When tracks are abandoned, do they forever stay the property of the railroad unless sold.?
The Milwaukee Road for example. Were large parts of that sold or given back to the state(s) they were in; or after some years can a state claim some sort of eminent domain and just appropriate the land, assuming the tracks... which might not physically exist any longer... will never be used.?
There must be abandoned track-age all ove the USA at this point. Is it, really, all accounted for.?
Thank You
kenny dorhamWhen tracks are abandoned, do they forever stay the property of the railroad unless sold.? The Milwaukee Road for example. Were large parts of that sold or given back to the state(s) they were in; or after some years can a state claim some sort of eminent domain and just appropriate the land, assuming the tracks... which might not physically exist any longer... will never be used.? There must be abandoned track-age all ove the USA at this point. Is it, really, all accounted for.? Thank You
The Real Estate Lawyers and Title Clerks FULL EMPLOYMENT actions if rights of way are desired to be used by railroads again.
The rights of way were obtained by any and every form of land transactions known to man, and probably a few that have been fully forgotten by 21st Century inhabitents. With as many different types of acquisition as there were, they probably even more types of reversion clauses in effect.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
kenny dorham When tracks are abandoned, do they forever stay the property of the railroad unless sold.? The Milwaukee Road for example. Were large parts of that sold or given back to the state(s) they were in; or after some years can a state claim some sort of eminent domain and just appropriate the land, assuming the tracks... which might not physically exist any longer... will never be used.? There must be abandoned track-age all ove the USA at this point. Is it, really, all accounted for.? Thank You
Falls under "Adverse Possesion" in some cases if it is abandoned and your adjacent to it unless someone else challenges your claim before the Adverse Possession time period lapses.....
https://lonestarlandlaw.com/adverse-possession-in-texas/
One of our next door neighbors in Wisconsin tried this crap by repeatedly mowing a silver of our residential lawn, problem was his only argument was maintenence and because it was pre-emptive maintenence before we cut our lawn and because he didn't really lay claim to it via other means. His case failed.
So you cannot presume it is not someone elses private property because it was left abandoned. The process of abandonment means you abandon all rights to the land. I guess if nobody is adjacent then it remains unowned until claimed.
kenny dorham When tracks are abandoned, do they forever stay the property of the railroad unless sold.?
Balt nailed it, but I'll add my own take on it as well.
It is possible for more than one person (or company, or government) to own an interest in a piece of land. The most fundamental form of ownership is usually referred to as a fee interest. If you own the fee interest in a piece of land, then it is "yours". And unless you sell it to someone else (or someone else seizes it by adverse possession) it will remain yours.
However, even if you own the fee interest, other people may still own a more limited interest in the same property. For instance, you can sell off the mineral rights to an oil company, and then they would have the right to come in an extract the oil underneath your land at any time. Or, someone can buy (or take by eminent domain) an easement, which is a right to use a specified parcel for a specific purpose. An easement is normally "reversionary", which means that if the owner of the easement is no longer using the property for the specified purpose, then his interest in the property disappears and automatically is returned (reverts) to the fee owner.
So, when a railroad is abandoned, then the parcels in which the railroad only had an easement revert to the fee owner, but any parcels where the railroad owned the fee interest still belong to the railroad.
So the answer to your question is, "It depends." But as Balt said, the nuances have resulted in many, many court cases and a few pieces of legislation to clarify exactly who gets what when a railroad is no longer used.
There is one very important special case which doesn't fall neatly into either the "simple fee" or "easement" category. When Congress gave a railroad public land to use for its ROW (as happened with many western railroads), the US courts have determined that the railroad gained a "limited fee interest". Exactly what that means is complicated (and I don't really understand it). It's more than just an easement - for instance, clarifying legislation in the 20th century gave the railroads the right to sell easements on the land to others, as if they owned the fee interest - but, like an easement, the railroads only own it for as long as the railroad is there. When the railroad is abandoned, that fee interest reverts back to the federal government - who were the ones who owned it before the railroad was built. Other follow-up legislation has decreed that the US automatically transfers that interest to the adjoining landowners.
Another category of ROW is actually playted public streets. While street-running railroads are pretty rare these days, there are other where the railroad was originally given permission to operate in a public street - and then the street disappeared, leaving only the railroad. In that case, if the railroad ceases operations, the public street ROW stays in place and is still dedicated to public use. Perhaps more importantly, any time a railroad was built through an existing town, it crossed previously-platted public ROW's. In some cases the roads that they crossed still exist, and in other cases the roads have been vacated and ceased to exist - with fee ownership typically reverting to the fee owners of one or more adjoining properties. But there are also many examples where the platted road is not there today but was never vacated (either the road was never actually constructed as platted, or the crossing was closed without vacation). These create "holes" in the railroad's ROW which aren't usually a big issue for day,-to-day railroad operations, but affect the use of the ROW for anything else after rail operations cease.
But in most cases, the question comes down to whether the railroad bought the fee interest or just an easement. When railroads were acquiring ROW in the 1860's, the deeds often did not make it clear which was being conveyed. Deeds would say things like, "So-and-so conveys to the Podunk and Western Railway Co. a parcel of land for right-of-way purposes, being situated in Podunk County and described as [some survey description]", and courts have to determine whether the "conveys land" indicates a sale of the fee interest or whether the "right-of-way purposes" indicates that it is only an easement. (It can vary from state to state, but the general tendency is to treat anything that says "Right of Way" or "railroad purposes" as an easement.)
Another areas that can get contentious: when does an easement expire? Property laws are determined by the states. But, in the case of a railroad line that is part of the interstate rail network and subject to Federal jurisdiction, the states are barred from doing anything that would prevent the railroad from carrying out its operations and obligations. So regardless of normal state law, railroad easements are interpreted to survive until the line is formally abandoned - even if the rails have been removed for a decade.
Except they back tracks and industry spurs can be abandoned without getting Federal approval... BUT states are still pre-empted from "regulating" these lines. So a state court trying to decide whether an easement for a spur track has expired, still has to ensure that it is not doing anything that would interfere with railroad operations.
And what about a ROW easement that was extra wide at a station area to support both a main track and several spur tracks - does the part of that property under the yard tracks revert when the yard is removed, even if the mainline is still in service (or removed but not yet officially abandoned)?
Finally, there is the legal fiction of the "Notice of Interim Trail Use", i.e., railbanking. If a railroad is finished using a ROW for railroad purposes, but some of that ROW consists of easements on other people's property, the railroad can't just sell the land to a would-be bike trail developer, because they don't own an easement for a bike trail, only an easement for a railroad. On the other hand, as long as that ROW is officially still part of the interstate rail network, then federal law says that the ROW is still in use and the railroad easements don't expire. So: instead of the line being abandoned, it can be "railbanked", meaning it is mothballed but preserved intact for future railroad use. Oh, and by the way, since the railroad isn't using it, Congress has said that other people can develop it into bike trails until such time as it is needed again.
Now the truth is that few if any of these lines stand any chance of ever being reactivated for railroad purposes. But the "Interim trail use" designation allows the public to use railroad corridors as bike trails without having to actually go and buy the easements they would normally need to install a bike trail. The owners of the fee interest can sue the government for damages using so-called "reverse condemnation" proceedings, because the government just seized a property right from them... but the seizure happens automatically by law, the government doesn't have to go out and individually assemble the corridor by acquiring those easement rights from each landowner. And I suspect that reverse condemnation proceedings are pretty rare, because they're not going to be cost-effective if you only have an interest in a small piece of the ROW.
Dan
Thanks for all yhe replies.
I sort of figured it was complex
The Tennessee Pass remains a topic of interest. I cannot imagine that the majoriity of that mainline will ever be used again, but i am not any kind od railroad expert.
As indicated above, RR ROW titles can be very diverse. My experience shows a variance by State and within each State a variance by decided court cases.
kenny dorham Thanks for all yhe replies. I sort of figured it was complex The Tennessee Pass remains a topic of interest. I cannot imagine that the majoriity of that mainline will ever be used again, but i am not any kind od railroad expert.
CMStPnPSo you cannot presume it is not someone elses private property because it was left abandoned. The process of abandonment means you abandon all rights to the land. I guess if nobody is adjacent then it remains unowned until claimed.
For what it's worth this reminds me of something I read in "Field and Stream" magazine 50 years ago:
"Every square foot of ground in the country is owned by someone."
The point being made was don't assume because a piece of ground is unoccupied it's OK to go hunting or fishing on it. Check first.
My small town used an abandoned BNSF line for part of a trail system. However, that extended only to the city limits.
South of there, the track right of way stayed as it was for several years until a farmer with adjacent land leveled it out and began farming on it. Within a short time, every other farmer along the way for a distance of about eight miles did the same, and it's nearly impossible today to even see where the tracks were.
I'm not sure how legal all this was, but so far, no one has raised any issues.
York1 John
York1South of there, the track right of way stayed as it was for several years until a farmer with adjacent land leveled it out and began farming on it. Within a short time, every other farmer along the way for a distance of about eight miles did the same, and it's nearly impossible today to even see where the tracks were.
If you look at satellite images, taken in the spring after plowing, of areas where that occurred, you can often pick out the different color. I've seen it from lines taken out many years ago.
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...
Falcon48 kenny dorham Thanks for all yhe replies. I sort of figured it was complex The Tennessee Pass remains a topic of interest. I cannot imagine that the majoriity of that mainline will ever be used again, but i am not any kind of railroad expert. The Tennessee Pass line has never been "abandoned". UP/SP originally filed for abandonment in the UP/SP merger, but the STB only granted authority to "discontinue" train service (which UP exercised on the line segment from Canon City to Gypsum). After UP's post merger service meltdown, UP voluntarily removed the line from its abandonment "hit list" (technically Category 1 of its "system diagram map", an STB mandated listing of lines that a carrier expects to abandon). This prevents any reversionary interests from taking effect and allows the railroad to restore service (if it chooses to do so) without any STB regulatory approval. That remains the line's status today.
kenny dorham Thanks for all yhe replies. I sort of figured it was complex The Tennessee Pass remains a topic of interest. I cannot imagine that the majoriity of that mainline will ever be used again, but i am not any kind of railroad expert.
The Tennessee Pass remains a topic of interest. I cannot imagine that the majoriity of that mainline will ever be used again, but i am not any kind of railroad expert.
The Tennessee Pass line has never been "abandoned". UP/SP originally filed for abandonment in the UP/SP merger, but the STB only granted authority to "discontinue" train service (which UP exercised on the line segment from Canon City to Gypsum). After UP's post merger service meltdown, UP voluntarily removed the line from its abandonment "hit list" (technically Category 1 of its "system diagram map", an STB mandated listing of lines that a carrier expects to abandon). This prevents any reversionary interests from taking effect and allows the railroad to restore service (if it chooses to do so) without any STB regulatory approval. That remains the line's status today.
Mr. Peltier and us former birds of a certain feather (retired or otherwise) could probably write a book on some of the weird things that happen. Would be nice to cross paths with him at an AREMA function some day.)
First rule of thumb:
IF the the STB (or ICC before it) says it's abandoned, then it is. (since 1996 that extends to back tracks and industrial leads as well)...
Second rule: The railroads have a very good index of how their rights of way were acquired. (Called a DV-107 Land schedule). To this day, the big railroads (Cls 1) still have to keep current records on what they have and what they have disposed of. In most states, the railroads' records are far superior to what that state's DOT or county road agency has for the local road R/Ws and State highway. [after 1983, the regionals and shortlines got let off the hook. An awful lot of transit and commuter rail agencies are just clueless. ]
Third - Local officials and local courthouses often create headaches operating on hearsay, old wives tales and just plain blunders. The Tennessee Pass issue is a prime example. Eagle County and some of it's claims are borderline absurd. They are patent proof of why local government should be kept out of the decision making process - they are in over their head. (A well known, but not actively seen lately forum member has my complete sympathy and support on dealing with those idiots.) I suspect that the line will eventually come back to productive life.)
Rule 4: Much of what shows up in the media is just opinion, never having been researched or vetted.
IMHO: Anyone claiming railroads are nothing but easements should be discreditted with extreme predjudice. (finding reference to an easement in those DV-107's is exceedingly rare) GIS should not be trusted unless it is checked and vetted by a properly trained surveyor or land professional (the guessing has to stop)...The STB needs to better check and verify some of the rails-to-trails claims and better update and record those that are legit and go after the scofflaws that are gaming the system. NARPO and EagleOne need to be held accountable for the damage and dis-service to the public they have done over the years. Both owe the surveying profession a massive apology.
Very well-presented MC. You have been there, done that.
It should be understood that each State has its own laws and decided court cases.
I have also been there, done that.
diningcar Very well-presented MC. You have been there, done that. It should be understood that each State has its own laws and decided court cases. I have also been there, done that.
It seems from a casual perusal of MC's and Dan Peltier's informative posts that there are conflicting views on whether or not railroads use easements.
I have never seen, or heard about, an easement for a main or branch line main track.
There may, occasionally, be an easement on the outside of a railroad yard for some specific service but I know of none.
mudchickenThe proper term for what's going on is "Discontinuance of Service". There are multiple reasons that lines wind up in this kind of limbo, usually in a game of keep-away with some other railroad. ... IMHO: Anyone claiming railroads are nothing but easements should be discreditted with extreme predjudice.
...
IMHO: Anyone claiming railroads are nothing but easements should be discreditted with extreme predjudice.
An example of the "keep away" is here in Alexandria, Virginia. The last NS customers in town went out around 2012-2013. The City prevailed upon NS to not file for abandonment and instead simply discontinue service. At the time, Arlington and Alexandria were working on a plan for joint streetcar service. The city saw the NS ROW as a useful corridor for a branch of the system. The whole thing fell apart when Arlington discontinued their part of the project. But it still serves as an example of why someone would prefer not to abandon a rail line, even if the railroad that operated it is long done with it. It was going to be much easier to convert it to streetcars than start from scratch with ROW acquistion.
The other remark is a peculiar one. Railroads are such massive land owners that it seems odd to me that people would even claim such. I remember in my youth, I went to the county court house on a field trip. We had a fun time in the room full of enormous maps and found out that the Bessemer & Lake Erie seemed to own much of the land where we lived. Some people were surprised to find out that their families were actually leasing the land they were farming.
diningcarI have never seen, or heard about, an easement for a main or branch line main track.
Off the top of my head, since I have second hand experience with it, the PRR/PC/CR's Butler (PA) Branch was easements the whole way from Freeport to Butler. There was a considerable local legal uproar when it was trailified.
The use of easements in railroad corridors is extremely limited and usually involves a federal highway or state road crossing over a railroad senior in right . Some are promoting a lie out of ignorance, but others have an agenda and hope no one notices the flaw in their agenda.
diningcar I have never seen, or heard about, an easement for a main or branch line main track. There may, occasionally, be an easement on the outside of a railroad yard for some specific service but I know of none.
On the BN's predecessors, industrial tracks were commonly built by the railroad on easements that the industry would provide (on the industry's land). Kind of the opposite of how it is today, where the industry builds the track and the railroad leases any part of its land needed for the track to the industry.
The railroad also obtains easements for access roads, drainage, and so forth outside the railroad corridor proper.
By contrast, I have seen very few deeds for mainline ROW that say "Easement" anywhere on them. But, I have seen many that contain language that is ambiguous - and the tendency in most states is to lean towards treating ambiguous language as easements. This encompasses most land that the railroads took using eminent domain, as well as a number of other deeds like the ones I mentioned in my previous post (land conveyed "for Right-of-Way").
Fortunately, it usually makes no difference whatsoever to railroad operations whether the railroad owns the fee interest or not. Either way the railroad typically has the same degree of control over the land while it's in use. (That's not necessarily true for every possible kind of deed, but it's pretty true for any deed that is ambiguous about fee vs easement interest.) The only difference comes in what happens once the railroad is legally abandoned.
And even then it doesn't always make much difference. For instance, if you're trying to redevelop an old industrial site and there are railroad easements recorded in it, your insurance company may not let you proceed until you get those easements cleared. Which you can do either by paying the railroad to give you a deed releasing them, or by going to court with a "Quiet Title" proceeding. The former, which basically amounts to buying the land back from the railroad, is usually the better choice because it costs less and has less chance of running into federal preemption questions.
mudchickenSome are promoting a lie out of ignorance, but others have an agenda and hope no one notices the flaw in their agenda.
That's a pretty serious accusation.
charlie hebdo mudchicken Some are promoting a lie out of ignorance, but others have an agenda and hope no one notices the flaw in their agenda. That's a pretty serious accusation.
mudchicken Some are promoting a lie out of ignorance, but others have an agenda and hope no one notices the flaw in their agenda.
Alas, it's true. People with an agenda (and money) are dangerous.
After 40+ years in the profession, you see and hear some things to the point of beating a dead horse. The need to push back is apparent and probably needs to be done more forcefully until the stupidity stops.
Repeating the lies on abandonment and easements in relation to railways doesn't somehow magically legitimize those claims.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.