The other day, for the first time in a long while, I stopped in Yarmouth ME, and decided to walk over by the track and the lovely historic depot building (now a bank branch, but retaining its character very nicely).
Right away I noticed that the tracks looked abandoned; they're still there, but no sign that a train had been by anytime remotely recently. But the road crossing right there does still have signals and gates, and there is no Exempted sign for school buses.
I went to their website. You can see how the track map illustrates the route differently from Danville Junction (small yard and Pan AM interchange) south to Portland. Graphically that part looks kinda like just crossties. There is no map key.
Does that graphic representation mean "tracks are still there, but out of service?" Does it mean abandoned (I doubt this, because why would they put an abandoned line on their map?) Is this type of graphic a universally-accepted thing in the industry to denote whatever it in fact does mean?
I am wondering if it may mean "we could still go there, but it would require some repairs first, a special train, and a big bill." I am virtually certain that all the track is intact all the way to Portland; but the bridge which crosses Back Cove inlet to get on to the more urban Portland peninsula is almost certainly not up to snuff.
Is that southern stretch on the map for a reason?
Still in training.
From what of seen on map legends in the past that broken line probably indicates "track in place, but out of service."
Yeah, you'd think they'd have a map legend explaining what's what.
MOTHBALLED
(1) STB Discontinuance of Service FD-1117 (Since 2015, traces back to 2008)
(2) The line is owned by the state of Maine, SLR just operates it. (23-24 miles)
(3) There is only one shipper on the line B&G Foods (bean processor (baked beans, near Portland), and they have an OFA on record to assist with operating costs, but it appears they are not not shipping. Not on Gennessee & Wyoming's current SDM pruning list.
NOT ABANDONED Waiting on better days (previously CN-Grand Trunk, currently Gennessee & Wyoming) or paper mills online to come back from the dead. Because of the Discontinuance, it is not embargoed in the conventional sense.
Flintlock76 From what of seen on map legends in the past that broken line probably indicates "track in place, but out of service." Yeah, you'd think they'd have a map legend explaining what's what.
mudchicken Flintlock76 From what of seen on map legends in the past that broken line probably indicates "track in place, but out of service." Yeah, you'd think they'd have a map legend explaining what's what. marketing people or webmasters with common sense and and a grasp on practical reality?
marketing people or webmasters with common sense and and a grasp on practical reality?
Really! What are they teaching kids in schools nowadays? I learned about maps and how to read them in grade school! We even had map drawing exercises in geography class!
Of course, that was back in the Pleistocene Era.
Lithonia OperatorIs that southern stretch on the map for a reason?
If you select "interactive map" at the page you have linked to, you will get a map that does not include the dotted portion.
Pan and zoom your view to the southern most tip of the remaining path solid line, and then switch to "satellite" view.
Notice there are tracks still in place....follow them south a short way to Danville, and you will notice the tracks you are following terminate abruptly, but there is one remaining switchleg that connects to an opposed line that has traffic visible still on it.
You can follow that line all the way to Portland and not see much railroad worthy business until you get to Deering Junction.
Curiously, you will find a couple stretches along the way where railroad ties have been set along the track.
I have no idea if these are new ties for replacement, or older "store in place" removals from a bygone removal of the second main.
In the same manner - if you click "view detailed map" you get a legend. Dashed liens indicate trackage rights.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
I am very familiar with the line from Portland to Danville Junction. In the greater Portland area, I cross the SLR tracks every few days somewhere. I just didn't notice until this recent Yarmouth stop that the rails were so rusty. I was surprised, particularly because our boat is moored pretty close to that line, and from the mooring I'm used to occasionally hearing a train blow for crossings. I am virtually certain I heard at least one train in 2019. (If not, then 2018 at the latest.) I think I may have heard one this past summer, even. I'm wondering if those could have been special trains of some type. A work train gathering up usable stuff? For many, many years, there was one train each way coming by there. The chances of me being on the boat, on the mooring, at the right time are pretty slim, because usually going to the mooring means we are soon away and sailing. So when I do hear one it gets my attention.
I am almost certain the tracks are still intact down to the B&M bean plant mentioned above. Just nearby is the old roundhouse, now a half-round office building; the DMV is there, and I recently got my license renewed there. I also used to use a photo lab in the roundhouse.
But after that is the bridge I mentioned above, going to the urban peninsula. I don't know for absolute sure that the bridge is not servicable, but it looks like hell, and in practical terms it's a bridge to nowhere. Where that bridge lands is now all the Maine Narrow Gauge. The MNG follows the old Grand Trunk ROW down to the Portland waterfront. There used to be a small yard at the Grand Trunk HQ building there (it still stands: https://www.portlandlandmarks.org/grand-trunk-railroad-office-building).
The tracks are now gone, but they used to run right down the center of Commercial St. Interchange used to happen in Portland between GT and MEC. I have a pic or two of the street running, which I'll try to locate.
If you go a mile or two further south, the tracks cross the Fore River and go to the once-bustling Rigby Yard of MEC and BM.
Right near that bridge the old MEC Mountain Division branches off. A mile or so up the branch is the Amtrak/bus station. Another few miles up the branch is a giant paper mill in Westbrook. I don't know if the mill still gets rail service. But beyond that, the track is abandoned; and a lot of it is dramatically NOT usable anymore.
Convicted One ... Danville, and you will notice the tracks you are following terminate abruptly, but there is one remaining switchleg that connects to an opposed line that has traffic visible still on it.
The train you see there is on the old MEC mainline, from Portland to Lewiston, Augusta and beyond. It's now Pan Am Railways.
This is the only place Pan Am interchanges with SLR.
Lithonia OperatorThe train you see there is on the old MEC mainline, from Portland to Lewiston, Augusta and beyond. It's now Pan Am Railways.
In that case, do you suppose Zuggman is correct about trackage rights? (Danville to Portland)
Lithonia Operator. It's now Pan Am Railways.
Whep, I guess that explains the banks of (used) railroad ties.
Convicted One Lithonia Operator The train you see there is on the old MEC mainline, from Portland to Lewiston, Augusta and beyond. It's now Pan Am Railways. In that case, do you suppose Zuggman is correct about trackage rights? (Danville to Portland)
Lithonia Operator The train you see there is on the old MEC mainline, from Portland to Lewiston, Augusta and beyond. It's now Pan Am Railways.
Maybe that means tackage rights over Pan Am to Portland. Dunno. That map is not detailed enough to know for sure whether that part represents SLR's inactive stretch, or if it means Pan Am. (both go through or (Pan Am) very near Yarmouth, and both go to Portland.
Not sure why they'd need trackage rights to Portland on Pan Am, though, because they can interchange at Danville Junction. Once you get to Portland, the only RR you can intechange with there is Pan Am. But maybe it's related to how the money is split up.
The more I look at that map, the more I now think zug is right about trackage rights.
If you look at the stretch between Yarmouth and Portland, the route arcs inland somewhat, instead of paralleling I-295. That looks more like Pan Am (formerly MEC). The SLR (formerly GT) runs almost exactly parallel to I-295. That's why I can/could hear trains from our mooring, which is pretty much halfway between Yarmouth and Portland, in Falmouth Foreside.
Can someone explain to me why SLR would use trackage rights over SLR. While in Portland, I have seen lots of Pan Am trains heading north and south, between Rigby Yard and points north. I have never once seen SLR units leading a train, or anywhere in the engine consist.
Until this discussion, I have thought that all SLR-PAR interchange happened at Danville Junction, period.
Convicted OneIn that case, do you suppose Zuggman is correct about trackage rights? (Danville to Portland)
Don't take my word for it.. jsut hit the "view detailed map" option on the original link.
Aha. Right you are.
I had been on my phone, and when I clicked that link nothing happened. But here on the computer now, I can see that.
So why would they do that, as opposed to interchanging at Danville Junction?
Bizarre - FRA record shows PanAm/Springfield Terminal/Portland Terminal is sole user of the operating track (No trackage rights to SLR) and SLR's track is listed as unknown (UNK) ownership....STB website is silent on any trackage rights for SLR (G&W) over ST/PanAm/PT....nothing mentioned about trackage rights in CN/GTW sale to Emons/SLR 1989-1998
Zuggy just horsing around?
Well, that "detailed map" does show it as trackage rights, according to the legend. But that came as a big surprise to me.
There is a small yard at Danville Junction. I'm wondering if, say, SLR had a unit train, or a very large block of cars for interchange, maybe there are physical constraints making it very awkward and time consuming to interchange there. Maybe it's easier on everyone to just have the SLR train continue on to Rigby.
Now, why the FRA wouldn't be aware of this ... I know nothing about such things.
Lithonia OperatorWell, that "detailed map" does show it as trackage rights, according to the legend. But that came as a big surprise to me. There is a small yard at Danville Junction. I'm wondering if, say, SLR had a unit train, or a very large block of cars for interchange, maybe there are physical constraints making it very awkward and time consuming to interchange there. Maybe it's easier on everyone to just have the SLR train continue on to Rigby. Now, why the FRA wouldn't be aware of this ... I know nothing about such things.
Don't know the realities of the locations you are describing.
Back in the day - Chessie System (B&O) interchanged with ConRail (former PRR & PC) at Bayview in Baltimore. In the middle 1970's coal started to move to Curtis Bay Coal Pier from origins on ConRail. The loads were actually given to the B&O at CR's Mount Vernon yard near the B&O's North Avenue Tower. The empties were taken from Curtis Bay and placed on the B&O/CR connection at East Aikin - Mt.Vernon and E.Aikin could handle intact trains - the actual interchange tracks at Bayview could not. Bayview remained the Official Interchange location
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
zugmannDon't take my word for it.. jsut hit the "view detailed map" option on the original link.
Just being honest, but I looked at the "detailed map" even before I posted my comment about the interactive map.....and suspected pretty much the same thing as you.
But, realizing that there always seems to be a clique around here just waiting for someone to stick their neck out, so they can step on it.....I kept my suspicion to myself.
Then, when you posted the same observation, I was more than happy to give you the spotlight, as well as the attendant crosshairs on your back that come along with it.
Lithonia Operator Well, that "detailed map" does show it as trackage rights, according to the legend. But that came as a big surprise to me. There is a small yard at Danville Junction. I'm wondering if, say, SLR had a unit train, or a very large block of cars for interchange, maybe there are physical constraints making it very awkward and time consuming to interchange there. Maybe it's easier on everyone to just have the SLR train continue on to Rigby. Now, why the FRA wouldn't be aware of this ... I know nothing about such things.
Does it? I think the "dashed line" refers to that part of the SLQ in Canada where it shows them using the CN. Those dashes are different from the SLR portion.
I think that part of the SLR as mentioned before means out of service.
Jeff
jeffhergert Lithonia Operator Well, that "detailed map" does show it as trackage rights, according to the legend. But that came as a big surprise to me. There is a small yard at Danville Junction. I'm wondering if, say, SLR had a unit train, or a very large block of cars for interchange, maybe there are physical constraints making it very awkward and time consuming to interchange there. Maybe it's easier on everyone to just have the SLR train continue on to Rigby. Now, why the FRA wouldn't be aware of this ... I know nothing about such things. Does it? I think the "dashed line" refers to that part of the SLQ in Canada where it shows them using the CN. Those dashes are different from the SLR portion. I think that part of the SLR as mentioned before means out of service. Jeff
That's a good point. I saw that the other dashes were different, and didn't know what to make of that.
There's definitely an information void there. I don't know why SLR would want to show an out-of-service track on their map. And as I've stated, I don't get why SLR would use trackage rights over PARR. So I'm not sure what to think.
Lithonia Operator And as I've stated, I don't get why SLR would use trackage rights over PARR. So I'm not sure what to think
Isn't Pan Am the company that allowed NS to "buy in" to their existing line between Boston and some point in New York? With NS money used to upgrade the existing Pan Am plant, and a shared maintenance responsibility going forward?
It wouldn't be unthinkable that they are somehow cooperaing with SLR on this other segment. Perhaps SLR kicks in money to help maintain the Pan Am line, in lieu of their own mothballed parallel line? And this saves SLR in the overall? Just speculating, mind you.
Just because an entity may have trackage rights doesn't mean they always use them. My understanding of trackage rights is that there is usually renumeration paid to the host railroad for every trackage rights movement. Oft-times trackage rights from an original railroad will follow along with the subsequent buyer.
Perhaps if some sort of terminal opens up at the Port of Portland someday, such as a grain export facility or a wood pellet export facility, then SLR may have a reason for again using trackage rights all the way to Portland.
Convicted One Lithonia Operator And as I've stated, I don't get why SLR would use trackage rights over PARR. So I'm not sure what to think Isn't Pan Am the company that allowed NS to "buy in" to their existing line between Boston and some point in New York? With NS money used to upgrade the existing Pan Am plant, and a shared maintenance responsibility going forward? It wouldn't be unthinkable that they are somehow cooperaing with SLR on this other segment. Perhaps SLR kicks in money to help maintain the Pan Am line, in lieu of their own mothballed parallel line? And this saves SLR in the overall? Just speculating, mind you.
kgbw49 Just because an entity may have trackage rights doesn't mean they always use them. My understanding of trackage rights is that there is usually renumeration paid to the host railroad for every trackage rights movement. Oft-times trackage rights from an original railroad will follow along with the subsequent buyer. Perhaps if some sort of terminal opens up at the Port of Portland someday, such as a grain export facility or a wood pellet export facility, then SLR may have a reason for again using trackage rights all the way to Portland.
Both excellent theories.
Yes, if SLR wanted Portland port access at some point in the future, they would need to use Pan Am. Because reviving their own route to Portland and accessing the port area would mean rebuilding a fairly long bridge, probably putting the Maine Narrow Gauge RR out of business, then re-laying about 1.5 miles of track right down the middle of Commercial Street (like in the old days). Not gonna happen.
kgbw49 Just because an entity may have trackage rights doesn't mean they always use them. My understanding of trackage rights is that there is usually renumeration paid to the host railroad for every trackage rights movement.
Just because an entity may have trackage rights doesn't mean they always use them. My understanding of trackage rights is that there is usually renumeration paid to the host railroad for every trackage rights movement.
As an example, Monon obtained trackage rights over South Shore between Michigan City and State Line when South Shore was purchased by C&O. Aside from an initial demonstration run, the trackage rights were never exercised.
Trackage rights are pre-1996 if they exist. (Nothing on STB finance dockets online or in the ICC card index (plus the STB/ICC bound volumes) I have access to. You cannot have trackage overhead or haulage rights without STB/ICC approval)
Still the FRA record and who changed the record in Maine is a bit of a mystery. Unusual.
When it comes right down to it, isn't the ICC/STB just another government agency?
As is the case with many other agencies, don't they hire out of the same pool as other, often reviled agencies? It's hard to imagine that the STB alone has managed to hire employees immune to laziness and the other sins we commonly credit to the govt.
It's not hard to imagine some clerk reconciling obsolete records, quietly force-fitting loose ends to make them appear to dovetail cleanly. Just a thought.
C1 - In this case, This is 40 dedicated career people who rarely, if ever, leave the agency. (down from almost 10,000 people at one point. Most of them are attorneys (that is an issue) that are more interested in rate cases and other "sexy" regulation -they normally deal with other lawyers submitting dockets*. (and yes they are administrative law judges and ombudsmen, but there is more to it....) The other stuff still on the books, rarely if ever gets looked at or checked. Even spun off from DOT, they are understaffed and do the best they can. It slowly is turning into a good-ol-boy's club.
- The rails to trails side/ abandonment is an administrative mess, made worse by people gaming the system.
- The surveying profession is frustrated with them. (and their vaunted GIS system is a failure. A "toy" that will never be representative or complete)
-There are places out here where rail has been removed / and or sold without formal abandonment. Two more cases (Colorado & Oklahoma) just oozed to the top.
They did away with the STB Librarian after cancer took the last one. (Dumb and Stoopid - Now you struggle to find a record of anything and any layman is screwed...Certain lawyers are giggling over that stunt.)
and the story goes on.
(My "bizarre" comment is aimed primarilly at the FRA/DOT side as opposed to the ICC/STB side ... I really wish some folks would audit/independently check what's going on, it would be an eye-opening experience. Most of the general public does not know who they are or what they do (or even exist) until it's far too late. Sad.)
mudchicken(My "bizarre" comment is aimed primarilly at the FRA/DOT side as opposed to the ICC/STB side ... I really wish some folks would audit/independently check what's going on,
My thoughts, admittedly based upon conjecture.....I often see people base arguments upon ICC valuation data, from 1918 and forward.
I think the purpose of the Valuation Act was to determine what was "out there" for the purpose of establishing rates. Much of the information supplied came from the railroads, and accepted at face value. It was never intended to be the encyclopedic essay of who owned what segment of line back in 1880 that many people now use it for, for example, on lines that changed hands many times over the years.....especially in instances where complete records were difficult to locate.
Just in illustration, if for example New York Central absorbed all predecessor components, and was willing to take responsibility for an entire line, and produce a plausible history that accounts for what was known, I doubt there was an enforcement wing of the ICC willing to go out and research titles in courthouses to verify that the 1880 transactions and 1890 transactions happened exacty as reported by NYC, years after the fact in 1918. Do you think that is a reasonable assumption?
And of course, as you say, there are always those willing to game the system. Producing "believable" information for the sake of expedience being a possible motive . And if all mileage relevant to the desire to devise formulas to establish rates is accurately accounted for,....(I guess) where is the harm?
This web page seems to have the hiccups.
C1 - Not buying parts of your argument. You need to explain all the field verification by teams of local appraisers in the field from 1916 until the 1950's plus all the field notes from the ICC field crews and structures crews notes.
The rates comment has about the same validity as the comments tying the Prince Plan to the ICC Valuation Act. (like a big zero)
People did check ICC GO-7 form DV-107's over validity.(that's deeds and acquisition records schedules to the uninitiated) Sometimes two and three times. Some railroads had to submit new val maps two and three times before the ICC auditors let railroads off the hook. (Eastern railroads and southern railroads had issues on occasion due to age or the Civil War where records were lost. The only bad actor/ shoddy product beyond that was the Wabash (just plain sucked because of Gould and that history). The bulk of that stuff is still pretty good (and certainly much better than many current town/county/state road and bridge records.)
Things started to slide in the 1960's and fell down even worse with the 2nd USRA and the creation of CR. (CR was incredibly bad in places. I keep seeing those fails created by the operating management and money people. )
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.