I just sent an email to the link shown in your post. Good luck.
Rich
DeggestySue the former railroad?
That would fall on the state, which owns the ROW.
The trail advocates keep coming up with claims that the salvage value of the rails would pay for the trail. And now even the state says that's not the case, but they're sticking to their guns.
The cost of disposing of the ties is huge.
As for folks hiking the trail - well, that's doubtful anyhow, and certainly not in line with what a lot of folks think is 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...
It is obvious to me that the people who want the rails removed are totally unaware of the cost thereof--and think only of the supposed advantage to them. Now, suppose that the rail line is goven over to the trail advocates--they discover that the cost of removing the rail is beyond their resources, and leave it until someone is damaged in some way in walking the trail. What is their recourse? Sue the former railroad?
Johnny
tree68 wanswheel Good old AD iron dack CX, the first railroad in New York State. Actually, that was the Mohawk and Hudson (1831). But ADIX (the mark we now use) is first in the hearts of many.... The railroad's handout on the issue: https://adirondackrrblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/save-the-adirondack-railroad-pdf-flyer1.pdf
wanswheel Good old AD iron dack CX, the first railroad in New York State.
Actually, that was the Mohawk and Hudson (1831). But ADIX (the mark we now use) is first in the hearts of many....
The railroad's handout on the issue:
https://adirondackrrblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/save-the-adirondack-railroad-pdf-flyer1.pdf
Noticed in the linked article, the cost of removing rail would exceed the expected scrap value of what is to be removed.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
MidlandMike A while back, Iowa Pacific (?) was interested in studying thru service to Lake Placid. Has anything more happened on that?
A while back, Iowa Pacific (?) was interested in studying thru service to Lake Placid. Has anything more happened on that?
Need track (ie, servicable) to run on, first. And that depends on when funding can be found.
Sam - that possibility is always in the back of our minds. All the more reason to drum up written support and to point out the foibles of the other sides' postulations.
In fact, back when said "solution" was first mentioned not long ago, the though was that the state was throwing out a bone to both sides of the debate, probably hoping both would go away happy. That won't be the case. The trail advocates still want the tracks completely out of the woods, and the railroad still sees Lake Placid as the ultimate goal.
We (the rail side of the debate) can only hope that our facts over-ride what have been proven to be not only nebulous, but flat out incorrect information provided by the trail advocates.
In fact, more and more of their outlandish claims and promises come out almost daily.
Tree68 wrote in his O.P. [snipped] "...The trail advocates have used a number of nebulous claims regarding the use and economic benefit of trails, usually based on trails which do not compare with their proposed trail. Those of you with experience with such trails might be able to cite said experience. Of course, lack of use of such trails would be a great point, but what you write is up to you!
Snowmobiles already have use of the corridor between December 1 and April 30. Their only problem with the railroad is the track structure.
It's my personal opinion that a large part of the attraction of the railroad is the ultimate destination of Lake Placid. One plan being floated cuts the railroad back to Tupper Lake (where?). Nothing against Tupper Lake, it's a fine community, but it doesn't have the name recognition of Lake Placid..."[snipped]
The folowing is a snip from the TRAINSNewswire of this date11/03/2014
[In part, it is a quote of some of the language from the State of NY Proposal for the UMP under consideration] [snip]"...Specifically, the state will develop a draft amendment to evaluate the use of the Tupper Lake to Lake Placid segment for a recreational trail. The agencies are also examining opportunities to maintain and realize the full economic potential of rail service from Utica to Tupper Lake, and reviewing options to create and expand alternative snowmobile corridors, and other trails, to connect communities from Old Forge to Tupper Lake on existing state lands and conservation easements..."
Larry (tree68) The above snip, as noted, Takes a position within its language,that seems to indicate that the hearing is just a mere formality to satisfy a form; that the Committee has already made up their collective minds as to the future of that portion of the ASR... The Railroad seems to be in a very negative position as to its future there?
I would certainly hope that it is not the case. One of the respondents on the Newswire mentioned that he hoped that, "... Lake Placid would never need to host another event the size of the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid venue...."[paraphrased] There are probably not that many snow mobiles in this country to transport a crowd that size to view it.
wanswheelGood old AD iron dack CX, the first railroad in New York State.
Done, thanks for the heads up.
These public comment hearings are required by law, so they hold them. It has been my experience that they are just complying with the law, their mind is already made up.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Just did...
23 17 46 11
I was going to simply resurrect the old thread, but I'll start a new one...
The "final push" is happening with regard to turning the Adirondack Scenic Railroad into a trail. New York state will shortly be holding hearings on revising the "Unit Management Plan," which is what governs use of the corridor.
The "trail advocates" are going all out. The supporters of maintaining (and completing) the railroad all the way to Lake Placid need to do the same.
Most of you won't be able to make the hearings (four in total - more in a moment), but would certainly be able to send in written comments. You can do so via email to nystravelcorridor@dot.ny.gov or mailed to NYS Travel Corridor, NYS DOT Freight and Passenger Rail Bureau, 50 Wolf Road, POD 5-4, Albany NY 12232.
If you're close enough, the hearings will be:
October 28, 2014 6:00-8:00 PM in Utica at the State Office Building
· October 29, 2014 1:00-3:00 PM in Old Forge at the View
· November 6, 2014 6:00-8:00 PM in Tupper Lake at the Wild Center
· November 7, 2014 1:00-3:00 PM in Lake Placid at ORDA
While there will certainly be many "you can't rip up a railroad!" comments, what will be most significant will be comments on the economic benefits of the railroad, which are many.
A few facts about the railroad:
Has Carried over 1.5 million passengers since its inception in 1992 with a 35% ridership increase in
The trail advocates have used a number of nebulous claims regarding the use and economic benefit of trails, usually based on trails which do not compare with their proposed trail. Those of you with experience with such trails might be able to cite said experience. Of course, lack of use of such trails would be a great point, but what you write is up to you!
It's my personal opinion that a large part of the attraction of the railroad is the ultimate destination of Lake Placid. One plan being floated cuts the railroad back to Tupper Lake (where?). Nothing against Tupper Lake, it's a fine community, but it doesn't have the name recognition of Lake Placid.
It's also my personal conviction that the ultimate goal of "trail advocates" is to get everyone out of "their" woods, including the snowmobiles who have been something of an ally to the trail people.
Please take a few minutes to craft a letter or email. Comments close December 15, 2014.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.