Revision: The rail is worth more if it's chopped up--like $400 a rail. Factor in the gas or whatever to cut it into smaller chunks.

Using that number, the "gross" scrap value goes up to $104,000 per mile. That's still only 23.6% of the "permanent" trail conversion cost, based on the estimates by the trail consultant. Net will be less, as noted, for the cost of cutting and of transport. Based on what I see as "mark-up" in other businesses (which includes profit margins), it wouldn't surprise me if the net was as little as 50% of the gross--which would put the real, final scrap value at only $52,000 per mile.

Is there some on-line source that would have the nominal value of rail scrap, one that could be used to quote these things, rather than "somebody said something?" It would be good to have market figures available. I've been able to find them for what amounts to new rail, and for other scrap metal, but not for scrap railroad material, at least labelled as such. I can't help but wonder if it might be lumped in with structural steel.

I'll see what I can find out from my sources and report back.

Probably not.

The field is so variable, depending on location, metal, market conditions, etc. One scrapyard may want the rail "as is" because they may have a ready customer for used rail as posts or guardrails. Another may want it chopped. The scrapyard in a big city where there are six of them is going to have to fight harder (i.e. pay more) than the one "out in the country" with no nearby competition, and then factor in transport costs. The yard may pay a little more one week until they get swamped with junked cars and metal, then they drop the price until they can get the stuff processed and shipped out. The weight of the rail varies as well--the "$250 a stick" price I was cited was for specific 130-pound PS from Beth Steel, by a guy who knows and deals with the stuff routinely, and was cited because one museum group wanted to buy rail from another group that had been given several thousand feet of rail from a nearby yard, and the second group's manager had to strike a balance between fiduciary responsibility and helping out another rail museum.

OK, so while you are all speculating....

The 'best source' that is out there, and also accepted by the STB in abandonment proceedings, is the American Metals Market pricing index system (http://www.amm.com). It's relatively sophisticated - you can go in and search both markets and grades (i.e. random rails and OTM scrap) and also do date ranges. If you're really needing it, you can also do historical retrievals. It's on an annual subscription service, we have to use it in here and have for the last decade or so.

It's very much not free. You will not find other online sources for scrap pricing that actually hold up, but that's why. It's as much of a commodity-price market tool as if you were dealing in futures or shares.

Believe me, if there was a better tool out there that was available, reliable, and free, these guys wouldn't get that paid subscription rate they do. And when you DO SEE scrap prices quoted in reports, you should question whether that is 'market price' at the mill, dealer price, or discounted for price of removal, because the AMM numbers are basically priced at the mill or at the dealer, not in the ground. That's another calculation entirely, and if you think about it, picking up rail by the stick is a lot different from rolling it up on a welded rail train and hauling it out for a crop and weld.

Depending on worldwide demand, and what side of the country it's headed to (India? China?) the numbers can fluctuate quite a bit as well, so the number you got three months ago is not the number you'll get today. That's also why you'll see a date set in STB proceedings where everybody agrees that's what we'll price to, and why any appraisal of scrap SHOULD REFERENCE that date as well as how they arrived at the number they did, and the source they used.

I'm by no means advocating scrapping anything, certainly not, but if you're reading scrap valuation numbers and want to challenge or validate them, that's the weapon of choice here, certainly not what you get from your dealer down the street or what you read on the Internet three years ago.

Scrap value varies by location. Usually the closer to a large port you are (most of our scrap goes over seas) the higher the dealer will pay. For instance, as of right now, scrap steel at the port of Albany is going around $270/ton. In Utica it is currently $260. All this becomes irrelevant because there are absolutely no scrap yards in the Adirondacks anywhere near the railroad meaning you will have to carry it large distances to get to the salvage yard. All of this speculation, including ARTA's inflated numbers, are factoring zero cost to get the steel to the scrap yard. You don't get paid for it sitting on the ground. You only get paid once it is delivered. ARTA assumes it will be magically delivered by volunteers or teleportation or something.

I did the math on the actual scrap value of the rails further back in this thread and I still stand by my numbers. I calculated about $2.3 million in value of the rail total (I did not factor the tieplates or spikes) from Big Moose to Placid and I still maintain that any company that actually does the salvaging will take HALF for their work (we ran into this when my organization was forced to scrap our RS3, most companies we contacted wanted half to 2/3 of the value to do the job. We got lucky and found a company on the adjacent property that did it for a flat price). Then you need to factor the cost to dispose of the ties. In one conversation ARTA has the ties as being worth tons of money in resale and in the next they say they are so bad that the railroad is in shambles (so in ARTA logic that means rotten ties = Big $$$). In reality it conservatively costs about $12 per tie to dispose of (based on actual costs of disposal during the Big Moose extension project) and they CANNOT be resold for landscape or construction use in New York state by law.

This all is assuming that the rails will be salvaged at all. NYS is funny when it comes to things like this. It is much more likely that the state will instead store the rails for future re-installation or, more likely, send them somewhere else for re-use. Remember that NYS is in the railroad business and 105lb rail is still in use in other places. I can see rail going to places like fixing the NYS&W Utica branch or used to rebuild the Fonda Johnstown & Gloversville before I see it just going to scrap.

(And comments from ADM IV and Randy)

Something else that may be relevant here is how the 'offered' scrap value drops once there is no real alternative value for the rail in place. Even if a scrapper were to bid some fixed rate for all the rail, I'd suspect that as soon as enough rail had been ripped up to assure no rebuilding, there'd be some convenient bankruptcy chapter action, followed by a new 'take-it-or-leave-it' offer for as little as possible. That's completely within the scrapper mindset as I've encountered it, and I suspect that the general mindset of the trail supporters as expressed so far isn't really up to seeing this coming.

This raises a weird sort of question: Would it make sense to collaborate in early stages of 'track removal' to ensure the rail is lifted cleanly off the ties, by removing spikes carefully, until all of it has been lifted? That at least might make reinstalling rail 'later' a relatively simple process... not that I think it will actually proceed to scrapping, with all the intrusion in a protected area that would entail...

Here is some More FUD from North County Public Radio's Brian Mann (March 19, 2014). The article includes this disclaimer:

And here is another terrible NCPR piece in which Reporter Martha Foley interviews Reporter Brian Mann (March 20, 2014). IMO, they need to read "Journalists Should Stop Interviewing Journalists" article.

Mr. Mann predicts a decision will come soon:

Oh, I don't think I would be too critical of Mr. Mann:

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

That is a most interesting piece. . .highly recommended.

And maybe Mr. Mann is speaking the truth about the NY DOT-Parks people. Put yourself in the shoes of these unnamed bureaucrats. They are hearing all this noise about the rail trail from both sides. They are probably feeling a bit of pressure. I suspect many there may feel, "It's democracy, we should give people what they want," and at the same time are thinking, "This is the only railroad there. We may need it sooner than we think."

By the way, this was linked from the Adirondack Explorer page as well:

http://www.npr.org/2014/03/22/292633629 ... ign=buffer

Mr. Mann, maybe, and I would definitely guess the state people, may feel they are in the middle of the two warring camps.

An older story, but notable for the photograph:

http://www.adirondackexplorer.org/stori ... il-or-both

The photo in question:

http://cdn.adirondackexplorer.org/wp-co ... orris1.jpg

Two things stand out in that photo. One is the good condition of the track, at least compared to a lot of other lines I've seen, including active freight railroads.

The other, in some ways more significant, is how old all three of these prime movers behind the trail are. They all look to be over 60, and I can guarantee that Lee Keet is on the high side of 70, based on his background.

Why is this important? I'm convinced a big part of this fight is generational. I've seen it myself when promoting a light rail line, others have seen in promoting high speed rail in California and other light rail lines, and an Amtrak marketing man told me his agency had measured it in regard to Amtrak nationwide.

The short version is that people now over 90 remember a pre-Interstate, pre-auto dominated country, and would like to see trains back.

A younger crowd, under 60 or so, takes cars for granted, maybe doesn't appreciate them, is environmentally aware, likes electronic texting gizmos (which you can't use while driving), doesn't have money, and also finds driving is no longer fun. (How many of us remember when it was, and hate it now?)

The group in the middle--born between the late 1920s to about 1953-1955, and coming of age between the late 1940s and the first oil crunch of 1973--grew up when the future was supposed to look like "The Jetsons." Tell me, were there any railroad in "The Jetsons," or "Star Trek?" This group thinks we should have gone the way of the stagecoach. We think differently, but that's part of what we are against.

And those three--Keet, McCulley, and Goodwin--are definitely in that age bracket, or in McCulley's case, close to it.

At least, that's one of the things I see.

One more thing--as noted in the radio article linked above, a lot of younger people are finding transit services a better choice for them today. This has been a source of head-scratching for some people, who think it's un-American that young people seem to be uninterested in cars. One fellow gave his age away when he said part of the "problem" is that modern cars are boring, and that the young needed red convertibles with V-8s and fins!

At least one trail advocate does not suffer the "negative waves" problem of the rest of the trail crowd:

http://www.broadwingadventures.com/1/po ... an-it.html

Showing that a compatible rail/trail option is possible, and having it proposed by a trail person will hopefully take some of the momentum for total removal of the railroad away. At least it's a start. Even though the compromise trail route meanders quite a bit more than the railroad, time spent getting from point A to point B isn't the main concern of a hiking/biking trail anyway, is it?

Well, here are the reactions from the trail people at "The ARTA" (Facebook site):

Opening comment:

Hope Frenette
New proposal for Rail and Trail. Have at folks. Can snowmobile groomers get through these areas? Is PROTECT! going to have a conniption fit if new trails are built and old roads are improved for snowmobiling and bicycle riding? Are X-country skiers going to be happy losing their beloved trails to snowmobilers? Check it out and let us know.

Following comments:

Jeff Johnson It will never fly with the "GREEN" lobby. PROTECT has filed suit on the two connector trails that have been built under the Adirondack Park snowmobile plan. They are both located on permitted Wild Forest classified lands. They would tie this up for years in the courts.
13 hours ago · Edited · Like · 1

Mike Busher Yes, it would be nice, but it won't happen. Agreed, it would be another 10 years and nothing but BS and wasted tax payer money. Probably by that time some places along the corridor could be ghost towns...Sad, but people will continue to spend money elsewhere. I wish they'd just use some common sense...
12 hours ago · Like · 1

Jim Rolf Presuming that the sections in blue and red would mean that the rails are still on top of the travel corridor, also means that snowmobiles would not be able to ride this "trail" as a whole until there was enough snow to safely cover the rails. And in a year like this one, where snowmobile trails all around the corridor were able to be and were ridden since January, the corridor could not be ridden until mid-March. So, that leaves out the economic impact that snowmobiles would bring to the communities along the travel corridor for the whole winter season AND to a train that only 7k people/year would ride. That 7k, from their own study, would only impact the few stops the train would make, while snowmobiles support the other ADK communities like Long Lake, Sabattis, Beaver River, and more that are just off the corridor.
11 hours ago · Like · 2

Hope Frenette I cannot tell if the sections that are by the rails are over the tracks but I think they are purported to be areas that would be next to them. There are still bridges to be dealt with.
9 hours ago · Like

Andrew Maidment This is a joke. Right?
9 hours ago · Like · 2

James HoughtaIing Just the thought of spending all that money to make a trail next to the abandoned tracks is making be ill. Imagine if it ever happened like this... people could walk the sections near the tracks and wonder why the tracks are even there? And why am I now forced to ride my bike the long way around all these lakes?
9 hours ago · Like · 1

Jim Rolf "Because in 50 years, a train might run here again because gas will be $20.00/gallon". Lol
9 hours ago · Like

Jim Mcculley Still cheaper to drive@ 20 per gallon. The stupidity of the idea of saving these tracks shows how far we have fallen from having common sense as a people.
8 hours ago · Like · 1

Hope Frenette This is a proposal that is being put out there. I'll give credit for trying but I just don't think that these folks get it at all. DOT says there is no money for track improvements and that there is no anticipation of regular freight or passenger service.
8 hours ago · Like

Hope Frenette So the question remains. Why go through this effort and expense to build a trail that doesn't serve the purpose that we are after? It's not just about making connections to all the communities it's about a relatively flat trail with reasonable distances between communities. A trail that doesn't require reinventing the wheel, that already exists requiring minimal work to complete. Not getting new ROW's, additional permits, building new trails and bridges.

No comments at this time on the other site, "The Adirondack Rail Trail;" in fact, this isn't even posted there at this time.

What did I say earlier about how much of this was a generational fight?

You've got to wonder what these people want. . .and then this turns up (from "The ARTA" Facebook page, comment on trail with rail proposal):

Vincent Bonanno: "Nice thought but how many volunteers will spend the better portion of the rest of their lives cutting these new trails? This idea is similar to how the Hydro Line trail in Ontario is set up and basically the same terrain. That trail on a map shows approximately 75 miles from Bancroft to Calabogie. However, it doesn't show all the ins and outs of the trail on the map. We left Bancroft one morning around 10am anticipating being back to our trucks no later than 2-3pm. That didn't happen! All those cut offs to go around rock cliffs, creeks, and what ever made the 75 mile ride closer to 200. We got to the trucks at 6pm. Now we are talking Canada here. These trails are cut wide and groomed to a T. Not the 8' wide trails that twist and turn around every tree like NYS will permit. Adding these trails would turn that 90 mile, 2 hour ride into a 12 hour event. Anyone who has ridden the Hydro Line in Ontario would know exactly what I'm talking about."

Let's see, he's mentioning 90 miles in 2 hours, that's a 45 mph average speed on what amounts to an off road vehicle. . .top speed at some points, and perhaps actual average cruising speed, would be a good deal higher.

Now we know; at least for this guy, the snowmobile crowd wants a private superhighway for their sleds!