Taxpayers pay half of costs when D&SNG starts fires: Report

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Sat Dec 15, 2018 3:27 pm

I'm a-jes' gonna leave this here for review:

https://durangoherald.com/articles/2544 ... arts-fires

Quote:

The Durango & Silverton Narrow Gauge Railroad’s coal-burning locomotives have a long history of starting wildfires on public lands, with about half the firefighting costs falling on the taxpayers.

According to a 20-year snapshot of fires started by the D&SNG in the San Juan National Forest, the U.S. Forest Service has billed the railroad $1,195,265 for putting out the wildfires.

Of that amount, the D&SNG has paid only $623,078 – about half.

It is a reoccurring theme in two decades’ worth of fire investigations: A cinder from the D&SNG’s coal-burning engine will start a fire in the national forest. The Forest Service will send crews to fight the blaze. Investigators will deem the D&SNG at fault and send the railroad a bill for suppression costs.

But in almost every instance of several major fires started by the D&SNG, the railroad comes back with a lower counteroffer, often denying its locomotives were the cause of a fire.

And the Forest Service, time and again, agrees to the railroad’s marked-down offers.

You might want to read the whole thing.

DWH · **Joined:** Thu Sep 14, 2017 4:38 pm **Posts:** 46

Makes sense to me. I bet the over and under on taking someone to court to extract that remaining 600k isn't worth the time.

softwerkslex · **Posted:** Sun Dec 16, 2018 7:44 am

Who pays when it is a cigarette?

WVNorthern · **Posted:** Sun Dec 16, 2018 9:48 am

Or lightning?

John T · **Joined:** Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:05 pm **Posts:** 1270

In the case of a man caused fire (burning brush, camp fire, etc.) if the person who caused it can be convicted they, or their insurance company, pay some of the cost. Natural causes falls to the taxpayers. A big fire in Oregon was caused by a kid with fireworks. It is a safe bet that none of the cost was recovered.

Ron Travis · **Joined:** Sun May 15, 2005 2:22 pm **Posts:** 1543

As I understand the article, the Forest Service investigated and concluded that the D&S started the fires, but could not actually prove that. So, I guess the Forest Service is just issuing an opinion. Then naturally D&S claims the Forest Service opinion is wrong, and thus refuses to pay the claim. Then the Forest Service lowers their claim, and D&S pays it. The article seems outraged that D&S is getting away with something. But it could just as easily be that the Forest Service is getting away with something.

Steamguy73 · **Joined:** Wed Dec 24, 2014 3:15 pm **Posts:** 635

Don’t listen to the Durango herald they’re a very biased website towards the railroad and it’s ambitions.

softwerkslex · **Posted:** Sun Dec 16, 2018 2:12 pm

Between diesels and oil burning, I think D&S will close out this discussion.

mspetersen · **Joined:** Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:13 pm **Posts:** 101

The Forest Service isn't exactly unbiased themselves. For an interesting read: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0742H7YJB/ref=oh_aui_d_detailpage_o05_?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Alan Walker · **Posted:** Tue Dec 18, 2018 3:43 pm

The fires were a topic of side discussion that I had with some others in the industry at the Heritage Rail Alliance conference. With the ongoing drought situation here in the west and other considerations, I would strongly suspect that the days of coal firing in our region are numbered. Oil firing is lower risk and that may be what it comes to if the steam locomotives are to keep running. I should note that the HRA train trip up to Cumbres Pass ignited two brush fires (in November).

Ron Travis · **Joined:** Sun May 15, 2005 2:22 pm **Posts:** 1543

It sounds like D&S is believed to have started many fires with their locomotives. But in few or none of those cases, have D&S trains ever been proven to have been the cause.

If a fire starts near the track shortly after a D&S train passes, is that sufficient evidence to prove that a D&S train started the fire?

If so, that would require ruling out arson as the cause. How do you do that?

Kelly Anderson · **Joined:** Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:52 am **Posts:** 2477

PMC · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm **Posts:** 2870

I lived in Denver when the 2002 Hayman Fire was started by a firefighter who didn't want to be transferred out of state, still the largest fire in Colorado history, five firefighters died. The sky was red in Denver for over a week.

I still would like to see this device, posted by Shogo Takizawa a few months back, tested, though it may be too late for coal fired engines at this point.

Ron Travis · **Joined:** Sun May 15, 2005 2:22 pm **Posts:** 1543

Kelly Anderson wrote:

Ron Travis wrote:

If a fire starts near the track shortly after a D&S train passes, is that sufficient evidence to prove that a D&S train started the fire?

In this case, a "volunteer firefighter" "discovered" the fire immediatly after the train had passed. Around here, there are lots of volunteer fire departments in small towns, and a volunteer firefighter gets convicted of arson every couple of years, i.e. he gets a little too enthusiastic for his own good.

In this case, I have no faith that the fire wasn't started by the "fire fighter". It was 37' from the track, which is near the recognized limit that locomotives can throw sparks hot enough to start a fire. He was video interviewed about it while standing on the tracks, and there is no burned vegetation in sight in the video.

I had similar suspicions when reading the article about the firefighting role of the local residents living near the fire origin.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Sat Dec 22, 2018 3:46 pm

If the investigating authorities are on top of their game--which, of course, is never guaranteed--the possibility of "arson by firefighter" has been, or is being, investigated. It's not just a theme for TV first-responder dramas, after all.

Investigating these kind of possibilities are routinely part of how qualified, thorough investigators and detectives work--and is also part of just why police/authorities are reluctant to release "details" of the "ongoing investigation" while such investigating is ongoing.