What is needed to keep Route 66 neon signs in situ:

  • Willingness of sign owner to sell the sign.
  • Funds to buy the sign.
  • Funds to restore the sign.
  • Funds to protect the sign from vandalism in perpetuity.
  • Funds to maintain the sign in perpetuity.

Barring this, eroding signs are best preserved in private and museum collections. The principle “I’d rather the signs rot than be removed” is selfish and shortsighted. We’re losing far too many signs forever with every passing year.

This doesn’t only apply to neon Route 66 signs. All signs, particularly painted signs, are fading to nothingness with little interest in preserving this important piece of history.

Think of the Jackrabbit signs that once counted down the miles to “”HERE IT IS.” Where are these signs today? Hopefully, someone with an eye to historic preservation has these signs in protective storage.

And of those painted signs still in situ, is there funding like that needed for neon signs to preserve them in place? Ample evidence over 2,448 miles proves there isn’t.

It takes money to preserve abandoned Route 66 history. The “rot in place” principle doesn’t serve preservation and I see very few well-off saviors stepping up to save these signs where they stand. So the best solution is private and museum collections. And just because a sign is relocated to a collection doesn’t rule out these signs being reinstalled at the original location if attitudes, protections, and dependable funding becomes available in the future.

It’s about preservation of Route 66 history and not a romanticized stubbornness for “how Route 66 should be.” It’s about pragmatism before principle. Route 66 deserves preservation even if it’s not preservation in place.