
This One?

Or this one?
There is a group that has been nosing around Oysterville for a year or so in the guise of “assisting” us in our ongoing efforts at preservation. The group calls themselves the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation and, although they present themselves with great authority, they are not to be mistaken for the Washington State Advisory Council on Historic Preservation which is an official arm of the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Preservation.
It’s totally confusing and, perhaps, is meant to be. The Washington Trust (whose very name seems to inspire confidence and, well… trust) is a group of do-gooders who purport to build an ethic that preserves Washington’s historic places through advocacy, education, collaboration, and stewardship. One of the ways they do that (NOT!) is to generate a list of most endangered historic sites within the state. They have put Oysterville on that list. I’m not at all sure to what purpose.

Recipients Beware!

Think Twice!
Right now, they are having a fund-raiser. They are, after all, do-gooders in possession of a 501(c)(3) which allows them to receive unlimited tax-exempt contributions from individuals, corporations, and unions. Currently they are soliciting donations and featured on their slick, direct mail postcard is…an Oysterville structure. But, it is not featured in a good way, nor in an honest way, nor with the permission or even knowledge of the property owners. As a matter of fact, they have their information totally skewed.
They are picturing the Captain Stream House which Oysterville aficionados know was discovered by its new owners to be riddled with powder post beetles. At the recommendation of the Washington State Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (that’s the State’s really-o, truly-o, preservation group) and at the insistence of our own county’s Department of Community Development, they took the building down and are replicating it as closely as possible.
I should point out that the owners took the house down board-by-board in order to find any and all parts that could be preserved. There were hardly any and, needless to say, it has been a time-consuming and costly endeavor. (I can’t even imagine buying a house, discovering that it needs to be destroyed, and then in the interest the historic record, meticulously rebuilding it.) In my humble (and totally unofficial and unsanctioned capacity), I think the home-owners should be getting an award for their exemplary preservation efforts.
Furthermore, I would certainly urge anyone with dollars to donate to historic preservation to find a more worthy recipient than this misguided organization. They apparently operate on rumor, perpetuate untruths and certainly do not talk to the property-owners before misrepresenting them to the public for their own benefit. I’m so sorry that they have Oysterville within their sights. I don’t see an upside to their efforts on our behalf.
Talk to Matt Winter. This needs to be an expose in the Observer. We also need to name names.
I’m not sure I’m understanding what you are saying the WA Trust is doing that’s wrong? They raise funds to give grants to properties like the Captain Stream House.
There are very few funding opportunities for private owners of historic homes. The Most Endangered Properties list is created to help properties on it fundraise by raising visibility of how important they are. If these homeowners need help, why on earth shouldn’t a nonprofit with a public mission be allowed to help?
I’ve never seen WA Trust tell anyone that they are a state agency. The WA Trust does manage several grants for the state, and I’ve always found them to be extremely credible. It seems like this article is targeting them without an understanding of how state, nonprofit, and private enterprise partner together to preserve Washington’s heritage.