Some other things:

http://adirondackdailyenterprise.com/pa ... l?nav=5005

http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/artic ... 920636.php

The writer of that letter claims to have a "well-informed opinion", but then he says:



The line between Utica and Remsen is the Mohawk, Adirondack & Northern freight railroad and has been since 1991, when it was acquired from Conrail.

The person in this article claims to be informed, but from the sounds of it, he is anything but. His opinion seems to be based entirely on "facts" that ARTA has come up with. $44 million is the extreme high end DOT estimate for 40 mph operation. To claim, from another state, without seeing it himself, that it will cost more makes me suspect of his whole case.

From the Adirondack trail group's Facebook page:

"Make sure you pick up the Nov/Dec Adk Explorer mag.
Brian Mann wrote a terrific exposé on Adirondack Scenic Railroad's operation and long term viability. Coming to a newsstand soon."

Supposedly due out next week.

So, watch for lies in the magazine article, might make for a good law suit to stifle some of the misinformation...

Steve Hunter

In the know your enemy department....

The Adirondack Explorer magazine's advertising sales page, with demographics:
http://www.adirondackexplorer.org/advertise

Current stories to give an idea of the editorial direction of the publication. (Oops, turns out to be more links than copy)
http://www.adirondackexplorer.org/latest-park-news


That said, it is still important for the Adirondack RR to build their own positive PR and to relentlessly pitch the positive impacts of the railroad. The Catskill Mountain RR folks are getting wise to this, though it might have helped if such outreach had started sooner.

In any instance, you cannot be insulated from the community you operate in, or the neighbors who hear/see/smell your operations. It is also wise to identify and manage your impacts (junkpiles/scrap, weed management, paint on buildings and equipment).

Michael Seitz
Missoula MT

It would be fun if the trail types got their way, if only to then watch them rant and rave about the noise, smoke, dust, etc. from the 4-runners, dirt bikes, and other machines roaring up and down the right of way behind their fine homes.

Keeping an eye on the opposition:

First up, a public radio interview with Adirondack Railroad people, can't listen to it yet (my wife is playing her piano about three feet away), but it's here for reference:

http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/ ... c-railroad

Trail group's Facebook comment:

Adirondack Rail Trail [Administrator]: "ASR radio interview. An eye opener for sure."

Other material from the Facebook page, opening comment and replies, only edited to add quotation marks and eliminate Like buttons and time notes:

Adirondack Rail Trail [Administrator]: "After reading the Adirondack Scenic Railroads entire proposal for the Remsen to Lake Placid Corridor I find more information about using the railroad to control access to the Wilderness areas of the Park than to open access to the Park. It's more about limiting access than of expanding access. It's more about keeping people inside of rail cars then outside participating in active exploration. It's more about event creation than trail creation. In fact there is virtually nothing about creating trails in the corridor at all. This is no RAIL and TRAIL proposal at ALL! No wonder they didn't disseminate it to the public. ARTA needed to FOIL it to get a copy. Makes for very interesting reading. Hmmm..... Who's pandering to the environmental community here?"

Replies:

Ron LaScala: "Hmmmm interesting! Not surprising at all. Usually when people resort to calling names and whatnot it has been my experience it's usually the pot calling the kettle black."

Charlie Frenette: "Hope. This is real news. Do you think an extract or synopsis published would help inform and cause people to see the real issue. The reason I ask is that I see the real issue being how to create the infrastructure to capture and monetize the opportunity the trail creates. The commercial aspects are what will benefit the community. The access is what creates the commercial opportunity. The monetization of the opportunity is what creates jobs and wealth. If blocked, nothing changes and unfortunately the rail corridor becomes the metaphor for our community... rotting ties, rusting rails, opportunity squandered."

Bill Lahey: "I want to ride my sled all the way to Placid, and spend my $ all up and down a real TRAIL."

Sled Shed T.V.: "Same here Bill !! I would spend money from one end of the trail to the other, even bag trips and overnights in areas we now can hardly get to..... I would love to ride to and overnight in Lake Placid and then ride back down to Old Forge the next day....."

The Adirondack Rail Trail: "The local politicos get it. At least most of them do. You've got to get to your Assemblymen and Senators to push this thru."

The Adirondack Rail Trail: "Tupper's getting a new groomer this season so should be able to do a better grooming job if we get enough snow. Come on back now ya hear. Your sleds are always welcome in Tupper."

Cynthia Wilczak: "Really and you were surprised. They don't want anyone to use our land. Can't wait to ride this winter!"

The Adirondack Rail Trail: "We are currently carefully reviewing ARPS 'business plan' and will provide commentary soon. But the reality is that the plan focus is clearly on establishing 'tourist train type of experience' and not 'transportation.'"

The Adirondack Rail Trail: "So the game plan for ASR is to use the threat of Enviromental groups trying to get rid of the corridor so there are no snowmobiles while courting these same Enviromental organizations saying that they will be the gateway to these areas thus preventing overuse and abuse by limiting access. The snake speaks with forked tongue"

"The snake speaks with forked tongue."

And an administrator thought me a bit extreme by pointing out that "We don't get no respect. . ." Oh well, let them speak that way--it reveals what they really are.

And another thing: If the trail group does have a copy of the Adirondack Railroad business plan, and it was obtained through the New York Freedom of Information Law, then they have the right to put it on their web page as a now-public document. If it is as incriminating as the trail crowd claims it to be, they should be happy to post the whole thing. That they have only posted remarks and comments without the actual document or even quotations from it tells me something is fishy.

http://www.oms.nysed.gov/foil/

http://www.dos.ny.gov/coog/foil2.html

I have seen the railroads business plan (most of it anyway, it is lengthy). It is a well thought out and very detailed document. I'm sure ARTA is aware of that and they are just trying to destroy it's credibility and change peoples mind about it before they get a chance to read it.

To imply that the Adirondack Scenic has evil motives or "speaks with a forked tongue" is ridicules. The railroad is comprised mostly of hard working volunteers that are some of the nicest people you would ever meet. It really shows what kind of expletive delete these anti-rail people are.



Well of couse that is what the business plan calls for... That IS their business! A tourist railroads business plan isn't gonna call for carwashes and popsicle stands! Transportation will be a by-product of the tourist service.

Adjacent landowners, as a rule, don't want the trail OR the railroad. They want nothing in their backyard.



Lawsuits should not be entered into lightly. Defamation suits doubly so. Defamation suits against the media -- double, then carry the 3, hold on, have to get a calculator...

Some other things, starting with an article based on a public radio report that was allegedly written by a trail supporter, though if he is prejudiced he doesn't do too badly at telling the railroad side.

http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/ ... -it-happen

I have to say, if the story above is accurate, it points out how railroads struggle--struggle!!--at jobs that are 10 times harder than they should be, at least partially, if not largely, because of, well, "we don't get no respect," including "respect" in the form of outside support. Think of what we could do if we got even the public support for a stadium for high school sports, or a gymnasium! Somebody tell me just how much a facility for such low-tier sporting events really helps out the community, at least economically!!

Other commentary by the same fellow on why he does what he does:

http://blogs.northcountrypublicradio.or ... -railroad/

This unfortunately also brings up what I consider a double standard in regard to railroads vs. anything else, and it applies to ANY railroad--heritage, commuter and transit service, Amtrak, freight--and that is that anything on rails is supposed to "support itself" or be "profitable," but subsidies for anything else--highways (your gas taxes barely pay half the cost of the road system), air service (Essential Air Service subsidies can run into thousands of dollars per passenger), and yes, trails (will the trail people charge tolls to support their operation?) gets a pass. Grrrrrrrrrrrr. . .

Having said that, I will repeat what I have said before. . .we may be "red headed stepchildren," but partially because of that, if you've managed to accomplish great things--and you know who you are--you can be doubly proud of what you've done, because you've earned it!

Final comment: The radio story has a link to a partial version of the railroad's business plan--and it doesn't look bad. Considering the cost of trail conversion, and the lack of direct cash flow from a trail, I think the road has a solid, conservative case. It certainly seems more realistic and more detailed than anything I've seen from trail supporters for the Catskill Mountain trail.

http://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/pdfs/adkrail.pdf

Which brings up the double-standard again--the railroad studies and documents for both this line and the Catskill Mountain are conservative, realistic, and much more detailed, but they get the brush-off from trail supporters, who seem to make numbers up out of the air. How come they get to spin tales and get believed, and we do all sorts of harder, more detailed analysis and get brushed off, not only by the trail people, but by too many others? I've got to say I've had personal experience with this, and believe me, it doesn't feel good. So, if I occasionally shout out something that some people here don't like--well, at least the administrators and the readers will know where I'm coming from.

I completely agree, the comment I'd like to share is "If the numbers are pulled out of thin air and are made up to be fictitious at best, they (the trail supporters) will win as soon as they swoon government officials into believing those numbers and the Economic Development Dollars are Real" , "now we all know they are not" I truly believe that rail trails are a waste of tax dollars and it presents I full list of BS to syphon what little taxpayer monies are available for taxpayer needs, this need for the state owned railroads appears minimal at this time, If corridor investment is gained on the part of these NY Organizations, then the strategies need to make real sense so the TREEHUGGERS and NIMBY's can keep their trap shut about taxpayer monies they did not get!

there is no economic payoff to walking trails I've said it before and I have to say it again, please tell me how 2-200 individuals a day can pay for a ridiculous construction program I don't want to hear its free money from the feds, that's nonsense, that's kind of comment is the reason this countries is so much debt (another discussion), point is the use it or lose it mentality or spend money for the sake of spending is stupid,

REAL VIABILITY IS A PLAN!, JOBS ARE A PLAN, tourists spending real money is a plan,

so my theme here is MAKE A PLAN, Be reserved and optimistic

there are folks that want you all out there in RYPN world to SUCEED I see no success in rail trails, I see quiet places where people can get hurt mugged or worse because there are so few people around, it happens on the New Haven to Northampton/CANAL line on some part of it at least every 3 to 6 months 75% of that line is now a tree huggers paradise most of the route is rural!

Well, the print story is out:

http://www.adirondackexplorer.org/stori ... -questions

It does have some variations compared with the radio transcript, but they seem to be relatively minor (I've only glanced at it, though). Of greater concern are points raised by some people's comments that the author of this piece is also a journalist with the public radio station there, and that there might be a conflict of interest.

Speaking for myself, I'm bugged by a comment by the author/journalist on the radio station's blog page:

http://blogs.northcountrypublicradio.or ... /#comments

First, a comment from one Peter Hahn:

"I for one, and Newt has asked for this several times, would like a realistic discussion of the two business models. I realize there are two competing rosy futures. Teasing out what is realistically likely is probably impossible.

"I am struck always by the math that ARTA’s argument is that economically, $ARTA minus $Train is positive. i.e. They think they will bring in more money so there will be a net gain. It is very possibly true. On the other hand, if ARTA built their trail on some other rail bed, and there are many other places they could built it in a 6 million acre park, it would $ARTA plus $Train, and the snowmobilers would still get to use the tracks when there is enough snow. That would be a lot more money for the region.

Brian Mann's questionable response--at least, questionable to me.

"Peter: the main difference between trail and tourist trains is that tourist trains require a large public subsidy year after year after year for maintenance and trails do not. I’m okay with that for mass transit trains but much less so for tourist trains. They tried the tourist train idea for several decades. It didn’t work. Ok fine. Let’s move on."

Trails don't need the subsidized maintenance a railroad does? Let's see, how much do you have to do that's common between railroads, trails, and roads? There's bridge repair and maintenance, ditching, clearing fallen trees, repairing washouts, repairing frost heaves, keeping trees trimmed so they don't grow into your trail. . .what else am I missing?

And where is the money to pay for this coming from? Will the trail have toll booths? Will the volunteers keep all this up free of charge? Or will it come down to the taxpayer? Or are the trail people hoping to enlist the elves of "Rip Van Winkle?" No, wrong area--those guys are in the Catskills!

Frankly, I'm not terribly comfortable with people who are either so ignorant, or who lie.

Should have done this earlier--checked out what the trail group has for studies:

Rails to Trails report: "The Adirondack Rail Trail--Lake Placid to Old Forge-Stage One:Lake Placid to Tupper Lake Trail Development Plan"

http://www.thearta.org/Lake%20Placid%20 ... _Final.pdf

Stone Consulting Report:"Adirondack Scenic Railroad, North Country Regional Economic Impact Analysis"

http://www.thearta.org/120514-Adirondac ... -final1%20[Annotated].pdf

Adirondack Rail Corridor Economic Impact Study, by Camoin Associates (Trail Consulting Group):

http://www.thearta.org/Camoin%20Rail-Co ... Report.pdf

REMSEN-LAKE PLACID TRAVEL CORRIDOR FINAL MANAGEMENT PLAN/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT--MARCH, 1996

http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/lands_forest ... cidump.pdf

State Land Master Plan:

http://www.thearta.org/SLMP.pdf

An "Outdoor Recreation Economy Report;" I would argue that heritage railroads should be included in this:

http://www.outdoorindustry.org/images/r ... rt2012.pdf

Demographic changes in the "Northern Forest" report (essentially says manufacturing is declining, tourism increasing, therefor the future is in tourism):

http://carseyinstitute.unh.edu/sites/ca ... orests.pdf

An extract from a report on the infrastructure needs for railroads in New York:

http://www.thearta.org/NYSDOT%202008%20 ... xtract.pdf

Application for the railroad to historic status:

http://www.thearta.org/Northwest%20Engi ... 201990.pdf

The big rivals that I see are the reports from Rails to Trails (whose cost figures for trail conversion seem a little low--but none have paving or are ADA compliant), Stone Consulting (railroad consultant, see later comments) and Camoin report (trail consultant).

I've barely glimpsed at these reports, but I recall that someone from Stone Consulting posted an item here that said Stone used a very low economic multiplier in their studies for conservatism--in other words, they don't want to overstate things. The trail people have taken this to be gospel, and they make it out as an admission by the road's consultant that the railroad won't bring in that many people.

The Camoin report sandbags the railroad in terms of rehabilitation costs, citing several rail reconstructions around New York to Class II; the figures cited strongly suggest new track material, which isn't needed here. In addition, there is the question of what they used for an economic multiplier. If it's considerably higher than what Stone uses, then the comparison of economic impact may not be valid.

These are just glimpses of what I saw (didn't have the time to read all this yet), but maybe someone else can start on it, at least until I get a better look.

Well, now I'm wasting time on the public radio site making comments, including a response to one fellow who was wondering if the railroad was still getting some sort of taxpayer support. I wound up using some information from the trail people. A part of my most recent comment is below:



That blooming double standard again!