I live in Iowa, and have heard about the bottlenecks out there in the last few months. Mean time, grain is down in the PNW, while up in the Gulf. Source? One dispatcher, a lawsuit by Amtrak, and media articles. Even the USDA has reported the lower numbers in the PNW. How much more evidence do you need?
The answer as to whether the former MILW line is legally railbanked is not entirely clear. There are plenty of web references that suggest it is railbanked. However, this 2011 map from the WA DOT says its status is “abandoned”.
The 2010 version of this map includes a disclaimer statement about Railbanking* in the map legend that does not appear in the 2011 version.
[QUOTE]* Includes only Surface Transportation Board decisions after 1996. May not reflect all Rail Banked lines. Rail Bank lines are eligible to revert to active lines if certain conditions are met.
http://www.wsdot.gov/NR/rdonlyres/891C6021-26CF-4E49-8BFA-1CEBC4FC755B/0/AbandonedActiveRailBank.pdf
[/QUOTE]
Enough loopholes to make any bureaucrat smile! [:$] [;)]
Ken,
I was hoping that Murrary would reply but since he has not, lets talk about the credibility of your sources.
One dispatcher says grain is down to PNW and up to the Gulf. Assuming that he can see both flows at the same time and assuming his report is correct, the statement is not evidence of capacity constraints in the PNW.
A much more likely reason for the observation is that grain consumers in the Pacific Rim are now buying less grain than they were when he started counting and that consumers better served from the Gulf have increased their purchases. It is also possible that ocean carriers, for reasons that I can not know, offfered extra cheap rates to the Pacific Rim from the Gulf Coast. It may or may not be relevant that BNSF mentioned a Fourth Quarter 2013 surge in Agricultural Shipment products in their announcement of their $5 billion Capex program for 2014.The point is that the observation is not evidence of the claim of rail constraints in the PNW
A lawsuit by ATK. About what? Where? What you provided is so vague as to be meaningless.
Media articles. What media articles? Published by whom? Give me a link. Again what you provided is so vague as to be meaningless.
If you are going to claim the moon is made of green cheese, you need to show some evidence. So far you have not.
Mac
Murray: Spend some time with the STB librarian. 1986-1996 is in the donut hole for researchers at STB in the period between hand carried and computer records. [compounded by the reckless custodial actions of a Denver Law School Library and the joke Intermodal Institute]…there is no immediate record of any NITU or CITU. It’s gonna take some digging to get an answer.
Start with Dockets AB7-86(F) and FD-29328 and go forward from 1980 when BN applied to take over the PCE of the MILW.
Edit: So it’s clear, BN only acquired a couple of pieces (69 miles)of the MILW PCE main track across Washington. The bulk of the line abandoned. The 54 mile chunk from Easton-Cedar Falls/Maple Valley-Snoqualmie Falls includes the Snoqualmie Pass tunnel and is now part of the Iron Horse/ John Wayne/Whatevertheycallitthissweek Trail. On the west end of that 54 mile acquisition, they abandoned
Is that in their main building at Evans and University roughly? I was in the Law library when the law school was in the old Colorado Women’s College near Lowry but have never been in the new building even though I was a DU student and lived three blocks from there ten years ago. Would they have records of abandonment applications under the old ICC, say from the seventies? I have been searching for the original abandonment application for my namesake all over the place, at county courthouses etc.
Was re-railing the SP&S considered, vs double tracking the former NP between Spokane and Pasco?
Pure Humbug!
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/12/23/212551/oil-grain-trains-squeeze-amtraks.html
http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/jan/21/fix-bottlenecks-before-panama-canal-work-is-done/
Now, I need to go, tired of doing homework for others. This is not imagined, it has been the topic of discussion for a few months now.
Ken,
None of these articles have anything to do with Snoqualmie Pass or alleged capacity constraints on BNSF between Spokane and the Lower Columbia River or Puget Sound.
The first, from McLatchy, has to do with ATK problems in North Dakota they attribute to new oil traffic from the Bakken, which their nice map shows centered on the ND/MT border. The article also notes doubled grain traffic on BNSF due to big harvest, but says nothing about problems handling that traffic. Anywhere.
The second, datelined Bismark ND, is a heart rending tale about how ATK’s problems in ND are hurting ice fishing guides near Devil’s Lake and funeral homes needing to ship bodies. Devils Lake and the Bakkan are well over 1000 miles away from Washington State and totally irrelevant.
The Columbian piece is a call for more highway spending in Washington State. IIRC the Columbian is published in VAncouver WA, so the geography is at least close. It is an opinion piece, so lots of generalities. It makes no claim that BNSF has cross state capacity problems, and even noted BNSF’s 2013 capital investment in the State of Washington.
I am not asking you to do by homework. I am asking you for evidince to support your claims that Snoqualmie Pass should be rebuilt to relieve congestion on BNSF in Washington State. So far you are 0 of 4.
Mac
So Mac, what you are suggesting is that all is well with BNSF in Washington State and there is no freight stacked up and no congestion there at all?
NOTE: I used to live in Spokane, so I am familiar with the state.
Murray,
I believe that BNSF is busy in Washington. I am not aware of any capacity constraint that has adversely affected service to a serious extent.
You have made claims without any evidence to support them. Since you are making the claims it is up to you to provide some evidence that the claim is true. Without evidence you look like chicken little.
Mac
BNSF’s tunnels are not a capacity constraint?
The trip south and then up the gorge is not a capacity constraint?
WADR, you’re the first person I’ve talked to that does not admit a PNW capacity problem.
Murray,
You have offered nothing by way of fact nor shown any failure to provide service. Given that, why should anyone take seriously the notion of reopening Snoqualmie Pass, which is the absolutely least cost effective way to increase east - west capacity across the state of Washington?
Mac
Mac…I mentioned Snoqualmie as a suggestion, based on my observations and from what I hear from people I know in the industry.
You keep continually pressing me for substantive sources.
How about you providing some sources to justify your claims that there is not a capacity issue on BNSF in the PNSF.
I have no sources, but I seem to recall that prior to the recession PNW was under severe capacity issues. Stampede was at capacity. I have this recollection that the Governor of Wa at the time even suggested pushing to put rail back down over Snoqualmie.
Certainly, I would not be wise to use the economic downturn and resultant drop in shipments as proof of a lack of capacity issues.
Cascade Tunnel is an issue. The question is whether Snoqualmie is a solution. The answer is “probably not unless someone else wants to pay.”
I will just add, as the OP, that my original question was in relation to a time a few decades back, when this Tunnel/ROW in question, was first acquired from Milwaukee I thought that might have been the time to do it.
Just as relevant to discuss it as a current scenario as well…whether it would or would not be a good idea. But as I say, I was wondering if it had been considered “back then”.?
carry on
This is pretty much what I was looking to discuss.
I’m not looking for the MILW to be raised from the dead, so to speak, but if the situation of the BNSF tunnels and the traffic issues along the gorge are such that it is creating an impact, what other solutions (to include Snoqualmie might be “possible?”
All,
For summary of recent, last 5 years or so, things BNSF has done to improve cross state capacity in Washington see my posts of 2-11 and 2-14 this thread.
The iron triangle is a BIG BIG deal in terms of reducing meets and train delay, thus increasing capacity.
To the best of my knowledge BNSF has spare capacity over the mountains/gorge. Double tracking Pasco-Spokane will finally fix most of the stupid stupid move by the oilmen of tearing up SP&S between those points.
Mac
The SP&S between Pasco and Spokane had a lot of very large bridges and deep cuts. With traffic down, I suspect BN didn’t think that the harder to maintain route was worth it.