Our current rulebook and operating manual does not say anything about animal strikes, one way or the other. The instructions I referenced about reporting animal strikes are from a specific bulletin that only applies to the trackage within Jasper National Park.
I believe there used to be instructions requiring crews to report accidents involving livestock, but this was so the farmer could be compensated, and had nothing to do with animal welfare.
The biggest step railways, car owners and shippers could do to reduce animal strikes would be to fix leaking grain hopper gates and quit spilling grain on top of the cars. It is this free food that lures so many animals to the track.
I used to work a branchline that didn't have any grain traffic, and animal strikes were very rare there.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Murphy SidingI guess it would be prudent then to ask airplanes to reduse their speed by 1/3rd or more whenever there are birds in the area?
Hey, in a modern reality where police budget cuts are expected to make us safer, I don't see your suggestion as completely without merit.
So if you were flying an airliner with 300 passengers, and came up on the tail of a large flock of geese, what would you do? Notch 8 and yell "YEE HAA!"?
Convicted One Euclid I assume they do have such a rule that prohibits any attempt to yield to animals. Why else would this have happened? Obviously, the engineer resented it. What else would explain it other than a rule? I doubt that it is spelled out that blatently, What I was thinking.....actually something more along the lines of a prohibition against a crew "knowingly impeding" employer's primary mission, or " failure to execute employee's duty in the most expeditious manner possible",,,,,with a verbal instruction that stopping for animals is seen as such an instance. But yeah, I agree, the video is very likely some form of protest by a disgruntled whistleblower.
Euclid I assume they do have such a rule that prohibits any attempt to yield to animals. Why else would this have happened? Obviously, the engineer resented it. What else would explain it other than a rule?
I doubt that it is spelled out that blatently, What I was thinking.....actually something more along the lines of a prohibition against a crew "knowingly impeding" employer's primary mission, or " failure to execute employee's duty in the most expeditious manner possible",,,,,with a verbal instruction that stopping for animals is seen as such an instance.
But yeah, I agree, the video is very likely some form of protest by a disgruntled whistleblower.
That would be called "Delaying Trains."
It's a catch-all for running too slow for their liking, not taking off from a stop fast enough or even stopping when not otherwise required. Like malicious compliance, it's threatened more often than actually used.
Jeff
Convicted One Murphy Siding I guess it would be prudent then to ask airplanes to reduse their speed by 1/3rd or more whenever there are birds in the area? Hey, in a modern reality where police budget cuts are expected to make us safer, I don't see your suggestion as completely without merit. So if you were flying an airliner with 300 passengers, and came up on the tail of a large flock of geese, what would you do? Notch 8 and yell "YEE HAA!"?
Murphy Siding I guess it would be prudent then to ask airplanes to reduse their speed by 1/3rd or more whenever there are birds in the area?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murph, one thing that planes can do that trains can't is alter the flight path in any one of four different directions, hopefully gradually enough not to wreak havoc with the passengers and/or flight attendants...
Brian (IA) http://blhanel.rrpicturearchives.net.
Nobody is suggesting that all animal strikes must be eliminated. So why offer the choice of either fencing all the railroads; or intentionally running down and killing a heard of wild animals?
When I look at this video, I see no attempt to slow down. The train appears to be traveling about 50 mph, and the animals at 30 mph. The train closes that gap in about 10 seconds, so it has traveled 730 ft.
The video begins with the animals in plain sight, so they had to have been observed on the track prior to the start of the video. It seems reasonable to conclude that there was at least another ten seconds in the visual approach prior to the start of the video.
So that is 20 seconds or 1460 feet of reaction time to reduce speed by 20 mph, which would have let the animals escape.
The defensive claim that the train could not stop in time is nonsense. There was no need to stop. The need was to reduce speed from 50 mph to 30 mph over a course of 1460 feet.
Anyone with experience would know that the animals would see their only option would be to try to outrun the train.
On most trains even emergency braking wouldn't slow you from 50 to 30 mph in less than 1500 feet.
And then there is the issue of train delay and blaming the crew for taking such unusual action.
Euclid Nobody is suggesting that all animal strikes must be eliminated. So why offer the choice of either fencing all the railroads; or intentionally running down and killing a heard of wild animals? When I look at this video, I see no attempt to slow down. The train appears to be traveling about 50 mph, and the animals at 30 mph. The train closes that gap in about 10 seconds, so it has traveled 730 ft. The video begins with the animals in plain sight, so they had to have been observed on the track prior to the start of the video. It seems reasonable to conclude that there was at least another ten seconds in the visual approach prior to the start of the video. So that is 20 seconds or 1460 feet of reaction time to reduce speed by 20 mph, which would have let the animals escape. The defensive claim that the train could not stop in time is nonsense. There was no need to stop. The need was to reduce speed from 50 mph to 30 mph over a course of 1460 feet. Anyone with experience would know that the animals would see their only option would be to try to outrun the train.
Murphy Siding Serious question- if the train had been able to slow down to 30 mph / antelope speed, wouldn't they just be following the herd along at antelope speed? The animals are on the track because the snow isn't as deep. If the horns didn't scare them off, they'd probably want to keep on running on the tracks.
I don't know what would have happened in that case. Maybe the animals could take siding somewhere.
I've 'chased' deer or coyotes for miles on a few occasions, if the snow is deep the track provides the easiest (only) trail for them.
This was also on a branchline where we were doing less than 30 mph in the first place, and with short trains where slowing down was not such a big deal.
Murphy SidingWhat do the pilots do now? A jet traveling at 500 mph covers 8-1/3 miles in a minute's time. I don't think tapping the brakes when you see a flock of geese will gain you much.
I suppose you could pull a "Kenneth Arnold" and blame it on forces beyond your comprehension...
Euclid Murphy Siding Serious question- if the train had been able to slow down to 30 mph / antelope speed, wouldn't they just be following the herd along at antelope speed? The animals are on the track because the snow isn't as deep. If the horns didn't scare them off, they'd probably want to keep on running on the tracks. I don't know what would have happened in that case. Maybe the animals could take siding somewhere.
They could do that - or - the train could swerve around them! [/sarcasm]
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Murphy SidingSerious question- if the train had been able to slow down to 30 mph / antelope speed, wouldn't they just be following the herd along at antelope speed? The animals are on the track because the snow isn't as deep.
Seriously, I believe if the train had managed as you propose, that would have given more animals opportunity to "peel off" as the video indicates some were doing. Reducing the waste.
Just speaking from my personal perspective, the most disturbing thing of all about the video is the appearance that the locomotive appears to remain under power throughout the episode, as though no effort whatsoever was made to mitigate the carnage.
Like Euclid, I don't expect any perfect solution exists that could totally eliminate this sort of thing, but merely writing it off to "stupid animals!! oh well" doesn't appear to be a responsible outcome, either.
Convicted OneLike Euclid, I don't expect any perfect solution exists that could totally eliminate this sort of thing, but merely writing it off to "stupid animals!! oh well" doesn't appear to be a responsible outcome, either.
Conservation officials here in northern New York are concerned about reduced numbers of hunters. That translates into a reduced take, and an increase in the numbers of car/deer collisions.
Had a gentleman bag a nice five point with the front of his car the other day. I was going to take the deer (law enforcement can issue a tag just for that), but when you factor in the possibly totalled car, that's some expensive meat for the freezer...
Just another point of view.
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...
Convicted OneJust speaking from my personal perspective, the most disturbing thing of all about the video is the appearance that the locomotive appears to remain under power throughout the episode, as though no effort whatsoever was made to mitigate the carnage. Like Euclid, I don't expect any perfect solution exists that could totally eliminate this sort of thing, but merely writing it off to "stupid animals!! oh well" doesn't appear to be a responsible outcome, either.
As I mentioned, I think there is more to this than meets the eye. No matter what the excuse is, the video stands on its own as being really creepy precisely because there was no attempt to prevent what obviously would be a wanton slaughter. It almost looks like a grudge murder.
Euclid Convicted One Just speaking from my personal perspective, the most disturbing thing of all about the video is the appearance that the locomotive appears to remain under power throughout the episode, as though no effort whatsoever was made to mitigate the carnage. Like Euclid, I don't expect any perfect solution exists that could totally eliminate this sort of thing, but merely writing it off to "stupid animals!! oh well" doesn't appear to be a responsible outcome, either. As I mentioned, I think there is more to this than meets the eye. No matter what the excuse is, the video stands on its own as being really creepy precisely because there was no attempt to prevent what obviously would be a wanton slaughter. It almost looks like a grudge murder.
Convicted One Just speaking from my personal perspective, the most disturbing thing of all about the video is the appearance that the locomotive appears to remain under power throughout the episode, as though no effort whatsoever was made to mitigate the carnage. Like Euclid, I don't expect any perfect solution exists that could totally eliminate this sort of thing, but merely writing it off to "stupid animals!! oh well" doesn't appear to be a responsible outcome, either.
Man is the most predatory of all predators on Earth.
Other predators do it for food, but not man.
tree68Conservation officials here in northern New York are concerned about reduced numbers of hunters. That translates into a reduced take, and an increase in the numbers of car/deer collisions.
I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but the "over population" mantra tends to get trotted out around here (Northern Indiana) whenever there is a car/deer collision, frequently by guys I know well enough to be sure they have SELDOM bothered to research any fact ouside of a sporting context.
If there TRULY was an"overpopulation" problem, I think there would be ample evidence of starvation.....
Personally, I tend to think it's more a matter that anytime there is a conflict between man and beast, the beast get's the rap. eg "If I ran into one of them, then that's one too many of them".
I more suspect the cause of the collisions we have around here, are due to the animals becoming habituated to human presence. They come nearer to our doings as they become more accustomed to our presence. And are ill prepared to deal with some of our behavior. I really don't think that is so much proof of "overpopulation", as some might be willing to claim.
And, I'll admit that I am somewhat of a freak when it comes to wildlife. I don't expect everyone to have the same feeling that I do.
When I see some of those pictures that guys take out of their living room windows, where it looks like Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood, except there is some big moose standing in his driveway.....it makes me jealous.
blhanel Murph, one thing that planes can do that trains can't is alter the flight path in any one of four different directions, hopefully gradually enough not to wreak havoc with the passengers and/or flight attendants...
Tell that to Sully and see how he replies.
(Miracle on the Hudson)
Convicted OneAnd, I'll admit that I am somewhat of a freak when it comes to wildlife. I don't expect everyone to have the same feeling that I do. When I see some of those pictures that guys take out of their living room windows, where it looks like Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood, except there is some big moose standing in his driveway.....it makes me jealous.
Around here the deer, elk and moose like to hang out in town because they have learned that wolves, bears and cougars do not.
I've had a few close encounters when stepping out to go to work during dark hours.
SD70DudeAround here the deer, elk and moose like to hang out in town because they have learned that wolves, bears and cougars do not.
SD70DudeI've had a few close encounters when stepping out to go to work during dark hours.
I was walking through the yard (dirt road - no tracks involved) one day, browsing some publication or other, and nearly ran into a doe. They are known to wander through on a regular basis, sometimes fascinating passengers waiting on the platform as they duck under the train...
We see some bear in the area from time to time...
Get a motion activated 'wildlife camera' and be amazed at the animals that come around your property - especially in the dark.
BaltACD Get a motion activated 'wildlife camera' and be amazed at the animals that come around your property - especially in the dark.
I put one up next to the cat food dish to figure out why we were going through so much, and was rewarded with hundreds of shots of mice. They were there literally every minute through the whole night.
There were also lots of photos of the oldest, fattest cat sitting beside the dish, watching the mice eat.
After that we moved the dish on top of a table the mice can't climb.
Convicted One tree68 Conservation officials here in northern New York are concerned about reduced numbers of hunters. That translates into a reduced take, and an increase in the numbers of car/deer collisions. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but the "over population" mantra tends to get trotted out around here (Northern Indiana) whenever there is a car/deer collision, frequently by guys I know well enough to be sure they have SELDOM bothered to research any fact ouside of a sporting context. If there TRULY was an"overpopulation" problem, I think there would be ample evidence of starvation..... Personally, I tend to think it's more a matter that anytime there is a conflict between man and beast, the beast get's the rap. eg "If I ran into one of them, then that's one too many of them". I more suspect the cause of the collisions we have around here, are due to the animals becoming habituated to human presence. They come nearer to our doings as they become more accustomed to our presence. And are ill prepared to deal with some of our behavior. I really don't think that is so much proof of "overpopulation", as some might be willing to claim.
tree68 Conservation officials here in northern New York are concerned about reduced numbers of hunters. That translates into a reduced take, and an increase in the numbers of car/deer collisions.
Convicted One And, I'll admit that I am somewhat of a freak when it comes to wildlife. I don't expect everyone to have the same feeling that I do. When I see some of those pictures that guys take out of their living room windows, where it looks like Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood, except there is some big moose standing in his driveway.....it makes me jealous.
Murphy Siding Convicted One And, I'll admit that I am somewhat of a freak when it comes to wildlife. I don't expect everyone to have the same feeling that I do. When I see some of those pictures that guys take out of their living room windows, where it looks like Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood, except there is some big moose standing in his driveway.....it makes me jealous. I was born in Alaska and lived in a rural area outside of Anchorage until I was 11. Moose were common on the highways and in yards. They are very dangerous to be around. You're talking about a big, dumb, easy to spook cow with huge horns. The deer that eat under my apple tree evey night, on the other hand, are quite harmless.
I was born in Alaska and lived in a rural area outside of Anchorage until I was 11. Moose were common on the highways and in yards. They are very dangerous to be around. You're talking about a big, dumb, easy to spook cow with huge horns. The deer that eat under my apple tree evey night, on the other hand, are quite harmless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72awOuWcfAA
Convicted OneI'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but the "over population" mantra tends to get trotted out around here (Northern Indiana) whenever there is a car/deer collision, frequently by guys I know well enough to be sure they have SELDOM bothered to research any fact ouside of a sporting context. If there TRULY was an"overpopulation" problem, I think there would be ample evidence of starvation..... Personally, I tend to think it's more a matter that anytime there is a conflict between man and beast, the beast get's the rap. eg "If I ran into one of them, then that's one too many of them". I more suspect the cause of the collisions we have around here, are due to the animals becoming habituated to human presence. They come nearer to our doings as they become more accustomed to our presence. And are ill prepared to deal with some of our behavior. I really don't think that is so much proof of "overpopulation", as some might be willing to claim.
Convicted OneI'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but the "over population" mantra tends to get trotted out around here (Northern Indiana) whenever there is a car/deer collision, frequently by guys I know well enough to be sure they have SELDOM bothered to research any fact ouside of a sporting context. If there TRULY was an"overpopulation" problem, I think there would be ample evidence of starvation.....
It was an article in the paper the other day.
One must remember that I live in a part of NY state that many don't realize exists. I can stand on my back porch and view the Big Dipper while listening to the only vehicle in motion for miles as while it's still a couple of miles outside of the hamlet where I live. And, I live not far from the six million acre "forever wild" Adirondack Park.
I've been hearing multiple car/deer collisions daily on the scanner - and responded to one a few nights ago.
And we do get reports from time to time about the deer herd suffering due to overpopulation.
Murphy SidingI was born in Alaska and lived in a rural area outside of Anchorage until I was 11. Moose were common on the highways and in yards. They are very dangerous to be around. You're talking about a big, dumb, easy to spook cow with huge horns
I am envious of your history, and respect your personal experiences. I've never had an opportunity to "chum up" to a moose, and while I am sure it requires an abundance of caution, under the right set of cirmcumstances, I'm probably foolhardy enough to give it a try.
This not being a wildlife forum, I don't want to go too far off on a tangent, lest risk upsetting people. But in brief...my own experiences....I've been amazed with how not-dumb wildlife can be.....once you have earned their trust on an individual level. And that requires more patience than most people are willing to invest. I also find that many people are prone to confusing obedience for intelligence....if the animal fails to respond in an expected way, on a certain cue...they dismiss the animal as "dumb". Often that is an erroneous assumption.
Truthfully, the biggest risk I have encountered is once I have established trust with such an animal, I worry that some other unscrupulous human will exploit that to the detriment of the animal. There seems to be no shortage of people who amuse themselves inflicting hardship, thinking it is their birthright. But, uniquely enough, I find that many of the animals I've bonded with can distinguish me as an individual....acting calm and relaxed as I enter the scene....but displaying tense, or cautionary behavior when other folks come waltzing down the path.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.