Overmod Remove the draconian assumptions, and the case for many segments of then-abandoned lines becomes interestingly feasible; add any kind of community interest or coherent group restoration activity, both of which are often strong in Britain, and I would expect to see exactly the sort of thing we're seeing with lines opening up and becoming 'profitably' utilized.
Remove the draconian assumptions, and the case for many segments of then-abandoned lines becomes interestingly feasible; add any kind of community interest or coherent group restoration activity, both of which are often strong in Britain, and I would expect to see exactly the sort of thing we're seeing with lines opening up and becoming 'profitably' utilized.
The scene was set for Beeching's extreme measures by the incompetence of preceding management of the railway system.
There had been gross over-manning: stations serving small towns on rural lines would often have as a minimum a station-master, a couple of porters, a booking clerk and a goods clerk (a newspaper article at the time of the publication of the Beeching Report gave the example of Tenbury Wells with 11 staff - this town even today has under 4,000 people). There were also double-tracked secondary lines that could have been reduced to single-track, and freight-only lines maintained to passenger standards. Timetables often reflected long-lost sources of traffic such as farmers travelling to livestock markets, and failed to adapt to changing working patterns and the transformation of many rural towns into commuter dormitories.
Where there was effective community support for the local railway remarkable transformations occurred. The line to Braintree in eastern England was threatened with closure in the early 1960s but thanks largely to local activism (not just passive opposition to closure but what in effect amounted to shadow management of the railway) traffic built up to the extent that the line was electrified in 1977.
If it was railbanked, the NITU/CITU status will hold, period. (People keep trying [and losing] to challenge that, goaded on by NARPO et al.)
If you get into the nonsense created around the Adirondak and NH Old Colony lines prior to the federal rule, it gets murky. I still am amused about some of the stories on the Old Colony lines about swimming pools, porches and bridges between buildings that were forcibly removed over the protests of the local dimestore lawyers.
bratkinsonI remember a snowmobile trail in northern Wisconsin that was abandoned Milwaukee Road ROW that when the state wanted to make it a snowmobile trail, they had to 'battle' a number of abutting landowners to force them off the ROW (Bearskin Trail from Tomahawk north)
I'd be willing to bet we are going to see some of the same thing with the former Milwaukee Road - Brookfield to Waukesha branch. Rails and Bridges still in places on most of it because it was originally rail banked by the State. However, NIMBY's fought it's last attempted reactivation by WSOR back in the 1980's or 1990's. Will bet that a good portioin of those same NIMBY's are attempting to claim the easement as their own land but time will tell. It was originally land grant land and I do not think it was formally abandoned. I think the state bought it.
CShaveRR And don't forget about the ex PRR main line from Tolleston (Indiana) east. I know it disappeared, then reappeared, but I've forgotten the details. It's still gone through Gary.
And don't forget about the ex PRR main line from Tolleston (Indiana) east. I know it disappeared, then reappeared, but I've forgotten the details. It's still gone through Gary.
And don't forget the Post Road Cutoff that was abandoned and had to be put back once the Boston section of the Lakeshore was reinstated ('75 or so?).
As for right of way being 'claimed' by abutting property owners, it depends on how the RR obtained the ROW in the first place. Sometimes, it was merely a 99 year property easement. Others were purchased or given by the US Government. I've read about similar abutter problems when an embargoed line was resurrected and some abutters had to be removed. I remember a snowmobile trail in northern Wisconsin that was abandoned Milwaukee Road ROW that when the state wanted to make it a snowmobile trail, they had to 'battle' a number of abutting landowners to force them off the ROW (Bearskin Trail from Tomahawk north)
Rebuilding lines in the U.S. can happen, but it's extremely difficult for several reasons: 1.) In many places, railroads were granted easements when built. Meaning, they didn't buy the land, and when the RR was abandoned, the land was returned to the adjacent property owner. So the land would have to be bought, and assuming many owners wouldn't be willing to sell, the RR would have to go through the eminent domain process, which would add millions in court and attorney costs on top of the land purchase price. 2.) Depending on the condition of the old ROW, you're looking at $1-2 million per mile to establishing a fully-functioning RR with signaling, etc.
So yeah, it can happen. But the price is steep, meaning the financial justification has to be pretty compelling. In most cases, it makes a lot more sense to just add capacity to existing lines.
How many auto roads that have been superseeded been turned back to the adjaecent property owners ? Much of route 66 is still there though seldom used and slowly going back to the weeds. Why not RR ROWs ? A law saying no property taxes on routes not used for a year, no scraping and becomes state / federal ownership.
Can be used for a trail with understanding any time will go back to RR use. In meantime no encroachment within 25 ft of outside rail. Any encroachment builder has to immediately pay for removal .
Part of the thing about the Beeching plan was that it presumed that the only 'future' use of railways would be for high-speed intermodal freight (and unit bulk trains like the MGR coal services), essentially in bridge service, and that no branch or even secondary lines were needed that did not optimize precisely that traffic. Trucks and buses/cars on good roads would do all the rest.
Even by the late '60s it was fairly obvious that this model was inadequate, indeed that the British system wasn't really well-suited to only that kind of service (especially with the intermodal technologies that were current in that era). Remove the draconian assumptions, and the case for many segments of then-abandoned lines becomes interestingly feasible; add any kind of community interest or coherent group restoration activity, both of which are often strong in Britain, and I would expect to see exactly the sort of thing we're seeing with lines opening up and becoming 'profitably' utilized.
Of course, as the Ginsu commercial has it, 'that doesn't work with a tomato' and there really isn't that much interest in running trains on resuscitated abandoned lines here, even for fairly-high-perceived-profit things like patronized dinner trains. I see less and less likelihood of interest for those lines, other than as OPM trail conversions, as Gen X and Millennials come to represent the majority of the American public concerned with this subject...
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
It has happened here, multiple times.
There has to be some economic justification, but...
(diningcar and I watched parts of the SP Dawson Branch live twice and abandon twice ... and if Ted Turner gets bored with his buffalo, it may come to life yet again. Stuff happens.)
A big problem with Britain's railways in the 1940s/50s stemmed from unnecessary duplication of routes, even in rural areas. This was partly a consequence of over-optimistic railway building and poor government regulation in the 19th century (railways were frequently built just to prevent rival companies gaining access to an established company's 'territory'). This problem was addressed neither by the 'Big Four' railway companies formed by the 'Grouping' (Government-directed mergers) in the 1920s nor by the nationalised British Railways (from 1948 on). This failure to act early paved the way for Beeching's 'axe'. If around 1950 a scalpel had been used instead of an axe many towns now proposing to reopen lines would never have lost their rail links in the first place.
Wisbech, the town mentioned in the article quoted by Overall, is a case in point. It used to have train stations on two separate through rail routes. One of these routes was part of a system of 180 miles and virtually all the towns it served were also served by other, better-engineered lines. It lasted until 1959 but could have been closed years before and resources concentrated on other lines, giving better service to passengers.
For any formerly abandoned rail line to be rebuilt to operation there needs to be an economic engine that will demand that rail is the lowest cost option to move the intended cargo (passenger or freight) between the service points of the line.
The lines were abandoned because they were not economically viable to continue in operation with the traffic level being handled at the time of abandonment.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Brian Solomon's column awhile back talked about British Rail Lines that had been abandoned during the Beeching era. While researching something else, I came across an article in The Economist magazine, which is also a British publication. In the article, they talk about abandoned rail lines that have been restored to service. If it can happen there, maybe it can happen here? I will try to link to the story. I apologize in advance for my lack of computer skills, here goes;
https://www.economist.com/news/britain/21697012-many-railway-lines-britain-were-closed-1960s-are-re-opening-re-coupling?zid=302&ah=601e2c69a87aadc0cc0ca4f3fbc1d354
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.