Well, he isn't a good "historical" talk show host if he is trying to hang the abandonment of the NSL on General Motors. He's just plain wrong and anti-historical. Bottom line, there is NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that General Motors had anything to do with the abandoment of the North Shore Line. I don't care what your beloved radio host says, there has probably been more written about the NSL than any other interurban, and this allegation appears nowhere. Why? Because it isn't true.

Also, many of the GM conspiracy enthusiasts fail to realize that most large-scale streetcar abandoments either occurred in non-National City Lines owned properties (Chicago), or were accomplished either by public entities or after NCL sold the property to public entities (Los Angeles, St. Louis, Chicago, Philadelphia, Pacific Electric, etc.).

I know you are probably saying "But wait! GM people went to jail and GM was found guilty of anti-trust violations!" You are only somewhat correct. A few NCL executives from the Twin Cities were convicted of essentially inside deals to sell the TCRT cars for scrap. GM was found guilty of trying to monopolize the market of transit buses. That is a different thing than a conspiracy to replace streetcars.

Frankly, if you educate yourself about the state of the street railway, interurban and transit industry in the United States, you will see a lot of factors at play, and GM trying to take over and shut down streetcar lines solely to sell buses isn't one of them.

Finally, the NSL, while much beloved by fans, was a rolling antiquie show by 1963. The newest equipment, the Electroliners, were over 20 years old. The NSL had trouble finding replacment parts, like Westinghouse HL control resistors. What profit there was to be made simply was not enough to invest in the railroad to modernize it. The management, mostly left over from the Insull era, was still stuck in the 1920s, in many ways. By 1963, the two paralleling steam railroads in commuter territory, the Milwaukee Road and the C&NW were modernizing their fleets with bi-level cars and air conditioning. the NSL could not compete.

Bottom line, none of this crazy ranting about GM and conspiracy theories has anything to do with the F&W in Califnornia.

Finally, if you want to read an accurate work about the demise of the electric traction industry in the U.S., read George Hilton's book on inteurbans. Bradford Snell, the attorney who started this whole nonsense was taken apart in testimony by Hilton. Snell simply made wrong and inaccurate claims. Sadly, it's easier to spout the consipracy theory than engage in a balanced discussion of what really happened.

And yet another active but out of service railroad line, owned by NS and not interested in abandoning or selling the corridor, is under intense pressure by a trail group:

http://www.ecustatrail.org/ecusta-trail-news.html

In this story, the trail group stops short of endangering their non-profit status (unlike ARTA in the Adirondack situation) but puts intense political pressure on the elected officials:

Transylvania County Commissioner Larry Chapman said the issue is economic development, not recreation-based development. As long as the railroad line creates the potential to attract a new job-creating industrial plant, Chapman is in favor of keeping it. "Our board has already taken a majority vote in support of keeping that rail line open," he said. "We're in favor of keeping that rail line as long as that property still has the opportunity to be developed. You might want to talk to the railroad. They've not made any indication they're ready to abandon that rail line."
Shelton said there are plenty of good reasons that Norfolk Southern should want to railbank the tracks. "If everybody is in agreement that industry (using rail) will never return to Transylvania County, there is no need for Norfolk Southern to hold that line," he said.

Over and over and over again.

Jim

I think this ties in with Jim's commentary and mine on the Adirondack thread about this older New York Times story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/02/upsho ... .html?_r=2

Jim brought up what he thought was an interesting change in methodology that had a big spike in rail-trail mileage in 2011. I note that rail trail mileage, based on this new methodology has declined in the last couple of years.

Speculation: The change in methodology was to include "potential" rail trails, such as this NS branch, vs. trails that have actually been converted. The decline represents, in part, the revival of the railroad industry, with inactive lines that are waking back up.

Among other things, this means the trail crowd is running out of lines to convert to trails in desirable locations. Those last three words are the key. Nobody seems to be interesting in making a really bikeable trail out of, say, the South Park to Alpine, not with it being 200 miles from anywhere, not to mention 4% grades at elevations that would give most people breathing problems and winters that seem nine months long. No, what's coming back are railroads in towns, which will need them (as in the Transylvania County example), which is where people are as opposed to Alpine.

Now, suppose you put yourself in the Rails to Trails' shoes. You are running out of what are, for your purposes, viable trail locations. You're organization, like many others, whether for profit or non-profit, is wanting to grow. You're finding you are running into limits to your growth. What are you going to think? What are you going to do? What will you say about big, "stuffy," "outmoded" railroads that stand in your way--whether they be heritage railroads or Class Is?

There are those who say unlimited growth is the goal of the cancer cell.

I think the spike between 2010 & 2011 also might be a result of increased funding from a very liberal/progressive administration in Washington DC.

The leadership of the Rail trail Conservancy has close ties to the environmental/green lobby. Health, conservation, renewable energy, alternative transportation, Greenways, etc. are all tied into this. Noble causes perhaps, but they do represent a more invasive government that believes it knows what best for all, whether we choose it or not.

I have mentioned the comments I have read from trail supporters that believe their support of a rail-trail project is a contribution to keeping commercial and industrial development at bay, to improve the environment.

Near Pittsburgh, the Turtle Creek Industrial RR is about to be lost to dual trail groups, the Turtle Creek Greenway Project, and the Murrysville Trail Alliance. The details of the pending abandonment/trail conversion are suspect in my mind. This is deep in Marcellus Shale country, and these old branch lines here have new life. The operator of the line is Dura Bond, a company that applies coating to structural steel and pipe, especially that used for natural gas transmission lines. Dura Bond/TCKR was interested in expanding rail service on the old Turtle Creek Branch of the PRR and for years dodged attempts by the trail groups to buy the property. There was a single storm in 2009 that caused a good deal of damage to the line. A $10 million flood control project by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) in Export PA included rebuilding of the three track yard and provisions to allow rail service to pass through a new impoundment dam:


However, when the railroad began work to repair washouts on other parts of the line, the same ACE issued a stop order, preventing them from continuing the repairs, effectively putting them out of business. This is where something stinks, and I can't get answers to my questions. Dura Bond will not return calls, and local elected representatives are ignoring this.

But the trail groups are well pleased. One comment I have from a trail supporter: "the rail-trail will prevent commercial development along Turtle Creek forever". Was it too expensive to repair the line? Was some species of snail in danger? Is this a victory for the anti-fracking crowd? I don't know but the trail group is closing in on $1M to purchase the line and begin conversion, and the Regional Trail Corp in West Newton received $15 million in public funding between 2007 and 2011 (IRS Form 990 filing in 2012) and they are the "Mother Ship" of trail projects here in Westmoreland County.

The RTC is well organized and aggressive, even to the point they have an early warning system in place on social media to be alerted to "infrequent and unprofitable rail corridors that make good candidates for conversion."

Jim

It pays to impoverish your word power???

How did it become fashionable to reject intelligent, reasoned dialogue (in this case, the words that make this easier)? Are we so obsessed with the insane ignorance we see on talk shows and reality-TV that we're starting to think that's a possible road to success?

Never has been so far...

What does it say when a guy takes umbrage to the word "shoplifter"...

I concur with Mr. McDowell's comments above. There is nothing wrong with sustainability, and indeed, if we had thought more about it, we wouldn't have some of the problems we have today (like being dependent on vehicles that need a fuel that's more expensive every year).

The problem is that the people who have been promoting sustainability have limited vision. They should include rail in the mix, which has a very low impact compared with a lot of other things, especially if the railroad is already there!

Now, we could also take note that some other people are looking into even more in the rail field. Check this out from Hungary:

http://www.solarpowertoday.com.au/blog/ ... n-hungary/

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php/ro ... rvice.html

http://www.hungarotrain.hu/eng/vili.html#4

Note that this is on a heritage road.

http://www.narrowrail.net/old/hungary/i ... =kiralyret

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXoUgGBtd7I

Looks like a pretty ride:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FImE2ITrQ8U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxVDDxdJjig

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGVzPinH-G0

A lot of people here like to tinker. This looks like it would be right up that alley.

Judging from the amount of material on the internet, it also seems to have garnered all sorts of attention far beyond what you would expect of a home made rail car on a relatively obscure line in Eastern Europe. Wouldn't you like as much positive attention for where you are?

I seriously doubt it would shut up the trail people--I think they hate railroads anyway--but it would win points from others, and maybe would help marginalize the anti-railroad crowd.

Nobody is suggesting the banning of words. Words are not the problem. It is just that some words become buzzwords, and thus take on a meaning in a broad range of implications that have nothing to do with the dictionary definition. So it pays to know that enhanced definition arising from a buzzword status. For instance, the word “sustainable” has acquired a buzzword meaning that amounts to a complete lecture on a proper lifestyle that conforms to one particular agenda vision.

“Stakeholder” is what you become when that vision wants to take your railroad away from you and turn it into a trail. When I said one should be wary of the word, “stakeholder,” I did not mean that one should avoid using the word. I meant one should be wary of what its buzzword message signals, and be ready to take defensive action.

In the buzzword meaning, I find that “stakeholder” is used by those who have the power to take your stake away from you, and think that making you aware of that fact by calling you a stakeholder somehow makes it fair.

Two ideas I wanted to get some feedback on in this vein. I know several industries have what I term "defensive groups": org.'s that band together industries of a certain type for a shared legal and political coverage. For instance, here in Kentucky, there were a spat of lawsuits over horse owners, targeting the little guys out doing non-commercial "fun" activities with horses. So the Kentucky Horse Council came up with a huge insurance plan for their members, as long as they are engaged in non-commercial activities.

Why is there not a defensive organization that bands together Class I's, Regionals, Short-lines, Museums, etc?

Also up for discussion, is political clout. Why do Amtrak, Class I's, and Regionals not have a Super PAC? It seems the train crowd is lacking representation.

While Amtrak does have a Government Affairs Dept. for purposes of dealing with Congress and state and local governments, they are a quasi-public entity, and can't engage in outright politics. Also, if you haven't noticed, some railroads really don't want to deal with Amtrak or passenger traffic, or any special moves in general. So, they really don't share the same interests Amtrak does. Besides, there is the AAR, which generally puts forward the industry line with the feds, plus regionals and shortlines have their own trade associations. Additionally, because of the secrecy allowed by recent Supreme Court decisions, we really don't know that at least some railroads, or their owners/managers, aren't giving to super PAC's. I guess what I'm getting at is that just because they all are railroads doesn't mean they always have the same needs and goals, but are sometimes in conflict with each other.

Interesting food for thought. It seems so obvious that Amtrak isn't allowed to do that that it slipped my mind. It just seems to my mind though that all railroads would have a common interest in defending their rights-of-way. Even a marginal shortline produces car-loads for a connecting line. Or so my admittedly armchair thinking goes.

It's a good thought, but unfortunately not shared with a lot of the "professional" railroad industry, many of whom see passenger service as something they would rather not fool with and the heritage business as even more undesirable.

It's too bad, because as noted, the trail groups and others have their knives out.

The railroad industry, in my opinion, has been extremely short-sighted in dealing with the public to the point that railroads are for many people invisible. When they do want to expand, as in the case of the Florida East Coast expressing interest in reviving passenger service, and doing so with their own money, they wind up being accused of buying politicians, of wanting to ruin towns with trains streaking through at 100 mph, of wanting to kill people with said trains at 100 mph, of trying to con everybody that this is really about more freight trains, that the railroad in question will demolish all sorts of structures and disfigure a state park by adding a second or third track (which used to be there between the 1920s and 1965), of causing more pollution with more trains, etc., etc. . .

Too many have failed to learn the lessons of steam and heritage, as illustrated by Union Pacific (and the original Southern steam program and its recent revival), as useful tools for outreach, to tell their story, and indeed just to celebrate being a railroad!

I've heard stories that stockholders--stockholders, mind you--thought Burlington Northern was closing up shop when that road joined Amtrak.

The railroad industry, as a rule, does not properly appreciate its heritage or know what to do with it. It understandably wants to just be left alone, but as we are seeing, that's not an option.

I once used the word "stakeholder" in an internal document Some guy disrupted the meeting by asking if I meant that an outside organization should be deciding the matter. He felt we all urgently needed to know that there is some sort of public-speaking club called the ”Stakeholders".

I asked him if he was a promise keeper.

Jeff -

Thanks for update. I just checked their website and it says that they are "still in business" and offering train rides. Isn't this the outfit that has the ex-D&NE 2-8-0?



Les

Reading this post by the president of the F&W makes me wonder if all of this was just more senseless political games for control. Granted I have not heard or read the other sides argument, but from what I just read, The F&W has done nothing wrong. If what is said is true, this is a sad and unfortunate situation. Its a long story, but it does help understand a lot of the situation by the end of it.

http://www.fwry-blog.com/f--w-presidents-blog

I believe that the Filmore and Western has given up and is liquidating.