There have been lots of messages posted here decrying the idea of a recreational trail next to the WM Scenic. While optimism does not seen to be a dominant characteristic of railroad preservationists, in this case I am optimistic. I think there is a good chance that the addition of the trail could be very positive for the WMSR and for recreational railroading in general.

The trail is likely to have a positive effect on patronage, the lifeblood of any tourist railroad. The exposure of the WMSR will be significantly enhanced. Trial users who would otherwise know nothing about the line will see it first hand and may well decide to go for a ride. They will experience the unforgettable thrill of seeing, hearing, and smelling a steam locomotive working hard on a grade. And some may want to experience it again.

The experience of the train rider will be enhanced as well. Particularly for children, the ride can seen a little long with nothing much of interest (to them)to do or see. Being able to wave at trail users and seeing them wave back will make the trip more enjoyable for the non-railfan.

The trail may lead to a great new market for the railroad -- one way riders. Taking the ride uphill to Frostburg with your bike in the baggage car and then riding your bike downhill for 16 miles back to Cumberland would be a great one day bike outing and should attract new patrons to the railroad.

Again thinking optomistically, if the trail and the railroad do in fact work well together, each enhancing the experience of the other, it could lead to cooperation instead of antagonism in other corridors. If it can work anywhere, it should work here. The railroad operation is first class. The trail segment is an important one of national interest to the trail types. Since this line was double track, the embankment is wide enough for both a single railroad track and a trail. Since there are very few grade crossings, there will be very few gaps in the fence where trail users can run afoul of the tracks. And there seems to be enough political will to find enough money to do it right instead of just slapping down some asphalt.

I suspect even that the small, statistically insignificant group of railfan photographers will enjoy using the trail to reach vantage points which were previously not easily accessible.

It will be vry interesting to see how it all works out.

Peter Schmidt



pjslks@ix.netcom.com

This whole scenario should be interesting indeed. The last I heard, the trail folks still haven't come up with a solution to that tunnel. Can you just imagine a DC yuppie being stuck inside there while 734 comes hammering through? But, those trail folks keep pressing on with a "damn the torpedoes" approach.

> the trail folks still haven't come up with a
> solution to that tunnel

The solution to that tunnel is don't go through that tunnel. The Rails-to-Trails anarchists were offered a very viable alternative route from Frostburg to Cumberland via the Cumberland and Pennsylvania right-of-way through Mt. Savage.

Instead, they not only insisted on the main line route, they built a switchback to take the trail from the site of the WM station on the main line up the hill to the C&P station that is at the end of the line for the Scenic Railway.

Remember the Western Maryland caboose that used to be next to the station? I say "used to be" because it isn't there anymore. It's down at the Cumberland station because it got in the way of the "trail".

And don't hold your breath waiting for the State of Maryland to protect their historic treasure. The State is out of the loop. They washed their hands of the Scenic and turned it over to Allegany County.

Most places in America, pedestrians walking on an active railroad right-of-way is called trespassing. In western Maryland, it's called recreation.

> I suspect even that the small, statistically
> insignificant group of railfan photographers
> will enjoy using the trail to reach vantage
> points which were previously not easily
> accessible.

> It will be vry interesting to see how it all
> works out.

> Peter Schmidt

Actually that will have the opposite effect, since the the fence would be BETWEEN the bike path and the Railroad, thus limiting ones view of the train(due to said fence).

Another negative is access for the railroad to places for track work. Right now much of the old second track is a service road of sorts to a number of locations, and the bike path will also eliminate that.

Imagine how unsightly this will be to have an entire railroad fenced on one side. Passengers will be looking through the fence out at the lovely mountains and valley to the north of the railroad. What a shame!

Ohio Central has the same scenario east of Newark for about 6 miles. This is generally why you never see any photo special photographs from this area, it is avoided!

The downside, for Western Maryland Scenic will be the loss of revenue, and good publicity, from all the photo specials that generate awareness, and are a nice diversion for the crews. Folks like Carl Franz and his brush cutters do a lot of work to make these happen. Its all beneficial to the railroad, especially when an article appears in a magazine, as an added bonus.

Hopefully the tunnel will make this issue a problem for the bike people. A suggestion might be for WM scenic to install a passing siding up there, which just happens to take up the area where the removed track is through the tunnel. Then the track would be IN-USE, and bikers would have a real problem wouldn't they!

Just my thoughts.

Greg Scholl


sales@gregschollvideo.com

Gerald,
I recently tried to get permission from Maryland DOT to walk over some of the DORMANT state-owned railroads on the eastern shore and they refused to grant permission on liability grounds. It's unbelievable that the same agency would endorse a trail adjacent to an operating railroad. By the way, it's true that in Maryland unauthorized "entry" upon any railroad property, active or dormant, is a crime. That's why I requested the permission that was ultimately refused. -- Ray

> > the trail folks still haven't come up
> with a

> The solution to that tunnel is don't go
> through that tunnel. The Rails-to-Trails
> anarchists were offered a very viable
> alternative route from Frostburg to
> Cumberland via the Cumberland and
> Pennsylvania right-of-way through Mt.
> Savage.

> Instead, they not only insisted on the main
> line route, they built a switchback to take
> the trail from the site of the WM station on
> the main line up the hill to the C&P
> station that is at the end of the line for
> the Scenic Railway.

> Remember the Western Maryland caboose that
> used to be next to the station? I say
> "used to be" because it isn't
> there anymore. It's down at the Cumberland
> station because it got in the way of the
> "trail".

> And don't hold your breath waiting for the
> State of Maryland to protect their historic
> treasure. The State is out of the loop. They
> washed their hands of the Scenic and turned
> it over to Allegany County.

> Most places in America, pedestrians walking
> on an active railroad right-of-way is called
> trespassing. In western Maryland, it's
> called recreation.


raymondreter@aol.com

I am pleased to see the WN Scenic issue has resurfaced in another RYPN thread. It is very important when my colleagues begin to discuss politics and policy in this thoughtful way. Those of us dedicated to rail preservation find the probabilities of future successes are enhanced not only by the opinions of our colleagues but, also, by the general awareness this discussion creates. And awareness is a prerequisite to action.

There is one item I would like to point out that has surfaced here on RYPN and on off-post notes I have received. I think we should beware of using predicate nominatives like "Rails-To-Trails anarchists" and "radical bikers" and the like. Just as the Viet Cong were considered "anti government insurgents" and "heathen Communists," there was a significant percentage of folks in that area who considered them "Freedom Fighters" and "noble opponents of Western and European colonialism."

Similarly, the initiatives of the Rails-To-Trails crowd are seen by many as one or more of the following:
(a.) a highly noble cause;
(b.) part of the current war on obesity;
(c.) an antedote to urban sprawl;
(d.) highly environmentally friendly;
(e.) an effort to establish a low-impact way of accessing, enjoying, and preserving pristine undeveloped areas;
(f.) an engine of economic development;
(g.) preserving essential linear rights-of-way for future commerce (including railroads, and other public utilities); and/or
(h.) providing low-cost urban and suburban recreational opportunities.

All of these statements have appeared in recent news articles about rail-trail conversions, or in RTC publications.

Tough Questions:
(1.) Do we, as railroad preservationists, have a similar lengthy (and polished) list of reasons to support our interests?
(2.) Are we 1/5th as effective at getting our message out?

I would humbly suggest that, until we can answer YES to these two questions, we should perhaps regard the rail-train special interest group not as the enemy. Rather, we should study their methods and see what we can copy...err, perhaps that should be, see what we can learn and borrow.

amiller@rtms-movietrains.com

Absolutely true. Personally, I can't see anything wrong with the trails program except where trails advocates set their sights on removing extant railroad track that we feel should be used as a railroad. Unfortunately, this has happened numerous times, and the Rails-to-Trails Coalition has offered encouragement to the local groups wanting the track removed. When R-T-C was first started, I tried several times to get David Burwell to work on amending their policies toward extant RR lines, but was unsuccessful.

But again, the fault lies on our shoulders, being poorly organized and often more interested in amusing ourselves with photography and models than in being genuine rail advocates.

ryarger@rypn.org

I have no problem with bike trails or hike trails on former Railroad rights of way. If the tracks are long gone, then its great to use it for a worthwhile cause.

However, this is a WORKING RAILROAD. Its not DEAD yet, it still has rails, and people use it for recreational railroading currently.

When my daughter was younger we were out in Salt Lake City chasing the UP special, and had a free day to sight-see. We found the UP 4-8-4 on display in a park (833 I think??). When my 4 year old daughter saw it her comment was "Look Daddy, a statue engine in a cage". To a large extent that is what the whole Western Maryland Scenic railroad will be except it will be moving through the long cage. This cage is going to consist of a mountainside on the firemans side, and a big fence on the engineers side(Scenic side), when you travel west to Frostburg.
If railway preservation is about preserving the history and the "Experience" then this will surely tarnish both aspects immediately. I have been to this place twice, once in 1994 as we shot for a segment in our America By Rail-Heartland Series. I rode the line twice, once shooting out the rear of the coach, and once in the cab of their Alco FPA4 which no longer runs there. The second time I was there I shot a few pictures of the steam operation in 1995 near the tunnel. I have never done the photo specials, but I can see from being up there along the line, that a fence will really change things forever.

I hope the folks that live in Cumberland and fans in general who go there can help to preserve the line as it is now, before further harm is done. Riding a steam train trip is all about the "Experience", so don't ruin it for the riders.
Just my opinion.
Greg Scholl

sales@gregschollvideo.com

Unfortunately, in this world, liars and fools are just as likely to sway the popular mind as those equipped with logic, reason, and experience.

How else does one explain the the success of Hitlar and his Nazis?

Does there exist any REAL economic information on what if any positive impact Rails to trails has on an area? They may be like a lot of lake traffic; they gas up the boat, buy the beer, bait and baloney before they leave home, use the lade and leave without ever spending a buck at a local place.

It seems to me that once they've spent their money on shoes (at home) and something to eat and drink, a casual hiker has about done all he can do, except maybe clean up after himself. Hike trails don't even employ anyone to speak of.

I bet that the lowest, cheesiest, part time mom and pop tourist train has pumped more real money into its local economy than the most successful (how do you guage something that doesn't take in money)rail trail.

> Unfortunately, in this world, liars and
> fools are just as likely to sway the popular
> mind as those equipped with logic, reason,
> and experience.

> How else does one explain the the success of
> Hitlar and his Nazis?

> Does there exist any REAL economic
> information on what if any positive impact
> Rails to trails has on an area? They may be
> like a lot of lake traffic; they gas up the
> boat, buy the beer, bait and baloney before
> they leave home, use the lade and leave
> without ever spending a buck at a local
> place.

> It seems to me that once they've spent their
> money on shoes (at home) and something to
> eat and drink, a casual hiker has about done
> all he can do, except maybe clean up after
> himself. Hike trails don't even employ
> anyone to speak of.

> I bet that the lowest, cheesiest, part time
> mom and pop tourist train has pumped more
> real money into its local economy than the
> most successful (how do you guage something
> that doesn't take in money)rail trail.

Good point about the economic impact Jim.

Also I might argue this point...How many other bike paths are within 75 miles of Cumberland available to bikers? On the flip side how far away is the nearest steam excursion railroad?
How many are there in Maryland? Maybe 2? I bet there are ton more bike trails.
Get my point?

Greg


sales@gregschollvideo.com

> Similarly, the initiatives of the
> Rails-To-Trails crowd are seen by many as
> one or more of the following:
> (a.) a highly noble cause;
What's noble about it? They aren't out to cure cancer nor expand man's relationship with his fellows or diety, how can wanting a trail to walk or ride on be "Noble"? Noble has a connotation of self sacrifice for the betterment of others. They just want what they want because that's what they want. Period.

> (b.) part of the current war on obesity;

Makes sense to me; lets drive a hundred miles to take a walk. You want a war on obesity, sling some coal.

> (c.) an antedote to urban sprawl;

The only antidote to urban sprawl is to make agriculture at least as profitable as selling the home place off to build McMansions. many of the biggest proponants of RTT are busily screwing up the countryside by there very presence.

> (d.) highly environmentally friendly;

Nothing friendlier to the great outdoors than granola wrappers everywhere.

> (e.) an effort to establish a low-impact way
> of accessing, enjoying, and preserving
> pristine undeveloped areas;

How's about if you are handicapped or elderly? Or is our society so youth and looks oriented that we must put away a train ride that would access the same place for many, many more people that otherwise couldn't participate in arduous physical activity?

> (f.) an engine of economic development;

Lets see, shoes (brought from home), clothes (brought from home), bike (bought from dealer, at home), snacks (brought from home 'cause you don't want to have to carry money and buy inflated price goods from local stores rather than WalMart at home). Maybe one Gaterade per head @ $1.98 per head..........

> (g.) preserving essential linear
> rights-of-way for future commerce (including
> railroads, and other public utilities);
> and/or

You just go and try to put a set of rails on one and see just who fights you the hardest.

> (h.) providing low-cost urban and suburban
> recreational opportunities.

See F above......... how can something be both an economic engine and advocate not spending a lot of money. economic activity by definition requires spending money; it can't be both.

> Does there exist any REAL economic
> information on what if any positive impact
> Rails to trails has on an area?

See the bibliography at the end of this PDF from the Rails to Trails Conservancy. That is more documented information on economic impact of trails than anyone has done for tourist railroading.

http://www.trailsandgreenways.org/resou ... onomic.pdf

Let me also cite a personal anecdote. I spent yesterday morning in the Basin next to the James River in Downtown Lynchburg VA. The (long abandonded) former N&W passenger route through Percival's Island and Blackwater Creek has been turned into a trail through this area, and I have been there before and after the trail went in.

There is no comparison. The Lynchburg waterfront is hopping now on any nice day, whereas 5 years ago it was a deserted wasteland. And the users are not out of town yuppies, they are local people who buy all their gear locally.

It's fine to prefer trains to trails, I do too. But trying to assert that the trail idea doesn't work well, make economic sense, and provide a highly visible benefit much used by many ordinary citizens, is a nonstarter in my book. Trails work, there is anecdotal and research evidence to prove it, and insisting it ain't so when all the evidence suggests it is so gets us nowhere.

My opinion only, your milage may vary.

Economic Benefits of Trails and Greenways
eledbetter@rypn.org

> See the bibliography at the end of this PDF
> from the Rails to Trails Conservancy. That
> is more documented information on economic
> impact of trails than anyone has done for
> tourist railroading.

>
> http://www.trailsandgreenways.org/resou ... onomic.pdf

> Let me also cite a personal anecdote. I
> spent yesterday morning in the Basin next to
> the James River in Downtown Lynchburg VA.
> The (long abandonded) former N&W
> passenger route through Percival's Island
> and Blackwater Creek has been turned into a
> trail through this area, and I have been
> there before and after the trail went in.

> There is no comparison. The Lynchburg
> waterfront is hopping now on any nice day,
> whereas 5 years ago it was a deserted
> wasteland. And the users are not out of town
> yuppies, they are local people who buy all
> their gear locally.

> It's fine to prefer trains to trails, I do
> too. But trying to assert that the trail
> idea doesn't work well, make economic sense,
> and provide a highly visible benefit much
> used by many ordinary citizens, is a
> nonstarter in my book. Trails work, there is
> anecdotal and research evidence to prove it,
> and insisting it ain't so when all the
> evidence suggests it is so gets us nowhere.

> My opinion only, your milage may vary.

> See the bibliography at the end of this PDF
> from the Rails to Trails Conservancy. That
> is more documented information on economic
> impact of trails than anyone has done for
> tourist railroading.

>
> http://www.trailsandgreenways.org/resou ... onomic.pdf

> Let me also cite a personal anecdote. I
> spent yesterday morning in the Basin next to
> the James River in Downtown Lynchburg VA.
> The (long abandonded) former N&W
> passenger route through Percival's Island
> and Blackwater Creek has been turned into a
> trail through this area, and I have been
> there before and after the trail went in.

> There is no comparison. The Lynchburg
> waterfront is hopping now on any nice day,
> whereas 5 years ago it was a deserted
> wasteland. And the users are not out of town
> yuppies, they are local people who buy all
> their gear locally.

> It's fine to prefer trains to trails, I do
> too. But trying to assert that the trail
> idea doesn't work well, make economic sense,
> and provide a highly visible benefit much
> used by many ordinary citizens, is a
> nonstarter in my book. Trails work, there is
> anecdotal and research evidence to prove it,
> and insisting it ain't so when all the
> evidence suggests it is so gets us nowhere.

> My opinion only, your milage may vary.

Here's the question. Is the revitalization due to the trail, or to a financial/public policy commitment to encourage investment in visitor friendly business. I will respectfully maintain, however, that a lot of what the rails to trails people put out as economic impact ain't exactly the unembelleshed truth.

A revitalized urban entertainment district using an abandoned rr row is one thing, but a trail in the boondocks is quite another.

Question: What impact could an historic streetcar system have had on the waterfront?

You put together a feasibility study for a tourist train, and it had better have quite a bit of truth or you're through as far a private OR public investment is concerned; massaging the numbers on a skinny park is likely standard operating procedure.

I guess what I am saying is I don't trust their evidence.

As far as preferring trains to trails, I know that if I save a railroad that serves the last few industries in town, then, by gosh, I know I have done something. If I lose to a bunch that wants a place to hike, those industries will likely head elsewhere.

Which is better? Saving what industry is left, maybe doing some sort of an excursion train to satisfy the need for recreational economics or peddling a few snowcones to locals hiking around town?

> I will
> respectfully maintain, however, that a lot
> of what the rails to trails people put out
> as economic impact ain't exactly the
> unembelleshed truth.

Jim:

I read with interest your very thoughtful rejoinders to some of the Rail-Trail arguments I listed in a recent post. These Rail-Trail benefits were extracted from a number of different publications. My citations of them did not constitute an endorsement of their validity. I have also imported a comment from your other post on this subject. Be assured that I welcome and respect your comments and discussion.

Earlier in this thread, my colleague Mr. Ledbetter responds to one of your comments by providing a link to some of the Rail-Trail research. Mr. Ledbetter should be thanked for taking the time to round up this important series of citations. His work allows us to discuss an important issue --- the value of economic research.

Understand that I make a part of my meager annual income doing market research, consumer surveys, and economic impact analyses. In general, the Rail-Trail community has a reputation for "doing pretty decent science" and is widely respected for it. They have been quite conservative in their claims (no Tenn-Tom Waterway or Worlds Fair hype). Accordingly, when the Rail-Trail lobby speaks, people with REAL political clout tend to listen.

If the railroad preservation movement hopes to develop and successfully advocate favorable national public policies, it will need to "play in the major leagues." Emotion will have to give way to science. Having good research -- done by respected researchers; with valid research designs; using realistic assumptions; and analyzed in a thoughtful and unemotional manner -- will be essential to winning credibility.

I hope you and others will consider the value of "good science." Making carefully-executed, scholarly research part of the railroad preservationist movement's policy arguments will yield major long-term benefits. It will take us a lot further than unsupported opinions.

Cordially,

Art


amiller@rtms-movietrains.com