tree68 schlimm I don't know what numbers the Stone Study showed. However, the numbers you gave do not come close to agreement. I don't have my copy of the ridership handy, and don't recall the specific period it covers. And I do have to rely on the recall of the folks who were there 35 years ago, so the specifics there are iffy. The 16,000 number is solid, though, and is on file with state DOT. As you note, I don't know how it was arrived at, ie, if that was boardings vs actual bodies. And service ended, rather abruptly, in mid-August. It's hard to say how things would have turned out had they continued through fall, when the "leaf peepers" would likely have resulted in sold-out trains. As I recall, the Stone study (the current study) conservatively estimated 7,000 riders. The bottom line here is that historically people will ride the railroad all the way from Utica to Lake Placid. Another thing the "trail advocates" like to point out is that commercial passenger service ended in 1965, which it did. To compare common carrier passenger service (in 1965) with tourist service (in 2016), however, is ludicrous - apple and oranges.
schlimm I don't know what numbers the Stone Study showed. However, the numbers you gave do not come close to agreement.
I don't have my copy of the ridership handy, and don't recall the specific period it covers. And I do have to rely on the recall of the folks who were there 35 years ago, so the specifics there are iffy.
The 16,000 number is solid, though, and is on file with state DOT. As you note, I don't know how it was arrived at, ie, if that was boardings vs actual bodies. And service ended, rather abruptly, in mid-August. It's hard to say how things would have turned out had they continued through fall, when the "leaf peepers" would likely have resulted in sold-out trains.
As I recall, the Stone study (the current study) conservatively estimated 7,000 riders.
The bottom line here is that historically people will ride the railroad all the way from Utica to Lake Placid.
Another thing the "trail advocates" like to point out is that commercial passenger service ended in 1965, which it did. To compare common carrier passenger service (in 1965) with tourist service (in 2016), however, is ludicrous - apple and oranges.
So looks like the 16,000 ridership (actual bodies) number may be accurate, which would be good news for the ASR's survival.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimmSo looks like the 16,000 ridership (actual bodies) number may be accurate, which would be good news for the ASR's survival.
In terms of saving the "north end," that's questionable - the powers that be have shown a marked propensity to ignore such facts, as well as public opinion in favor of the railroad. by all indications, all the posturing that's gone on over the past few years has been mostly cosmetic - it appears the decision along this line may have been pre-ordained at the outset.
The railroad has said that they will work with whatever is left, so we can hope that riders will still want to go to Tupper Lake in significant numbers.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
They say that bad news comes in threes. A third NY mountain scenic railroad operation may be threatened. The Saratoga & North Creek announced (last year) that they lost a million $ the year before last, and so they cut back service last year. They also brought up the idea of a subsidy from the County that owned the track. A local newspaper article about this on their website got about 2 dozen comments, all very negative.
tree68The railroad has said that they will work with whatever is left, so we can hope that riders will still want to go to Tupper Lake in significant numbers.
Part of the 'secret' is that some big casino or similar tourist attraction is being provided in Tupper Lake, and that's part of the reason for extending service there. I'm interested in seeing just how much additional traffic this generates, and how the ASR promotes it.
Excerpt from Adirondack Almanack, Jan. 31
http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2017/01/lawyers-debate-court-rail-trail-proposal.html#comments
After months of delay, lawyers for the state and the Adirondack Railway Preservation Society squared off in court Monday over the future of a 34-mile stretch of tracks between Lake Placid and Tupper Lake.
At the end of the 45-minute hearing in Malone, acting State Supreme Court Justice Robert G. Main Jr. reserved decision on whether to block the state from tearing up the tracks and converting the corridor into a multi-use recreational trail.
The judge also asked the state to provide more information on the ownership of the railroad corridor...
Assistant State Attorney General Marie Chery-Seckhobo told Justice Main the landowners have agreed to let the state use their pieces of the corridor for the recreational trail and signed letters of intent to that effect.
Nevertheless, Main expressed concern that the state’s existing right of way on the parcels may not allow for uses other than a railroad. If the right of way does not allow a recreational trail, he asked, “isn’t the proposal doomed to failure?”
When the hearing ended, the judge asked lawyers from both sides to discuss the issue further in his chambers.
“We just need to provide more information regarding the state ownership,” Chery-Seckhobo said after emerging from the closed-door meeting.
Other state attorneys who attended the court hearing said they do not see the ownership issue as a major obstacle.
The right-of-way question did not come up until the end of the hearing. Earlier, Chery-Seckhobo and Jonathan Fellows, representing the railway society, summarized their arguments in the case, reiterating points from legal papers filed with the court.
The railroad is "cautiously optomistic."
Seven postponements haven't helped the state's case any.
The "trail advocates" will likely appeal immediately (cost is no object) if the judge rules for the railroad.
The "trail advocates" still want the rails lifted all the way back to Thendara. Win or lose, their campaign is far from done. They continue to want everyone out of "their" woods...
tree68The railroad is "cautiously optomistic." Seven postponements haven't helped the state's case any. The "trail advocates" will likely appeal immediately (cost is no object) if the judge rules for the railroad. The "trail advocates" still want the rails lifted all the way back to Thendara. Win or lose, their campaign is far from done. They continue to want everyone out of "their" woods...
If the Judge were to state something in his ruling for the RR that - 'the trail advocates don't OWN the woods and their opposition is 'trivial' - would that bolster the RR's long term position?
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACDIf the Judge were to state something in his ruling for the RR that - 'the trail advocates don't OWN the woods and their opposition is 'trivial' - would that bolster the RR's long term position?
I suspect anything that takes the wind out of their sails - ie, dismissing all or part of the concept of the trail, even "you're wasting our time" - would certainly benefit the railroad in the long term. I doubt that he can prohibit any further trail campaigns, but suggesting that they are wasting their time would certainly put a dent in their efforts.
My phrase "out of 'their' woods" is a nod to those folks who seem to feel that their view for the Adirondack forest is the only one worth considering. In fact, the state owns very significant portions of the Adirondack Park.
The hearing lasted about 45 minutes, and the judge asked for more information from the state. Depending on how long that takes, we'll just have to wait patiently.
tree68 The hearing lasted about 45 minutes, and the judge asked for more information from the state. Depending on how long that takes, we'll just have to wait patiently.
I hope you win, Larry. A real trail could be somewhere else in the forest.
There are real trails all over the Adirondacks. Hundreds of miles of them and a good number of which can be enjoyed already by snowmobilers (As the Adirondack Scenic's ROW already could in the winter).
That's the pitiful part of all of this. Killing something unique to gain a trail resource that largely will only be enjoyed by the same crowd that was already enjoying it each winter.
The Adirondack has an abundance of far more appealing trails for summer hikers. I bet on the average day in June-August, you'll be able to count the number of passerbys on the fingers of one hand in the more remote center portions of their new trail.
This is a fine attractive for a train ride, but a rather boring walk in comparison to the average purpose built trail. And judging by some of the swampland they skirt by, I imagine the poor people that do take it on will be fly/mosquito food during large periods of the tourist season and won't be coming back for a 2nd go at it.
The NYC line thru the Androrondacs was actualy part of a greater system that would connect the United States Capital Washington DC with the Capital of Canada Ottawa ON. The thought was that both would be megacitys someday. and that Canada would have 100 million people and that the US would have 300 Million People. Somehow Ottawa is still small but Toronto Became the de facto Capital by way of banking and International relations.
How is it that you can rip up rail without permission from Surface Transportation Boards AKA the ICC!
Leo_AmesKilling something unique to gain a trail...
Ahh, but you see, there is the rub. The "trail advocates" don't want a trail. They want everyone out of "their" woods. The rails have to come up so they can get rid of the "corridor" designation and thus get rid of all users.
CandOforprogress2 How is it that you can rip up rail without permission from Surface Transportation Boards AKA the ICC!
IIRC the STB considers this to be a tourist line, rather than part of the national transportation system.
MidlandMike CandOforprogress2 How is it that you can rip up rail without permission from Surface Transportation Boards AKA the ICC! IIRC the STB considers this to be a tourist line, rather than part of the national transportation system.
The major legal impediments to lifting the rails will likely be their historical status. The corridor is on both the state and federal registers of historic places.
Simply getting a ruling in favor of lifting the rails will be a start for these folks - even if the rails don't come up, there will be no rail traffic (and maintenance) on the line, and it can be left to moulder, returning slowly to nature...
Leo_AmesThere are real trails all over the Adirondacks. Hundreds of miles of them and a good number of which can be enjoyed already by snowmobilers (As the Adirondack Scenic's ROW already could in the winter).
I haven't been to the 'dacks in a long time.
Are there really other bicycle trails in the Adirondacks? Everything I hiked or canoe-portaged on was definitely not suited for any kind of non-motorized bike. It's all hiking, portaging, or snowmobiling. But back then no motorized vehicles were allowed on the trails in the Adirondacks.
aegrotatio But back then no motorized vehicles were allowed on the trails in the Adirondacks.
Many areas of the Adirondacks prohibit "mechanical conveyances." And that includes some portions of the corridor - the existance of the corridor is the only thing that lets snowmobiles run there.
I'm thoroughly convinced the ultimate goal is to keep everyone out. I doubt you'll ever see the trail, except in some of the "urban" areas...
wanswheel . . . The judge also asked the state to provide more information on the ownership of the railroad corridor... . . . Nevertheless, [Judge] Main expressed concern that the state’s existing right of way on the parcels may not allow for uses other than a railroad. If the right of way does not allow a recreational trail, he asked, “isn’t the proposal doomed to failure?” . . .
- Paul North.
Excerpt from WAMC radio, Feb. 1
http://wamc.org/post/lawsuit-challenging-adirondack-rail-trail-plan-delayed-judge-s-question
Trails with Rails Action Committee supports keeping the tracks intact. Coordinator Bob Hest was at the hearing in Malone. He says Judge Robert G. Main Jr. wanted to know the easement conditions granted by landowners when the railroad was built. “The judge's question I think took both parties by surprise. During the proceedings the judge said if the easement was granted for railroad use and the railroad infrastructure is removed, what is your comment? And the attorney for New York State said well if there’s no rail infrastructure then the easement for railroad use is extinguished. And the judge said I’d like to meet with counsel in my chambers.”
Hest noted that the judge wants lawyers from both sides to determine whether new trails would violate rail easement agreements. “If there is no longer a railroad that uses that there’s going to be an issue. Each private land owner they're probably going back to their deeds and wondering what’s in them and think about whether they want a trail across their property that uses the railroad right of away. It’s an interesting twist.”
wanswheel Excerpt from WAMC radio, Feb. 1 http://wamc.org/post/lawsuit-challenging-adirondack-rail-trail-plan-delayed-judge-s-question Trails with Rails Action Committee supports keeping the tracks intact. Coordinator Bob Hest was at the hearing in Malone. He says Judge Robert G. Main Jr. wanted to know the easement conditions granted by landowners when the railroad was built. “The judge's question I think took both parties by surprise. During the proceedings the judge said if the easement was granted for railroad use and the railroad infrastructure is removed, what is your comment? And the attorney for New York State said well if there’s no rail infrastructure then the easement for railroad use is extinguished. And the judge said I’d like to meet with counsel in my chambers.” Hest noted that the judge wants lawyers from both sides to determine whether new trails would violate rail easement agreements. “If there is no longer a railroad that uses that there’s going to be an issue. Each private land owner they're probably going back to their deeds and wondering what’s in them and think about whether they want a trail across their property that uses the railroad right of away. It’s an interesting twist.”
Facts have a tendency to be stranger than fiction.
It does have a connection to Amtrak at Utica NY. So like the Grand Canyon railroad is part of the national system.
aegrotatioI haven't been to the 'dacks in a long time. Are there really other bicycle trails in the Adirondacks? Everything I hiked or canoe-portaged on was definitely not suited for any kind of non-motorized bike. It's all hiking, portaging, or snowmobiling. But back then no motorized vehicles were allowed on the trails in the Adirondacks.
It's mostly mountain biking or sharing the highways, but there are some like the Bloomingdale Bog Trail. I believe that's even a rail trail on abandoned D&H right of way for several miles.
A more logical recourse if this campaign was genuine (I've long felt that tree68's suspicions were right on the mark) would be to let this live, and further develop abandoned right of ways in the Adirondacks like more of the D&H, if they want bicycle trails.
There are even abandoned rail bridges that could be utilized in places in the Adirondacks, like this line in Essex County or the abandoned Au Sable Forks branch of the D&H.
https://bridgehunter.com/category/railroad/lake-champlain-moriah-railroad/
That they're targeting an active tourist road to get the rails lifted just screams of ulterior motives from those leading the charge, like the old coot that has financed the campaign.
Railroad ownership of it's ROW has many - many facets and the answer will vary from State to State. Sometimes easement occupation has been defined in early statutes legislated when RR's were being solicited to build new lines. In the 19th century POPULIST MOVEMENT States (like Kansas) legislated that even if the RR purchased the ROW at a price and terms agreed to by the seller the seller was under duress because the RR had the right to condem if terms could not be agreed upon.
Each State has it's own history of statutes and litigation on this subject with "Case Law" (Case Law means that a trial was held and a ruling made) deciding some individual situations.
Few people are aware of the 'Easement Conditions' of properties deeded to the railroads for their use. This area has the potential to be a real "mine field" for Real Estate transactions involving old (abandoned railroad ROWs). I got a little 'schooling' from mudchicken on this subject, and 'abandoned' line in a community I had lived in. (Row was originally platted to the DM&A RR as narrow gauge ,but had changed hands to the MoPacRR who made it 'standard gauge', later abandoned when a flood in the 1960s took out a major river bridge, breaking its route. The local 'story' was that adjacent land owners could reclaim part of the property; turned out to be not quite true. The tale was in the County's Register of Deeds.
Sounds as if there are some local 'legal idiocyncracies' in that Adirondack land, that could have some unintended consequences for the 'Trail Advocates', and their Real Estate dreams.
There needs to be some serious research in the Counties Registrar's Deed records, to get the true story of that former NYC Row. I don't think that 'fast and dirty', ginned-up paperwork by some lawyer is going to work in this case.
The wrinkle with the whole deed thing is that NYS now owns the major portion of the adjacent lands, so it's not like there are many private citizens (or corporations, for that matter) to contest anything having to do with the corridor.
AFAIK, property ownership was not a part of the railroad's suit. That had to do mostly with the manner in which the decision was made to move toward lifting the rails.
CandOforprogress2 It does have a connection to Amtrak at Utica NY. So like the Grand Canyon railroad is part of the national system.
Physical connection does not make it a part of the "national system". Many industrial lines are connected to common carriers. Earlier (in this thread or one of the others on this line) it had already been established that STB has no jurisdiction in this case.
I hope the Adirondack is given great news and the trail advocates/snowmobilers are given a huge defeat. i mean really, how many trails do snowmobilers and other outdoor types in new york state really need?
too bad the trail advocates and their pals would just go away and leave the railroad alpone. why is it so important to have the 34 miles of track?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.