I have attempted to resist responding to this thread, but my energies have expired! ;)  What many non-conservators may not realize is that conservators have a Code of Ethics (see the American Institute for Conservation [AIC] website for a copy) that they follow, and one of the most important elements is the tenant that it can be considered unethical to give advice for the treatment of an object that they have not PERSONALLY examined.  So, not giving remote advice is NOT because a conservator isn't helpful or willing to assist, but rather that it may be unethical.  There are far too many variations in the nature, condition, and past histories of objects to be able to discern the best alternatives without examining the object.  Often, even after examining the object, the conservator can't tell visually, and must do tests.  For this reason, what was done to other objects in other situations may not be appropriate for different objects.  

Second, there are varying opinions in the conservation profession, just as there are in virtually all professions.  Some of these opinions are not accurate, or do not provide the best preservation results.  Discerning these can be very difficult, even for other conservators.  For example, in the particular question about leather, there is a great amount of disagreement among conservators about applying leather dressings to collections objects that are intended to last hundreds or thousands of years.  Many of the components of these dressings are excellent food sources for molds, and this is exactly the problem that was occurring with the original questioner.  Applying one of these dressings in this specific situation may cause an even greater mold problem in the future.

Third, ALL the conservators I know freely give of their time and expertise, especially to smaller organizations.  Personally for me, this is usually several hundred hours per year.  In fact, I would postulate that this is a good way to separate the TRUE conservators from the imposters.  Yes, there are a lot of imposter conservators who are not necessarily fully trained and do not necessarily abide by the Code of Ethics, but they see the benefit of calling themselves conservators.  Another of the Code's concepts is the free exchange of knowledge.  Conservators are encouraged to publish, give talks at conferences, and give of their time in educating the public, including museum staff.  Someone who is hesitant to share their knowledge is probably not a real conservator.

Fourth, conservators do not have "high hourly rates" considering the amount of training they have.  How much does your local auto repair shop charge per hour?  Mine is $95.  A mechanic does not have four years of undergraduate study, followed by three years of graduate study.  But, they are charging the same as many conservators.  The closest educational parallel is lawyers, who also have four years of undergraduate and three years of graduate study.  Does anyone know of a single lawyer who charges anywhere near $100 per hour?  My college roommate went to law school at the same time I was in conservation grad school, and we graduated the same year (actually, my program ran three months longer than his).  He charges $300 per hour.  I have never charged more than 1/3 of that.  Conservators in private practice also have significant fixed costs, which includes various insurances, rent, utilities, supplies and equipment.  And, generally they can only bill about 20-25 hours per week on average, as the rest of the time they must do administrative and marketing work that is not billable.  Add to that the fact that there are occasional gaps between projects with no billable income, and that vacation and sick time are unpaid, and most conservators probably have a net annual income of $30,000 - $50,000.  And, in this economy, many are below this.  So, looking at the whole picture, I don't think many would conclude that conservators are highly paid.

That's all, folks!

Marc

American Conservation Consortium, Ltd.
     4 Rockville Road
     Broad Brook, CT 06016
     www.conservator.com 
     860-386-6058 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ware Petznick 
  To: [log in to unmask] 
  Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 10:07 AM
  Subject: Re: [MUSEUM-L] Leather conservator



          I agree that a trained and experienced conservator is always best way forward, but for many sites that cannot afford one, is it not better to follow guidelines from conservators who actually share their knowledge than let an object deteriorate further?

          I searched many journals about the benefits and potential harms of Klucel-G and Mowital - products used by professional conservators at the Biltmore. As the chemical actions of those products were reversible in ethanol, we proceeded with caution. We tested it first. Likewise, the information came from trained conservators who agreed to help as questions arose in the process as a professional courtesy. It was a like for like process- leather chairs.

          I agree that saddle leather is quite different to leather used in books or in furniture, and thus, the same method should not be used without consulting an expert. 

          Another point I would like to make is that many conservators do not share their knowledge, and thus, are able to maintain their high hourly rates, which are deserved if they are well trained. I believe in paying for expert knowledge and used many conservators - Gentle Arts in New Orleans for example - but the same principles for the care and preservation of objects used by conservators should be known by curators of smaller sites who may risk losing an object forever for the lack of any action. Certainly they should know and understand the nine agents of deterioration, and methods of mitigation and control. Likewise, most sites will have far too many  textiles to send to a conservator and a well-informed and trained curator or museum technician can be trusted to use orvus paste, for example, on specific textiles that require cleaning.

          I am reminded of the many Victorians who acted with all the best intentions and ended up causing more damage to paintings than if they had done nothing at all. So, I do agree that it can be dangerous to proceed without fully weighing the pros and cons of any contact/action with objects.

          Whenever I have shared the method we used with others, I have always prefaced it by stating that I was not trained specifically as a conservator though the method, materials and process did come from them. 

          Sincerely,
          Ware Petznick 

  ========================================================= Important Subscriber Information: 
  The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes). 

  If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).