I've been giving this a lot of thought based on several postings from some pretty incisive and successful people on other threads - and I'm wondering if it isn't as specific-condition based a recommendation rather than a panacea, like any political or economic philosophy.........

Sure, it can provide more security against the whims of a landlord, but you still are at the mercy of the whims of the state of the economy and any entity capable of actuating Eminent Domain. Even more, the whims of the adjacent landowners, municipal regulating entities, historic environmental cleanup regulators, etc.

Lots of resources are expended in simply maintaining the real estate that isn't necessarily used in an economically intensive way, which I suppose is one reason that a rural location is usually considered in this scenario, but then you are faced with the need to persuade potential customers to make the effort to travel to your location just to buy your product. In times of high travel costs based on the whims of the energy industry, and competition for other uses of available leisure time, certainly implies some amount of self-limitation.

Another thought: supposing we do become irrelevant, why shouldn't we be removed or eliminated? Unconditional self-perpetuation might not be the ideal model. I'm thinking particularly here about such things as historic streetcars used to move people around for specific purposes or for development goals. When the development using it fades and patronage declines and other plans evolve, why fight a long battle against decline? Pick up your assets and go where you can be useful. Or, when your country branchline gets overcome by suburban sprawl.

Context: city streetcars running through open fields in the outback make no sense. the ONLY place they can be correctly interpreted in is an urban context. Running a light 4-6-0 at the head of a mixed train with a wooden combine works fine between small towns in the country, but not so much in a major urban center. Mainline steam or an A-B-B-A lashup puttering around a small industrial yard with no place to go?

Nothing here is either / or, BTW.... I think what I'm getting at is the idea of ownership of rural property can be a useful tool and business model for some entities under some circumstances, but isn't always the best for everybody, and that it makes good sense for us to consider a limited life span based on relevancy and patronage as an integral part of our planning.

dave

Two words come to mind: "Stillwater, Minnesota".

Ownership certainly did not help in that situation, with the possible exception of the end game, where the asset had value to be realized (read: "we got money from the sale").

Howard P.

One issue I haven't seen discussed on these threads is: what happens when/if the rail line to your site gets abandoned? As an example, in the 1990s the Bluewater Michigan Chapter NRHS was a tenant of CN at Pontiac, MI and got evicted. It moved to become a tenant of CSX at Saginaw (and many years later was evicted as well). Some members located a lumber yard in Walled Lake, MI along the CN Holly Sub as a site for a permanent home for Bluewater where Bluewater would own the land. For a variety of reasons this didn't happen, and was the subject of hurt feelings for many members.

A few years later CN abandoned the Holly Sub and completely ripped it out, bridges and all. If Bluewater had moved there they would have been stuck, and probably would have had to move out.

What would have happened if during the 1980s C&NW decided to tear up its branch that goes through Union, IL? That isn't a stretch, considering how much trackage C&NW did rip up at the time. Would history have been very different at IRM?

Chris.

Chris -

In the case of the Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum, that almost happened. CSX petitioned to abandon the "T-shaped" line that connected with HVRM at the very end of one leg of that "T". Despite a very high monetary amount hung on the railroad by CSX, the museum co-ordinated an effort between the three counties involved, the two shippers and the town of North Judson, and with some transit funds that were available, managed to save the 33 miles of railroad. Freight traffic on the line has slowly grown since the takeover from CSX (a short line operator runs the freight end) and the museum was able to start operations on its "leg". I would imagine that there are a few other stories out there of abandoned lines being saved by museums or tourist railroads. It is difficult, but not impossible. The worse that can happen, would be just to give up and not make an effort.

Les Beckman (HVRM/North Judson, Indiana)

To add to what Mr. Beckman has already stated, a railroad cannot pull up track indiscriminately. There is a process at the Surface Transportation Board which must be followed. ANY use of an existing rail line for continued rail service, in any form (short line, tourist, museum), supercedes abandonment and removal of the track.

If a museum or other preservation group finds itself in that situation, help is as close as the nearest STB attorney. A little over a decade ago CSX filed to abandon 140 plus miles of Western Maryland track in West Virginia. The State took exception to that, and with the help of a railroad consulting firm of which one of their principals is a poster on this forum, was able to negotiate the purchase for 6 million $$$.

One possibility is that the right of way can be transferred to the museum and be rail-banked (suspends the abandonment process and removes the railroad's tax burden) and the museum purchases the track and improvements at scrap value. The museum then ends up "owning" the railroad and can operate on it.

This is not quite as good as true ownership, since a rail-banked line can be re-activated if a potential customer exists and a qualified operator will provide service. In that case the new operator would have to purchase the rails, etc. from the museum. The likelihood of this happening depends on the development potential of the line in question.

A potentially bigger problem of owning the land your museum sits on is if the historic site is coveted by local leaders for a "better" project, as happened with the Hagerstown Roundhouse museum. The roundhouse site itself was wanted by the town fathers for a highway project, and one of the last major complete Class I roundhouses in the East was lost. Excuses like asbestos contamination (which can be abated) can be used to thwart preservation efforts when the advocates of the museum project just don't have enough clout to overcome powerful political interests.

Similar problems occur with the rails-to-trails people, who give lip service to the rail-banking aspects of saving a ROW, but really have absolutely NO intention of EVER allowing a restoration of rail service to a bike trail, once it's established (see linked story in the RDG 2100 thread for an example). They have to be fought tooth and nail to prevent them from tearing up every possible museum/tourist railroad ROW. A major part of the problem is the lack of urban ROW for bike traffic in the U. S. in general, but the railroad preservation community really can't solve that problem too.

To reply to WM303's post: true, the STB can stop an abandonment, but as you state, the RR can ask for a price for the piece of track, and with steel prices where they are today, even the scrap value can go into the millions. When the ex-GT Holly Sub was abandoned the SRI (owners of the 1225) did put together a proposal to acquire the line, but CN wanted millions of dollars for it. Shortly after it was torn up.

The Hagerstown situation was a travesty, and 10 years later the site is still a vacant lot.

Chris.

> the right of way can be transferred to the museum and be rail-banked

Not so. When a railroad files a Notice of Exemption at the STB, the end result of that process is the transfer of ownership of the rail line in question. Railbanking is only in play when the tracks are removed and the right-of-way is placed in rail bank for possible future use, which is of little use to a museum which finds itself landlocked and cut off from the nations rail infrastructure.

> The roundhouse site itself was wanted by the town fathers for a highway project

That was not the issue. The roundhouse site was completely captive inside the property limits of an active CSX yard. CSX wanted the State of Maryland and/or the City of Hagerstown to indemnify them from any future litigation (the recurring liability issue) resulting from someone getting injured on the property subsequent to the transfer of ownership. Neither would and the result was the demolition of the facility.

Railbanking is putting a railroad right of way to another public use, with the proviso that it can be reclaimed for regular railroad use under certain conditions.

Other public use can be something other than trails, such as commuter rail, energy transmission, other forms of mass transit, conservation, or recreation. A recognized nonprofit museum can successfully argue that its tax-exempt educational mission involving interpretation of an historic railroad and/or historic equipment qualifies as a public use in this context. In such a case removal of the rails is not necessary.

Whether being disconnected from the national rail infrastructrure is an impediment to the museum's operations depends on the museum. For example, a museum operating only historic non-interchangeable equipment, and with few prospects of receiving future acquisitions by rail, does not necessarily care about such a connection.

Chapter 3 of the STB's "Overview of Abandonments and Alternatives to Abandonments is useful.

So why was that such a big issue in Hagerstown, but had not been an issue with other parcels of property and buildings that CSX has donated/sold over the years?

And lose all those wonderful opportunities to have the Class 1's rip draft gear out of their sockets, and generally deliver your historic equipment in a shambles? For a significant number of museums, and certainly every trolley-only museum, having an interchange is irrelevant. Having Silk Road on speed dial - now that is important.


You surely mean a different branch and a different town, since the rails to Walled Lake are intact - and in fact, for sale, as Coe Rail (its successor) has thrown in the towel. Now's the time BWMC! They could have themselves a sweet little tourist line, and could make money any weekend they choose to.


CNW would not rip it up without having a conversation with IRM. This conversation would likely end in IRM owning the line to the nearest interchange. In the 80's, they were giving away railroads for next to nothing.

As for eminent domain, (a) it doesn't work on railroads. b) It has a little known aspect: the taker must PAY for it. In practical application, it looks like the National Capitol Trolley Museum.

So please, God, let the eminent domain tornado hit MY railway museum and whisk me off to the land of Oz where I can redesign from a clean slate and fix every problem!

It's worked 100% for those who have bought respectable acreage. Would it work for anyone? Maybe not. Depends.


Asteroids too!

There's always risk. The point of risk management is to mitigate all that you can. The #1 way to manage property related risks is to own it.


You have to factor for the additional revenue (and other mission-advancing benefits) the land/facilities will bring you.

As said, it has worked very successfully for those who have done it. Now granted this hasn't been tested in a world of $10/gallon gas, but I have a hunch we Americans will sort that out. We are married to our land use, after all.


Don't make the "perfect" the enemy of the "good". Just yesterday I had a fellow telling me that if you can't restore a piece to EXACTLY the historic configuration, then you are perpetrating a fraud on the consumer, because what you are showing them is NOT what was. Part of interpretation is explaining the difference. This is not 1908. The very CONCEPT of a streetcar makes no sense unless people understand the roads were paved with a 50/50 mix of mud and horse poo. So you interpret the "This ran in cities" bit as well.