Eureka Seeking Another Rail Route - Northwestern Pacific Railroad Network2024-03-28T08:32:28Zhttp://nwprr.net/forum/topics/eureka-seeking-another-rail-route?commentId=3290209%3AComment%3A98779&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noThe Land bridge alliance met…tag:nwprr.net,2013-05-23:3290209:Comment:987792013-05-23T09:02:47.204ZChristopher Palomarezhttp://nwprr.net/profile/ChristopherPalomarez
<p>The Land bridge alliance met May 15, 2013</p>
<p>Here's the article:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.willows-journal.com/articles/county-10309-bay-tehama.html" target="_blank">http://www.willows-journal.com/articles/county-10309-bay-tehama.html</a></p>
<p>I found out reading this discussion:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.altamontpress.com/discussion/read.php?1,86774,86774#msg-86774" target="_blank">http://www.altamontpress.com/discussion/read.php?1,86774,86774#msg-86774</a></p>
<p></p>
<p>Chris P</p>
<p>The Land bridge alliance met May 15, 2013</p>
<p>Here's the article:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.willows-journal.com/articles/county-10309-bay-tehama.html" target="_blank">http://www.willows-journal.com/articles/county-10309-bay-tehama.html</a></p>
<p>I found out reading this discussion:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.altamontpress.com/discussion/read.php?1,86774,86774#msg-86774" target="_blank">http://www.altamontpress.com/discussion/read.php?1,86774,86774#msg-86774</a></p>
<p></p>
<p>Chris P</p> The Land bridge alliance seem…tag:nwprr.net,2013-05-23:3290209:Comment:989682013-05-23T08:59:31.761ZChristopher Palomarezhttp://nwprr.net/profile/ChristopherPalomarez
<p>The Land bridge alliance seems to have the environmentalists' support</p>
<p>The Land bridge alliance seems to have the environmentalists' support</p> I think the main reason the N…tag:nwprr.net,2013-05-23:3290209:Comment:990252013-05-23T03:08:06.515ZSterling Klinckhttp://nwprr.net/profile/SterlingKlinck
<p>I think the main reason the NWP and NCRA seem hesitant to reopen the Eel River segment is because of the HUGE costs involved. The NWP just got started and therefore has very little money, and the NCRA is not only completely broke, but deep in debt. The NCRA is a government agency that exists with no state funding whatsoever, and if the state were to recognize the importance of a rail link between the North Coast and the national rail network, as well as the importance of a port in the…</p>
<p>I think the main reason the NWP and NCRA seem hesitant to reopen the Eel River segment is because of the HUGE costs involved. The NWP just got started and therefore has very little money, and the NCRA is not only completely broke, but deep in debt. The NCRA is a government agency that exists with no state funding whatsoever, and if the state were to recognize the importance of a rail link between the North Coast and the national rail network, as well as the importance of a port in the Humboldt area, and provide some funds, I think we'd see trains rolling in no time. Assuming, of course, NOvato and the Fiends of the Eel River didn't raise havoc.</p> Don't forget UP and BNSF are…tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-02:3290209:Comment:962742013-04-02T02:11:28.205ZChristopher Palomarezhttp://nwprr.net/profile/ChristopherPalomarez
<p>Don't forget UP and BNSF are BIG businesses. They want BIG profits without much hands on. Like most small businesses, if one starts doing REALLY well a larger business will move in and purchase the smaller one. The small business did all the work, the big business just wants to reap the benefits. Same thing with railroads...the big RRs are taking a wait and see approach. Of course there are some small RRs out there where annually they do extremely well but their methodology just doesn't…</p>
<p>Don't forget UP and BNSF are BIG businesses. They want BIG profits without much hands on. Like most small businesses, if one starts doing REALLY well a larger business will move in and purchase the smaller one. The small business did all the work, the big business just wants to reap the benefits. Same thing with railroads...the big RRs are taking a wait and see approach. Of course there are some small RRs out there where annually they do extremely well but their methodology just doesn't align to the big RR's methods of turn 'n' burn.</p> Bob, I agree with you as you…tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-01:3290209:Comment:961852013-04-01T22:19:23.962ZJim McCarterhttp://nwprr.net/profile/JimMcCarter
<p>Bob, I agree with you as you offer much deeper explanation and say it better than I would have, that is exactly how I have always believed it was.. However, I was (am) unaware of any subsidy offered in the 50-60's period. Regardless, the PUC and ICC would not just let them abandon routes as to protect shippers and towns that might be small or few, but dependant on rail. As I was told when I was young, they were considered basically like a utility, and when they started to service an area…</p>
<p>Bob, I agree with you as you offer much deeper explanation and say it better than I would have, that is exactly how I have always believed it was.. However, I was (am) unaware of any subsidy offered in the 50-60's period. Regardless, the PUC and ICC would not just let them abandon routes as to protect shippers and towns that might be small or few, but dependant on rail. As I was told when I was young, they were considered basically like a utility, and when they started to service an area they were taking on the risk of not being able to just quit, they would have to have permission for that which sometimes was really hard to get. Therefor, the stratagies of allowing a line to become so bad and customer base so poor that they could win approval to abandon. It was so with passenger and the growth of airlines that made the railroads beg to get rid of it (Amtrack?).Low ridership, low revenue and higher infrastructure costs etc. It was all driven by profits and mainly my point was that most railroads did what they felt was necessary to remain profitable, and SP was no exception. That did not make them a second class operation as some imply, but rather a victim of the business environment. And maybe I am partial, but I believe that SP for decades was a leader in the industry in terms of quality and progressiveness. All railroads did make decisions that came back to bite them, sadly. I also am happy to hear you mention class I buyout, as I have wondered if NWP ownership has had that in the back of their mind since the beginning. He is not getting rich on what they move now and he is putting up a lot of money for what he is taking in. I don't really know what his costs are but if you believe Capt Bernie " esquire" the NCRA is paying him to use it!!!! I also believe John Williams is smart and not foolish. He did use a million per mile to get to Windsor, knowing Smart would tear most of it all up. Don't know the particulars, but that would have delayed startup and missed grain and railtrain income of course. But it also meant that much less NCRA money to get further north from here on. If NWP did secure a great lease, and if it was transferrable to another party with NCRA paying much maintanence AND deep water port in Eureka up and connected, wouldn't that be a great opportunity for takeover by UP or BNSF? On the other hand, what do I know....</p> So very true! So glad there w…tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-01:3290209:Comment:959692013-04-01T21:57:52.591ZChristopher Palomarezhttp://nwprr.net/profile/ChristopherPalomarez
<p>So very true! So glad there was no affiliation with tRail America and their partnership with salvaging companies. So many california community's lost their rail access from tRail America's desire to squeeze every penny out of america's shortlines at all costs...even if it meant the value of the scrap generated from the rail they tore out. They tore up countless routes even ones that were still ACTIVELY being used by shippers. It was criminal what they did to a branch that UP owned. TRail…</p>
<p>So very true! So glad there was no affiliation with tRail America and their partnership with salvaging companies. So many california community's lost their rail access from tRail America's desire to squeeze every penny out of america's shortlines at all costs...even if it meant the value of the scrap generated from the rail they tore out. They tore up countless routes even ones that were still ACTIVELY being used by shippers. It was criminal what they did to a branch that UP owned. TRail America sold of a line they were leasing to their salvage partner and tore it up without out UP's approval...needless to say UP was irate! </p>
<p>It was happening in Coos Bay too. TRail America was wanting to sell off the entire branch to the salvage company but the community STOOD UP and changed the course of action for their rail line.</p>
<p>I think it's incredibly short sighted for any railroad route to be torn up right now...unless if they are connecting ghost towns. LOL</p> One issue I have, is when peo…tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-01:3290209:Comment:962622013-04-01T21:56:42.912ZSean Mitchellhttp://nwprr.net/profile/SeanM
<p>One issue I have, is when people flame the NCRA for "environmental violations" and such, my response is- What the hell do you expect them to do? The NCRA is funded via freight operations, and for 12 years they weren't running trains. They have no money to maintain drainage systems, and other things to comply with environmental regulations...For track that is illegal to run trains on.</p>
<p>Theres no way to even get to the Canyon, so of course ties will slide into the river, culverts plug,…</p>
<p>One issue I have, is when people flame the NCRA for "environmental violations" and such, my response is- What the hell do you expect them to do? The NCRA is funded via freight operations, and for 12 years they weren't running trains. They have no money to maintain drainage systems, and other things to comply with environmental regulations...For track that is illegal to run trains on.</p>
<p>Theres no way to even get to the Canyon, so of course ties will slide into the river, culverts plug, and waste will collect in the basin. </p>
<p><span style="font-size: 13px;">The canyon is not an impossible place to run trains, it's just a challenging</span><font size="2"> one. And by the time NCR was operating, it was </font>neglected<font size="2"> by SP, and torn apart by the debt collector for EUKA, so it was a disaster trying to make a profit. </font></p> LOL, that would like suing th…tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-01:3290209:Comment:963012013-04-01T21:33:25.281ZChristopher Palomarezhttp://nwprr.net/profile/ChristopherPalomarez
<p>LOL, that would like suing themselves.</p>
<p>Any environmental group that does this, risks being pulled into the public arena and made to be complete HYPOCRITES. So what will it be, thousands of pounds of green house gasses from local highway 101 or an environmental, emission friendly, railroad system that's been through the canyon for a hundred years.</p>
<p>You can't abandon the right of way without rebuilding it first due to poor highway access through the canyon. You can't helicopter…</p>
<p>LOL, that would like suing themselves.</p>
<p>Any environmental group that does this, risks being pulled into the public arena and made to be complete HYPOCRITES. So what will it be, thousands of pounds of green house gasses from local highway 101 or an environmental, emission friendly, railroad system that's been through the canyon for a hundred years.</p>
<p>You can't abandon the right of way without rebuilding it first due to poor highway access through the canyon. You can't helicopter the bridges away!</p>
<p>So what would an environmentalist group recommend then?</p>
<p>I read that there is a claus with in California Legislature with the acquisition of the NWP that as long as there is a private funding source, that there is no reason to wait for Evironmental Impact reports. NCRA is a public agency. The State of CA is in a peculiar position of now not being able to take sides with an environmental group due to the affiliation with the NCRA. It is in the tax holder's best interest to see this thing completed. I get the sense that there is becoming a "git 'er done" type attitude in regards to this route. My only hope that it isn't done too late and missing an impending boon time that could completely strengthen the NWP beyond imagine.</p> You are correct, to a point. …tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-01:3290209:Comment:962982013-04-01T21:05:33.030ZBob Cleekhttp://nwprr.net/profile/BobCleek
<p>You are correct, to a point. (And I'm no expert on the subject, either.) There is "big money" in freight traffic all the way to Eureka, just not "as big money" as there is in Class I long-haul traffic. It is difficult to blame the larger railroads, given the capitalistic environment in which they must exist. The simple fact is that long-haul rail traffic is much more profitable than short-haul. Wherever possible, a railroad is going to seek to maximize profits by expanding long-haul…</p>
<p>You are correct, to a point. (And I'm no expert on the subject, either.) There is "big money" in freight traffic all the way to Eureka, just not "as big money" as there is in Class I long-haul traffic. It is difficult to blame the larger railroads, given the capitalistic environment in which they must exist. The simple fact is that long-haul rail traffic is much more profitable than short-haul. Wherever possible, a railroad is going to seek to maximize profits by expanding long-haul freight service and avoiding short-haul service, particularly on high-maintenance ROW's. The strings attached to the federal rail subsidies attempt to counteract this by requiring the large long-haul railroads to maintain a certain percentage of short-haul service. If SP wanted its subsidies back when, it had to accept the lower profits (if not outright losses) on subsidiary short lines like the NWP. They were saddled with such short lines because, for the good of national commerce, the feds didn't want them skimming the cream of the long-haul service off the top and abandoning short-haul traffic serving various segments of the national economy. What to do? About all they could do was to demonstrate to the feds that this or that short-haul was so uneconomical that there was no way they could be expected to continue to operate it. That is what the SP did with the NWP. I can't say whether it was a matter of intentional policy or just coincidence, but when SP couldn't secure authorization to abandon NWP outright, what came to pass was a pattern of long-term deferred maintenance and incremental service level reductions (on a high-maintenance line far overdue for a rebuild in the first place) which ultimately reached the point where, although SP couldn't voluntarily abandon the line, the feds had to condemn it. After that, SP was able to secure permission for abandonment because the cost of repair exceeded any reasonable hope of a reasonable return on the investment, given the federal subsidy regulations of the time. If any big outfit is going to run a railroad, they are going to seek out the highest profit traffic. When times get tough, the small independent operations often don't have the capital (or the subsidies) to weather the economic storms. The new NWPRR Co. has to be seen as a "wildcatter" who is willing to take the risk in the hope of making a profit in a niche market, the proverbial "big fish in a small pond." I think they just might be smart enough to pull it off given half a chance. If the NWPRR Co. can connect with the Port of Humbolt (as the feds envision Humbolt as a container terminal port), they will be in a very good position to make good money on that exclusive franchise. As life goes in the real world, one of the big Class I railroads will then buy them out, yielding huge profits for the NWPRR Co.'s creators... and the cycle will begin all over again! Really, if my guess is any good, the current NWPRR Co.'s operators see hauling grain to Petaluma as simply a break-even "foot in the door" until economic pressures (i.e. a lack of seaborne container terminal capacity) justify the reconnection of Eureka to the national rail network. The value of the NWP will then be the price its exclusive access to that freight point of entry will bring.</p> Another hurdle to clear prior…tag:nwprr.net,2013-04-01:3290209:Comment:962562013-04-01T20:38:45.603ZLandon Millerhttp://nwprr.net/profile/LandonMiller
<p>Another hurdle to clear prior to the resumption of freight service further north - we live in a state run by bureaucrats for bureaucrats. I want the line rebuilt for the good of the state, but what happens when some rare butterfly or frog is found in the Eel River canyon, and a green-friendly judge slaps a restraining order on the ROW work via a lawsuit brought by some previously-unknown Greens group, assisted by the local office of some state agency?</p>
<p>Another hurdle to clear prior to the resumption of freight service further north - we live in a state run by bureaucrats for bureaucrats. I want the line rebuilt for the good of the state, but what happens when some rare butterfly or frog is found in the Eel River canyon, and a green-friendly judge slaps a restraining order on the ROW work via a lawsuit brought by some previously-unknown Greens group, assisted by the local office of some state agency?</p>