In the case of CMRR, the county is sitting on funds that are supposed to be going to repair/restore the line (disaster aid). Then they complain that the RR isn't doing its part to restore the line.
The Adirondack is paying its bills, but without outside funding, it'll be tough to get more track up to snuff.
Thing is, it would cost as much or more to build the trail in question. So it comes down to which option would benefit the most people - and each side feels their cause is the best answer.
Of course, ripping up the rails, then letting the ROW return to nature wouldn't cost much at all, and there are those who think that's the ultimate goal of the "trail advocates."
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...
I wouldn't say the system has become corrupt, it is corrupt people who try to use it to their advantage. I've been watching the action on the Catskill Mountain Railroad where the government who owns the line is trying to get rid of them to convert the line into a "rail" trail to fill in the deficit in the budget and get millions for railbanking the line. From what I see, it looks like the people responsible in both cases have an ulterior motive.
Lone Geep
\
DwightBranchI am biased in favor of maintaining the railroad and not caving to people who are using phony arguments about trails and their economic impact to destroy it. That being said, that was one of the most poorly written articles I have ever read, a textbook example of "false equivalence".
Trouble is, the so-called railroad line in question has been out of operation most days of the year for a long time. 10 mph? Rotting ties with spikes you can remove with you fingers? Where does the Adirondack plan to get the money to make the line usable?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I enjoy hiking, but if it is over 10 miles, or in very mountainous terrain then I wouldn't be hiking, I would much rather ride the train. And it really doesn't affect snowmobilers since they need a decent layer of snow to even operate their snowmobile anywhere. If you really want to ride were the tracks are, go ride somewhere else, and then ride on the tracks when there is enough snow. Hikers can use a small trail, even if it is just 2ft wide, and walking bridges can easily be built if the rr bridge idn't big enough. Besides rails to trails is suppose to save RR not destroy them. The system has become corrupt!!!
DwightBranch Norm48327 I see this finally made the national news. Not exactly glowing from the railroad's point of view. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/30/new-york-state-residents-fight-over-saving-old-railroad-route-or-turning-it/?intcmp=latestnews I am biased in favor of maintaining the railroad and not caving to people who are using phony arguments about trails and their economic impact to destroy it. That being said, that was one of the most poorly written articles I have ever read, a textbook example of "false equivalence".
Norm48327 I see this finally made the national news. Not exactly glowing from the railroad's point of view. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/30/new-york-state-residents-fight-over-saving-old-railroad-route-or-turning-it/?intcmp=latestnews
I see this finally made the national news. Not exactly glowing from the railroad's point of view.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/11/30/new-york-state-residents-fight-over-saving-old-railroad-route-or-turning-it/?intcmp=latestnews
I am biased in favor of maintaining the railroad and not caving to people who are using phony arguments about trails and their economic impact to destroy it. That being said, that was one of the most poorly written articles I have ever read, a textbook example of "false equivalence".
Keets and Goodwin are at the heart of the trail initiative. I'm still firmly convinced they are a bunch of moneyed retirees who simply want everyone out of "their" forest.
The piece is typical of their usual press releases - rosy predictions of trail use combined with gloomy pictures of the railroad. Most of their trail examples, however, are seriously flawed, and they dismiss any suggestion that completing rehabilitation of the rail line will have economic benefit, when such benefits have already been proven.
Curiously, it will cost as much, or more, to build their trail as it will to bring the railroad up to usable standards. They also are against "rail plus trail."
Agreed, Dwight. I got the impression the article was penned by one of the trail advocates.
Norm
Fuggles...would a flag stop station system near trail heads be feasible?
Absolutely - it's one of the things the railroad could easily offer.
An interesting sidelight from your tale is that of parking - one version of the "we need a trail" argument has been the possibility of bringing 240,000 people a year into the area - imagine the parking issues with 800 additional people per day looking for a place to park...
Wyoming case does not apply -completely different issue in play on the Adirondak line.
Once again, the Rails/Trails misinformation crap out there is masking the issue. State of New York (not the feds) will call the shots here. (FD-22363 and its kin around the Olympics play into this from the 1972 PC abandonment to the 1975 purchase by the state from the PC estate.)
tree68 [snip]A small, but very vocal group has been pushing for the removal of the rails from the old NYC Adirondack Division, to be replaced by a hiking an biking trail. At this point, they have been successful in convincing NY state to review the "Unit Management Plan," (http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/lands_forests_pdf/remplacidump.pdf) which currently calls for rail operations during warm weather and use as a snowmobile trail in the winter. So far, this arrangement has worked just fine. The trail advocates insist that 20,000 (or is it 250,000? The number seems to vary) people per year would use this "world class trail." The trail would run through several wilderness areas of the Adirondacks. Many portions of the trail would be extremely remote, with no cell phone service or any other services for that matter.[snipped]
[snip]A small, but very vocal group has been pushing for the removal of the rails from the old NYC Adirondack Division, to be replaced by a hiking an biking trail.
At this point, they have been successful in convincing NY state to review the "Unit Management Plan," (http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/lands_forests_pdf/remplacidump.pdf) which currently calls for rail operations during warm weather and use as a snowmobile trail in the winter. So far, this arrangement has worked just fine.
The trail advocates insist that 20,000 (or is it 250,000? The number seems to vary) people per year would use this "world class trail." The trail would run through several wilderness areas of the Adirondacks. Many portions of the trail would be extremely remote, with no cell phone service or any other services for that matter.[snipped]
The following came up as an article on the TRAINSNEWSWIRE:
"Supreme Court to hear rail-trails case"
"WASHINGTON – For the second time in history, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a case about rail-trails. At stake is public ownership of thousands of miles of right-of-way, some of which has been converted into multi-use trails. The Court accepted the petition in the case of Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States, and is expected to hear arguments in January. In the mid-to-late-1800s, Congress passed the General Railroad Right-of-Way Act of 1875, which allowed government to grant rights-of-way to railroads on public lands. In 1976, Melvin and Lulu Brandt acquired roughly 80 acres of land in Fox Park, Wyo. from the United States. That land was bisected by an existing railroad right-of-way held by Laramie, Hahns Peak & Pacific, a Union Pacific predecessor. After the Brandt’s acquired the land, the line, then owned by Wyoming Colorado Railroad, was abandoned.
In 2005, the Forest Service claimed a “reversionary interest” in the land under the 1875 Act, with the intent of building a rail-trail. The 21-mile Medicine Bow trail was completed 30 miles west of Brandt’s land after it was abandoned, but trail advocates hope to build a connector trail that would link Medicine Bow to other nearby trails, which could go through the disputed area.
The Brandt’s argue that the government’s position is contrary to over a century of precedent in which courts have interpreted rights-of-way granted under the 1875 Act as easements in which the government holds no interest once the land is transferred. Under that interpretation, when the railroad abandoned the easement on Brandt’s property, ownership would not revert to the government, but remain with the Brandt’s. But the government claimed that it, not the Brandt’s, held the interest in the right-of-way. A district court and the 10th Circuit Court rejected the Brandt’s argument. The 10th Circuit’s opinion noted, however, that this finding was contrary to precedent in the Seventh and Federal Circuit courts, both of which have held that the rights-of-way did not revert to the government once they are abandoned by the railroad. The Supreme Court will have to decide which court ruling to uphold..."
Information that I learned in some discussion with "MudChicken" from some time back... The "devil" will be in the "TYPE" of deed originally issued to the railroad as to how it reverts its ownership after the abandonment.
In the case of the RR ROW in NY (The ASR ) vs . The Trail Advocates.
It may very well come down to the interpretations in the aftermath of this SCOTUS decision on the 'Trail" that they will hear.
But then after the ROW "abandonment' by the NYC RR, and its subsequent purchase by the State of NY; then subsequentially, its leasing to the entity that is operating currently as The ASR. There is a whole new set of circumstances to be argued in the Courts and, or in the Bureaucracies. Sould be very interesting, and hopefully the ASR can gain the support of the local communities and their politicians.
I went on a backpacking trip up Mt Marcy 2 weekends ago. All along the mountain roads there were cars parked of people camping and hiking, seemed kinda dangerous to me. If the rr does get the line back into good shape would a flag stop station system near trail heads be feasible? I know I would love a ride on a train back to my car after an afternoon of hiking, especially in the mountain terrain of the Adirondacks.
schlimmToo bad this seems to be overlooked or not done. The ROW (according to the UMP) width seems adequate. Frankly, a hiking trail parallel to the tracks seems more compatible than snowmobiling.
See Leo's post - ie, the trail "advocates" want the railroad gone. And probably everything else. In other words, "get out of our woods!"
As I recall, they've already gone on record as being opposed to rail+trail in places where it's already feasible.
The current UMP was this:
"On those Corridor segments temporarily not required for rail services, recreational trail usescould be accommodated within the rail bed. Minor construction projects, such as installing
deck planking and safety rails on railroad bridges, could be undertaken to increase the suitabilityof available Corridor segments for trail purposes and to ensure the safety of trail users.On segments occupied by rail services, parallel recreational trails could be constructed withinthe boundaries of the Corridor property, but safely separated from the rail bed. Trails couldbe developed on segments of the Corridor to be used as links to local or regional trail systemsoutside the Corridor. However, because the Corridor is flanked in some areas by extensivewetlands and in others by rugged topography, the potential for the development of a continuousparallel trail within the Corridor is severely limited."
Too bad this seems to be overlooked or not done. The ROW (according to the UMP) width seems adequate. Frankly, a hiking trail parallel to the tracks seems more compatible than snowmobiling.
Exactly. The primary ally the trail "advocates" have has only one thing in mind - the fact that the track structure interferes with snowmobiling early and late in the season, and during the season if snowfall is below average.
They are in denial regarding the concept that they could lose the trail entirely. Or were. As Leo points out, they are starting to wake up.
The decision on whether to even reopen the Unit Management Plan (UMP), as based on the recently concluded comment period, will come around the end/beginning of the year.
The trail "advocates" so misunderstood the review process that they were essentially claiming victory, thinking instead that the UMP had actually been opened for reconsideration. One of them even put together a brochure "introducing" the soon-to-be trail...
The 800 pound gorilla in this has recently made it's presence known by objecting to the improvement of several existing snowmobile trails in the Adirondacks, as they did last year for a similar project. These environmental groups haven't taken a stand on the whole rail vs trail discussion, but you can bet that they will be out in force if the "advocates" are eventually successful in getting the rails pulled.
Those folks take "forever wild" seriously.
The people leading this fight including the public faces of it and the primary financial backer of it aren't interested in sharing. They want the railroad gone. The group that has any real use of it is already sharing it and would gain hardly anything under the best case scenario and could easily lose the whole kit and caboodle. And they appear to be awakening to the fact that this group doesn't have their interest in mind and are just using them to further their own poorly hidden agenda.
And a decision on what? The future of this line isn't anywhere close to being decided if that's what you're asking. What has been discussed and debated so far has been if it should even be opened for reevaluation. The answer on if it's officially going to be reevaluated by opening up the unit management plan is what's next.
Any word on a decision? Rather than this fight, too bad there isn't some way for both the excursion trains and hikers to share the space. Then winners all arouns. The # of trains is small and the speed is generally low. How wide is the ROW?
schlimmCould be eco-sabotage. Or a disgruntled former worker. Or could also be that the line's owner is looking for some insurance money for a business that he sees likely ending. As you say, "it's been tried. It works (sometimes)."
Eco-sabotage is a possibility, given the whole trail saga.
New York State owns the ROW. If the line goes away, they'll still own the ROW, there's just a question of what it will become.
Some of the trail advocates have been involved with the railroad in the past. I guess you could consider them disgruntled in that they haven't gotten their way so far (and hopefully never).
There's a $10,000 reward for arrest and conviction - that may be enough to loosen the lips of someone who knows about what happened.
But it's all speculation at this point. The authorities may have more information, but per usual, they won't be tipping their hand unless it will aid them in the investigation.
In the meantime, the railroad plugs on, with Thendara and Utica trains running as usual, and the railroad will be hosting a Halloween event at the Saranac Lake Union Station whether the trains are running or not.
I doiubt the last. The railroad people have and are expending a whale of a lot of effort to prove the case that the track should stay. A lot of emotional effort as well!
Could be eco-sabotage. Or a disgruntled former worker. Or could also be that the line's owner is looking for some insurance money for a business that he sees likely ending. As you say, "it's been tried. It works (sometimes)."
Hi Norm!
I know what I said may sound over the top, but it's exactly what stopped the eco-terrorism in the logging industry in the Pacific Northwest. Remember hearing about chainsaw blades being broken by steel implants in the trees, and the subsequent injuries to the loggers? It was civil as well as criminal actions that put a stop to it. I haven't heard about those type of shenanigans in a long time.
It's been tried. It works.
Firelock,
That may sound good on paper, and I agree with the sentiment. OTOH, that kind of statement coming out in court would very likely affect the outcome of a trial; and not to the advantage of the plaintiff. As Abe Lincoln said; "Better to be thought a fool than speak up and remove all doubt".
You can be reasonably sure the bad guys left some evidence for the authorities. Even DNA on a tossed cigarette butt has been successfully used in court.
Yhe Adirondack Scenic should put out a warning: If any sabotage or eco-terrorism of our equipment results in death or injury, after the criminal justice system is through with you we will seek civil damages. In a word, we will own you, from your hiking boots to your "Mountain House" trail mix. Your Grandma dies and leaves you her jewelry, we'll own that. Your millionaire uncle leaves you his fortune, we'll own that too. Your house, your Volvo, your Enya CD's, all of it. Even your statue of Gaia the earth mother goddess.
Then let them put that in their bongs and puff on it for a while.
So after sabatging the locomotive, what will the trail criminals do next? Maybe sabatage the track and cause a train de-railment? Perhaps cause injuries or deaths as well?Do these criminals have any limits?
I hope they're able to repair her. Money like that could be the end of her career which I'm sure has the anti rail advocate that wants a return to nature in the guise of benefiting the community salivating if he reads this.
Sam, the damage is $25,000-50,000, plus lost revenue, probably about that figure as well. Will insurance pay this, or the person responsible, or...?
http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com/page/content.detail/id/539427/Foul-play-suspected-in-train-damage.html
Some of the trail advocates apparently are taking a different tactic in their fight according to today's news page. Definitely wasn't a random act of vandalism or just some teenagers so you're left looking at who has the motive.
Sadly, I believe that it's also not the first time that people that have done some research to learn how to maximize their attack have damaged their equipment. I believe that they've had locomotives that have had their stack capped attacked in the past with it removed and dozens of gallons of water poured in during the winter months.
Edit: Already being discussed I see. I checked before posting but apparently wasn't on the last page.
Norm48327 BaltACD Appeares to be progressing beyond a war of words - http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/freight/short-lines/apparent-sabotage-at-adirondack-scenic-railroad.html?channel=94 And based on a sentence in the article they brought in some help who knows how to disable a locomotive. The average person wouldn't have any idea what wires to cut let alone make them look like they hadn't been tampered with. Definitely sounds like sabotage. Almost forgot. It is a federal offense to tamper with aircraft. Does that hold true for railroad equipment?
BaltACD Appeares to be progressing beyond a war of words - http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/freight/short-lines/apparent-sabotage-at-adirondack-scenic-railroad.html?channel=94
Appeares to be progressing beyond a war of words -
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/freight/short-lines/apparent-sabotage-at-adirondack-scenic-railroad.html?channel=94
And based on a sentence in the article they brought in some help who knows how to disable a locomotive. The average person wouldn't have any idea what wires to cut let alone make them look like they hadn't been tampered with.
Definitely sounds like sabotage.
Almost forgot. It is a federal offense to tamper with aircraft. Does that hold true for railroad equipment?
Norm 48327 and Balt ACD:
Sabotage on railroads seems to fall under the perview of the F.B.I. Witness their investigations of AMTRAK incidents where sabotage was suspected, and then recently the run-away train on the CTA ( Chicago Transit Authority). I also think that the FBI was involved in the UPRR run-away in Chicago, some time back (?).
There is no mention of the amount of damages, by value to the ASR locomotive, but judging from the reported circumstances. The Damage and concealment was an act deliberately designed to create a potentially major incident fot the ASR.
Iam sure anyone currently employed in the Railroad Industry can elaborate further on things that would bring in FBI Investigators. Possibly, the incident at Lake Placid area to the ASR locomotive, does not rise to levels that would bring in FBI participation, but you could probably count on it being on their radar, and that of Local Law Enforcement, as well.
I would guess that a sophisticated act as the article described, would possibly indicate some of the "TRAIL Advocates, or their sympathizers" would be an excellent place to start asking questions.
It might also be a good reason for ASR Employees being armed to protect life and limb around the railroad, as well. (See some comments, at the end of the article).
It is definite that someone is escalating their argument. Anyone recall the FEC RR vs. Unions(?) from 1963 to 1977... Interested ? link to an article about the FEC during the owner ship of Edward Ball starting in 1961 @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Ball_%28businessman%29
Norm48327It is a federal offense to tamper with aircraft. Does that hold true for railroad equipment?
I believe it is. A reward has been offered. Might be interesting to see what turns up.
This is on top of several fires set along the ROW there last year...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.