That’s a good point. I saw that the other dashes were different, and didn’t know what to make of that.
There’s definitely an information void there. I don’t know why SLR would want to show an out-of-service track on their map. And as I’ve stated, I don’t get why SLR would use trackage rights over PARR. So I’m not sure what to think.
Isn’t Pan Am the company that allowed NS to “buy in” to their existing line between Boston and some point in New York? With NS money used to upgrade the existing Pan Am plant, and a shared maintenance responsibility going forward?
It wouldn’t be unthinkable that they are somehow cooperaing with SLR on this other segment. Perhaps SLR kicks in money to help maintain the Pan Am line, in lieu of their own mothballed parallel line? And this saves SLR in the overall? Just speculating, mind you.
Just because an entity may have trackage rights doesn’t mean they always use them. My understanding of trackage rights is that there is usually renumeration paid to the host railroad for every trackage rights movement. Oft-times trackage rights from an original railroad will follow along with the subsequent buyer.
Perhaps if some sort of terminal opens up at the Port of Portland someday, such as a grain export facility or a wood pellet export facility, then SLR may have a reason for again using trackage rights all the way to Portland.
Both excellent theories.
Yes, if SLR wanted Portland port access at some point in the future, they would need to use Pan Am. Because reviving their own route to Portland and accessing the port area would mean rebuilding a fairly long bridge, probably putting the Maine Narrow Gauge RR out of business, then re-laying about 1.5 miles of track right down the middle of Commercia
As an example, Monon obtained trackage rights over South Shore between Michigan City and State Line when South Shore was purchased by C&O. Aside from an initial demonstration run, the trackage rights were never exercised.
Trackage rights are pre-1996 if they exist. (Nothing on STB finance dockets online or in the ICC card index (plus the STB/ICC bound volumes) I have access to. You cannot have trackage overhead or haulage rights without STB/ICC approval)
Still the FRA record and who changed the record in Maine is a bit of a mystery. Unusual.
When it comes right down to it, isn’t the ICC/STB just another government agency?
As is the case with many other agencies, don’t they hire out of the same pool as other, often reviled agencies? It’s hard to imagine that the STB alone has managed to hire employees immune to laziness and the other sins we commonly credit to the govt.
It’s not hard to imagine some clerk reconciling obsolete records, quietly force-fitting loose ends to make them appear to dovetail cleanly. Just a thought.
C1 - In this case, This is 40 dedicated career people who rarely, if ever, leave the agency. (down from almost 10,000 people at one point. Most of them are attorneys (that is an issue) that are more interested in rate cases and other “sexy” regulation -they normally deal with other lawyers submitting dockets*. (and yes they are administrative law judges and ombudsmen, but there is more to it…) The other stuff still on the books, rarely if ever gets looked at or checked. Even spun off from DOT, they are understaffed and do the best they can. It slowly is turning into a good-ol-boy’s club.
The rails to trails side/ abandonment is an administrative mess, made worse by people gaming the system.
The surveying profession is frustrated with them. (and their vaunted GIS system is a failure. A “toy” that will never be representative or complete)
-There are places out here where rail has been removed / and or sold without formal abandonment. Two more cases (Colorado & Oklahoma) just oozed to the top.
They did away with the STB Librarian after cancer took the last one. (Dumb and Stoopid - Now you struggle to find a record of anything and any layman is screwed…Certain lawyers are giggling over that stunt.)
and the story goes on.
(My “bizarre” comment is aimed primarilly at the FRA/DOT side as opposed to the ICC/STB side … I really wish some folks would audit/independently check what’s going on, it would be an eye-opening experience. Most of the general public does not know who they are or what they do (or even exist) until it’s far too late. Sad.)
My thoughts, admittedly based upon conjecture…I often see people base arguments upon ICC valuation data, from 1918 and forward.
I think the purpose of the Valuation Act was to determine what was “out there” for the purpose of establishing rates. Much of the information supplied came from the railroads, and accepted at face value. It was never intended to be the encyclopedic essay of who owned what segment of line back in 1880 that many people now use it for, for example, on lines that changed hands many times over the years…especially in instances where complete records were difficult to locate.
Just in illustration, if for example New York Central absorbed all predecessor components, and was willing to take responsibility for an entire line, and produce a plausible history that accounts for what was known, I doubt there was an enforcement wing of the ICC willing to go out and research titles in courthouses to verify that the 1880 transactions and 1890 transactions happened exacty as reported by NYC, years after the fact in 1918. Do you think that is a reasonable assumption?
And of course, as you say, there are always those willing to game the system. Producing “believable” information for the sake of expedience being a possible motive . And if all mileage relevant to the desire to devise formulas to establish rates is accurately accounted for,…(I guess) where is the harm?
This web page seems to have the hiccups.
C1 - Not buying parts of your argument. You need to explain all the field verification by teams of local appraisers in the field from 1916 until the 1950’s plus all the field notes from the ICC field crews and structures crews notes.
The rates comment has about the same validity as the comments tying the Prince Plan to the ICC Valuation Act. (like a big zero)
People did check ICC GO-7 form DV-107’s over validity.(that’s deeds and acquisition records schedules to the uninitiated) Sometimes two and three times. Some railroads had to submit new val maps two and three times before the ICC auditors let railroads off the hook. (Eastern railroads and southern railroads had issues on occasion due to age or the Civil War where records were lost. The only bad actor/ shoddy product beyond that was the Wabash (just plain sucked because of Gould and that history). The bulk of that stuff is still pretty good (and certainly much better than many current town/county/state road and bridge records.)
Things started to slide in the 1960’s and fell down even worse with the 2nd USRA and the creation of CR. (CR was incredibly bad in places. I keep seeing those fails created by the operating management and money people. )
Earlier in this thread I mentioned the big paper mill in Westbrook ME. I drove by there today, by the little on-property yard. In times past there were always cars there, IIRC mostly covered hoppers and tanks. Today there was just a single tank car, period. I don’t think the mill gets rail service anymore. I didn’t notice any reporting marks on the tank car. I’m guessing it’s an abandoned orphan, maybe being used now for some kind of static storage. Or it just hasnt been removed yet. I think the tracks are still intact enough to allow access to it, but not sure.
Sometimes the person hired to draw the map has not taken a class.
It must not be that uncommon for a railroad to show an out-of-service line as part of their system. The map of the Keokuk Junction Railway, on the Pioneer Railcorp web site, still shows the line between Hamilton and Warsaw, Illinois which has been out of service for decades. The highway crossing south of Hamilton is blacktopped over, the tracks to Warsaw are hidden in the woods, and at Warsaw there are houses built over where the tracks would have been.
Has the line been abandoned by either ICC or STB docket?
Embargoed yes, abandoned no… ATSF sold the funky TP&W pig-tail to KJRY in 1986 and after the oddball Pioneer management got hold of it, nothing happened. As close as it ever got to abandoning was Feb 2003 when the scoundrels at A&K (under the guise of SF&L) tried to abandon it in AB448_2_x. STB forced A&K to sell it to KJRY…and then it sat. (supposebly there flood damaged bridges in that idled stretch that can’t justify the repair costs?)
(at least it has rail…several other places don’t and still are not abandoned)
TP&W = Toledo Peoria & Warsaw