Oregon Public Broadcasting

1st congressional district 2012 election 2012 session agriculture art arts author beer births books budget business central oregon college congress crime culture death penalty eastern oregon economy education employment energy environment eugene fishing food gangs gay rights health health care high school history homeless housing jobs law legislature literature living media mental health military movies music native americans obama occupy portland occupy wall street onthejob oregon our town outdoors parenting police politics portland portland business journal portland mayor pregnancy prison public health race rebroadcast recess recession religion republicans rural schools science shooting sports supreme court talking business technology teen theater unemployment union university of oregon washington water weekend women youth

It is terrible to have to choose between a museum or a library--I value both.  The library has to come first, nevertheless.  Even the most engaging and educational exhibit in a museum is only one relatively static product of historical research, whereas a library is a vibrant place of origin for an endless supply of exhibits and much more. 

Professionally I have used the collections at OHS to do research on the historic use of properties to aid in environmental clean-up efforts.  I also use the library in historic preservation work.  It has been said that the greenest building is one that has already been built.  Limiting access to the collections at OHS (not to mention the expertise of the knowledgeable archivists) will have a negative impact on this type of work that does so much for the public good. 

Last, I feel for students--undergraduates just learning how to use primary source materials and graduate students who rely on the unique materials at OHS to complete their programs. 

posted 3 years, 2 months ago
view in context