Farm Museum, 48 

Hagley Museum, 45, 79 

Hamer, Philip M., 28 

Handlin, Oscar, 26 

Hatch, Charles E., 26 

Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village, 42, 49, 62 

Heritage Plantation of Sandwich, 74 

Hillcrest Farm, 70 

Historical research, 26, 27, 31 

Historical societies, alphabetically: American Association for State and Local 

History, 59; Arizona, 62, 66; Arkansas, 64, 74; California, 69, 79; 

Colorado, 72; Connecticut, 66, 61, 73; Florida, 62; Georgia, 69; Idaho, 79; 

Illinois, 65; Iowa, 74; Kansas, 73; Kentucky, 61, 62, 64; Maine, 75; Maryland, 61, 68, 72; Massachusetts, 73; Michigan, 59; Minnesota, 62, 65, 73; 

Missouri, 61; Montana, 66; Nebraska, 61; Nevada, 60; New Hampshire, 

66; New Jersey, 71; New York, 66, 69, 76, 77; North Dakota, 72; Ohio, 

67, 69, 74; Oklahoma, 73, 76; Oregon, 59, 78; Pennsylvania, 75, 77; Rhode 

Island, 73; South Carolina, 61, 62, 63, 66, 75; South Dakota, 61, 67; 

Tennessee, 71, 77; Texas, 65, 72; Utah, 62; Vermont, 73; Virginia, 60, 

69; Wisconsin, 61, 76 

Historic Governor Larrabee Home, 46, 65 

History Branch, USD A, 75 

Homestead National Monument, 50, 75 

Honey Hollow Watershed Association, 53, 78 

Hopewell Village, 53, 75 

Horticulture, 60, 63, 76 

Howell Park, 52 

Hunt, Robert, 29 

Hunter, Wilbur H., Jr., 38 

Idaho, 79 

Illinois, 46, 63, 65, 67, 71, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78 

Illinois Department of Conservation, 46, 72, 76 

Illustrations, sources for, 29 

Implements, farm, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 48, 50, 52-53 

Income, 41 

Incorporation, 10, 43 

84 
Indiana, 6, 46, 56, 60, 68, 75 

Inflation, effects of, 37 

Information bank, 31 

Information for visitors, 32 

Institute of Local History, 77, 

Insurance, 41 

Interior, Department of the, 67, 76. See also Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Interpretation, 31-32, 33, 36 

Iowa, 9, 10, 46-47, 65, 70, 73, 74, 78, 79 

Iroquois Indians, 51, 52, 71 

Ivy Hill Forest, 68 

Jackson County Parks Department, Missouri, 49-50, 70 

Johnson 1910 Farm, 46, 78 

Joslyn Art Museum, 66 

Kalamazoo Nature Center, 49, 60, 64 

Kansas, 47, 64, 73, 75 

Kaplan, Louis, 27 

Kellar, Herbert, 2 

Kelley, Oliver Hudson, 49 

Kellogg Foundation, 70 

Kennesaw Mountain Battlefield National Park, 64 

Kent Tavern Museum, 54-55 

Kentucky, 42, 47, 61, 62, 64, 68, 73, 77, 78 

Kern County Museum, California, 44, 59 

Knight, Edward H., 29 

Knott's Berry Farm, 44 

Labels, 33 

Labor, 30-31, 36-37 

Lake Jacomo, 49-50, 70 

Lake Mohonk Mountain House, 76 

Landahl, William L., 26, 42 

Land Between the Lakes, 47, 68, 73 

Landscaping, 35 

Landis Valley Farm Museum, 52-53 

Laws, 30-31 

Lee, Robert E., 42, 55 

Library of Congress, 28-29 

Lincoln, Abraham, 46, 60, 78 

Lincoln, Tom, 46, 56-57 

Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial, 6, 46, 56-51, 60, 78 

Lincoln's New Salem Village, 46 

Lippitt Farmstead, 51, 58-59 

Little Norway, 56, 68 

Living conditions, staff, 30 

85 
Living Historical Farms Bulletin, 2 

Living History Farms, Iowa, 2, 9, 10, 19, 22, 46-47, 70, 73, 78, 79 

Livestock, 41 

Lodi Grape Association, 23 

Louisiana, 66, 61, 74 

McCormick Collection, 56 

Machinery, 35-36, 47, 49, 56 

Mactaquac Historical Program, 63, 72 

Maine, 47, 63, 69, 70, 75 

Maintenance, 35 

Manuscripts, 28-29 

Maps, 32 

Maryland, 47-48, 61, 62, 64, 61, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 77, 78 

Massachusetts, 35, 38, 42, 48, 58, 59, 63, 65, 66, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 78 

Matthew Farm Museum, 70 

Michigan, 42, 49, 59, 60, 62, 64, 66, 70, 75, 78 

Micke Grove, 23, 44 

Minimum wages, 30 

Minnesota, 49, 62, 65, 66, 71, 73 

Mississippi, 9, 49, 59, 60, 61, 64, 65, 67, 68, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 78, 79 

Mississippi Ante-Bellum Plantation, 49, 78 

Mississippi Farm Implement Museum, 49, 68, 75, 79 

Missouri, 49-50, 59, 61, 69, 70 

Missouri Town of 1855, 49-50 

Monmouth County Park System, 51, 61, 76 

Montana, 50, 63, 64, 66, 79 

Motion pictures, 34 

Mountain Cove Farm, 60 

Mount Vernon, Virginia, 55, 62, 78 

Murray, William G., 19, 22 

Museum of English Rural Life, 14 

Museum of Man and His Daily Bread, 54, 62 

Museum of Pioneer Life, 63 

Museum of the Great Plains, 52 

Museum of the Rockies, 50, 63 

Museums, alphabetically by state: Arizona, 60, 62, 65, 66, 71; Arkansas, 63", 

California, 35, 59, 61, 67, 69, 74; Canada, 61, 62, 68, 72, 74; Colorado, 

72; Delaware, 79; Florida, 66; Georgia, 72, 76, 79; Illinois, 63, 72, 73; 

Indiana, 60, 75, 78; Kansas, 64, 75; Kentucky, 62; Maine, 63, 70; Maryland, 61, 62, 69", Massachusetts, 63, 70, 74, 75; Michigan, 60, 62, 64, 66, 

75, 78; Minnesota, 62, 71; Mississippi, 68, 70, 75, 79; Montana, 63; 

Nebraska, 66, 16; New Jersey, 70; New Mexico, 70; New York, 64, 66, 

69, 71, 76, 77; North Carolina, 69; Ohio, 69; Oklahoma, 73; Oregon, 

59, 78, Pennsylvania, 68, 73, 75, 77; South Dakota, 63, 67, 69; Tennessee, 

86 
60; Texas, 70, 73, Utah, 62, 77; Vermont, 63, 64; Wisconsin, 61. 

See also Farms 

Museums and Related Institutions: A Basic Program Survey, 41 

Nassau County Historical Museum, 51, 77 

National Colonial Farm of the Accokeek Foundation, 48 

National Museum of Canada, 61 

National Park Service, 6, 21, 31, 46, 48, 50, 53, 55, 56, 60, 61, 62, 64, 66, 

61, 68, 70, 75, 78 

National Trust for Historic Preservation, 21, 61, 65, 68, 72, 74, 76 

Nature centers, 16, 60, 64 

Nebraska, 25, 50, 61, 64, 66, 61, 75, 76 

Nevada, 60 

New Brunswick, 63, 73 

New Hampshire, 50-51, 59, 60, 61, 65, 66, 68, 71, 78, 79 

New Jersey, 51, 61, 62, 63, 66, 68, 70, 71, 74, 76, 78 

New Mexico, 51, 62, 70, 71, 77 

New York, 15, 36, 38, 39, 51-52, 58-59, 60, 63, 64, 65, 66, 61, 68, 69, 

70, 71, 74, 76, 77, 78 

New York State Historical Association, 66, 69, 11, 78 

North Carolina, 52, 69 

North Dakota, 72 

Nursery, 61 

Office of Economic Opportunity, 24 

Office of Environmental Interpretation, 66 

Ohio, 52, 67, 69, 74 

Oklahoma, 52, 67, 73, 76 

Old Bethpage Village, 15, 38, 51 

Old Cienga Village Museum, 74 

Old Colony Church, 46, 73 

Old Ferry Farm, 71 

Old Museum Village of Smith's Clove, 51, 77 

Old Salem, N. C, 52 

Old Sturbridge Village, 2, 18, 35, 37, 38, 39, 41, 43, 45, 48, 58, 70, 75, 78 

Oliver Hudson Kelley Farm, 49, 62 

Oregon, 52, 59, 65, 78 

Ontario, 15, 56, 57, 58, 61, 68, 74 

Owasco Stockaded Indian Village, 52 

Oxon Hill Children's Farm, 48 

Parking, 12 

Parks, alphabetically by states: Arizona, 71, 78; California, 61, 72, 73, 78; 

Florida, 73, 77; Georgia, 64; Illinois, 72; Indiana, 78; Louisiana, 66, 67; 

Maryland, 64, 61, 71, 72; Minnesota, 65; Mississippi, 65; Missouri, 69, 70, 

71; Montana, 64, 79; New Hampshire, 78; New Jersey, 61, 68, 76; New 

York, 74; Pennsylvania, 65; South Carolina, 62, 67; Texas, 65; Virginia, 

87 
61, 66, 78; West Virginia, 72; Wyoming, 67, See also National Park 

Service 

Patent Office reports, 28 

Patman, Wright, 2 

Pawnee Indians, 50 

Pay, 30-31 

Pennsylvania, 52-53, 60, 65, 68, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 79 

Perpetuation of Historical Heritage, 42 

Personnel, 17-18 

Peterson, Gale Eugene, 26 

Photographs. See Illustrations, sources for 

Pioneer farming, 5, 12 

Pictures. See Illustrations, sources for 

Pima Indians, 43 

Pioneer America Society, 74 

Pioneer Arizona Foundation, 5, 9, 11, 15, 23, 24, 43, 66 

Pioneer Log Farm, 49 

Pioneer Museums and Haggin Galleries, 67 

Pioneer Village Museum, 77 

Plains Conservation Center, 36, 44, 69 

Planning of projects, 17 

Plantation Museum, Inc., 44 

Plantations: Arkansas, 44, 63", Massachusetts, 63, 65, 72, 75; Mississippi, 

78, 79", South Carolina, 53, 60, 65, 71; Virginia, 55, 69, 78 

Plants, location of, 31 

Plimoth Plantation, 41, 42, 48, 63, 65, 72 

Pliny Freeman Farm, 18, 19, 35, 58 

Prairie Village Historical Society, 67 

Presentation of project, 18 

Preservation, historic: Arkansas, 74; Illinois, 78; Rhode Island, 78; Virginia, 

76, 77, 78. See also National Trust for Historic Preservation 

Press, 11 

Processing, 33-34 

Profits, 43 

Protection, 32-33 

Publications, 40 

Pueblo of Zuni, 51, 71 

Quiet Valley Farm Museum, 53, 74 

Ranches, 44, 75 

Ranch Headquarters, Lubbock, Texas, 54 

Rath, Frederick L., Jr., 26 

Research, historical, 26, 27, 31 

Resources for the Future, Inc., 62, 64 

Restorations, 15, 34, 60, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 69, 75, 76, 77, 78 

88 
Rhode Island, 53, 73, 76, 78 

Robert Frost Homestead, 50-51, 78 

Robert E. Lee Memorial Foundation, 64 

Rogers, Merrilyn, 26 

Rudler, F. W., 29 

Safety, 14 

Salaries, 39 

Salem College, 55-56, 64 

Sales, 42 

San Joaquin County Historical Society, 44, 69 

Saskatchewan, 56 

Schools, 15, 16 

Sea Pines Plantation, 53, 65, 71 

Service facilities, 34, 35 

Shakers, 22, 42, 47, 62, 77, 78 

Shannon, Fred A., 28 

Shelburne Museum, 54, 64 

Shops, 13 

Signs, 33 

Silent Meadow Farm, 44, 61 

Sites, selection of, 13, 14, 15, 19 

Six Oaks, 53 

Skansen, Sweden, 13 

Sleepy Hollow Restorations, 63, 67 

Slide films, 34 

Sloane-Stanley Museum, 45 

Smith's Clove. See Old Museum Village of Smith's Clove 

Smithsonian Institution, 2, 21 

Snaketown National Monument, 43 

Soil, 16 

Soil Conservation Service, 24 

South Carolina, 10, 53, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 61, 71, 75, 76 

South Dakota, 61, 63, 67, 69 

Spanish colonial agriculture, 44 

Spartanburg (South Carolina) County, 10, 53, 61, 62, 63, 66 

Sponsors, 23 

Staff, 29-30, 31, 36-37 

State directory of historic farms and museums, 43 

State historical societies, uses of, 20, 21 

States, funds from, 25 

Stewart County Historical Commission, 9, 45 

Stonefield Historic Site, 56, 61 

Storage, 18 

Stratford Hall, 42, 55, 64 

Stuhr Museum of the Prairie Pioneer, 25, 50, 76 

Stuntz, Stephen C, 28 

89 
Tallahassee Junior Museum, 45, 66 

Tennessee, 10, 25, 54, 59, 60, 71, 77 

Tennessee Valley Authority, 47, 68, 73 

Territorial Farm in Howell Park, 52 

Texas, 54, 65, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 77 

Texas Tech University Museum, 54, 70 

Theft, 32 

Thomas, Minor Wine, 37, 39 

Threshing, 33-34 

Tickets, 12 

Time Stone Farm, 66 

Timma Foundation, 61 

Tipton-Haynes Historical Society, 10, 25, 54, 77 

Tools, 33 

Tours, 12, 13, 32. 

Travel, 11, 12 

Trinity Historical Museum, 49, 72 

Ulster Folk Museum, Belfast, 14 

Union List of Serials, 27 

United States Marine Corps Reserve, 25 

United States Navy Seabees, 24 

University. See Colleges and universities 

Upper Canada Village, 15, 42, 56-57, 58, 68, 74 

Utah, 54, 60, 62, 77 

Utilities, 35 

Vandalism, 32 

Vermont, 54-55, 63, 64, 67, 73, 74, 76, 78 

Veterinary medicine, 40 

Villages, 12 

Vineyard, 44 

Virginia, 36, 55, 60, 61, 64, 66, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78 

Visitors, 12, 31, 32, 33 

Wages, 30-31, 38-39 

Wallace, Earl, 22 

Walnut Grove Plantation, 53, 60 

Washington, Booker T., 55, 66 

Washington, D. C, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 61, 68, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 

76, 77, 79 

Washington, George, 55, 68, 78 

Water, 16 

Wendelin Grimm Farm, 62 

Western Development Museum, 56 

Western Trails Museum. See Knott's Berry Farm 

90 
Westville Historic Handicrafts, 9, 25, 37, 45, 76 

West Virginia, 55-56, 64, 69, 72, 75 

Wheat, 33-34 

Wildlife, 16 

Williamsburg. See Colonial Williamsburg 

Windham Foundation, 67 

Winedale Inn Properties, 54, 77 

Wisconsin, 56, 61, 68, 76 

Worcester County Horticultural Society, 63 

Wyoming, 67, 73 

Yolo County, California, 44 

Yorker Yankee Village, 65 

Zuni Indians, 51, 62, 71, 77 

91 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1972 O - 444-709 


ZL'NG 

>ss* 

SpSsiE 

**mt£ 

* * 

. ,.*._ ^i,i»*(i^^i*i&is»^-*-^^ 

* .V. • «-'-• >.J<*<» J?,