Timber Heritage Association (THA) The Timber Heritage Association President Marcus Brown spoke at today's Port Development meeting at the Samoa Cookhouse. (Noodles and shortribs. Lots of bread, soup and salad also. I'll give today's lunch a B score.) His group raised over $30,000 in a recent fundraiser to help defray costs of moving a workable train to the Round House in Samoa. A call out was made for local service groups to consider adopting the THA project. They are in need of help in the near future for renovations of the Redwood built Round House. I am sure they would appreciate monetary funds, but for those who are willing to put in some elbow grease to the project, they are need of that also. Marcus also talked of hope of running a short portion of the rail line in Samoa by this summer. Further in the future, the hope is to run train from Samoa to Eureka, and then perhaps the Madaket trip back to Samoa. That would make a great day excursion for tourists.
Bill Bertain also spoke at the meeting and brought up Robin Arkley's public endorsement of the railroad and his political and phone line ties with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger as possible leverage for the northern section of the rail line. He also mentioned that railroad advocate and former Congressman Doug Bosco has Arnold's attention after leading the Democrats for Schwarzenegger Committee. Maybe we will see the resurrection of the rail yet.
36 minutes ago
51 comments:
Oh, come on now Softball, you know the general public really wants to rip up the tracks to build trails. You know, something beneficial to the entire population. Something everyone will use not just train enthusiasts. (Ok, being purely facitious now) You know trains are icky things for the environment around the bay. And they haul icky things like gravel, too.
Or maybe its not economically feasible, like all the engineering studies say.
I'm hoping that 8:41 post was entirely factitious?
After lunch yesterday, I emailed 'samoafrog' a document from the National Parks Service that has to do with the ongoing rail/trail project. Much effort has gone into many meetings with trails groups, HCOAG participants and other stakeholders (like train enthusiasts).
I've noticed a lone dissenter writing the occasional opinion piece (against rail/trail coexistence) in the papers, but when we look around for a group to reach out to-these writers usually turn out to be working without connection to an existing group-even though there are quite a few opportunities to hook up and get involved.
The restoration of the rail around the bay is useful to the entire population...in that we would have multimodal transportation, increased employment through the tourisn industry, more light industry, and many recreational and cultural opportunities.
It takes time and everything won't happen overnight-but you'll see more happening if you volunteer and get an up close view.
The fact that the Timber Heritage Association raised the entire $30,000 for moving the locomotives from Glendale to Samoa-in just one fundraising even is a significant sign that there is community support for the restoration of rails around Humboldt Bay. We can always use more members and a family membership is only $25 per year.
Our website needs updating (and we're working on it) but if you're interested in a membership or in volunteering to rip up track, or drive spikes into the ground for new track, or working with us in restoring a historic 1890 Roundhouse-check it out: http://www.timberheritage.org/
For more information on trails groups and getting caught up with what has already been accomplished in this area-you can contact Jennifer Rice at RCAA-Jen works in the natural resources division and is considered an expert in the field.
BTW 12:38 the 'engineering studies' you brought up are discussing the Eel River Canyon. -Not an excursion train around Humboldt Bay.
There is a feasibility study available-although perhaps not yet online that gives much support to rail restoration, excursion train, light industry, possibility of a container port using rail.
Is mary-mrsb814?
"There is a feasibility study available-although perhaps not yet online that gives much support to rail restoration, excursion train, light industry, possibility of a container port using rail"
Who did this study? All the earlier ones said it is such a long shot that it is likely to fail.
The Trails Trust of Humboldt Bay is one source for trail info.
Excursion trains tend to be a money looser and need community support to keep them running. Take for instance the train (trolley) in Astoria. Runs along the Columbia River next to the downtown. I think it is $3 for a pass. But it can't make it on its own even with all volunteers.
Then maybe you should join the Timber Heritage Association with a Lifetime Membership and get busy volunteering?
Nah. Trails are cheaper to maintain and cost leess to use.
From the NCRA's 2003 The Long Term Financial and Economic Feasibility of the Northwestern Pacific Railroad
Market Analysis Conclusions
The freight market potential along the NWP corridor is relatively flat. Overall the greatest opportunity for growth in rail related shipments are in solid waste, aggregate and port-related marine industrial activities. The demand for intercity passenger rail on the corridor is fairly limited and would not prove to be a cost effective endeavor. Commuter rail is currently under study by the SMART commission and could prove to be viable at some level. However, there is little viability for commuter rail outside of the San Rafael to Cloverdale corridor.
From the same 2003 NCRA study:
11.0 CONCLUSIONS REGARDING 25 YEAR OPERATING FEASIBILITY
11.1 Summary of Financial Results
11.1.1 Low demand
Under the low demand scenario, the railroad will not breakeven for the life of this analysis. If the low demand stays at the same level for the next 25 years, it will not be able to overcome the fixed or variable costs of operating the railroad.
11.1.2 Medium demand
Under all three operating scenarios there will be a net negative cash flow. If the medium demand stays at the same level for the next 25 years, it will not be able to overcome the fixed or variable costs of operating the railroad.
11.1.3 High demand
Under the high demand scenario once the north end of the railroad is connect to the south, the railroad is net cash flow positive, averaging approximately six million dollars a year in net positive cash flow.
11.1.4 “Most Likely” demand
Since the "Most Likely" demand tracks closely with the Medium demand, it does not cross the break-even mark with its forecasted volumes.
and this means what?-you don't support having trains whether they make money or not (even if they are historically relevant to this area)?
The Timber Heritage Association has been restoring two of the very same locomotives that were originally located at Samoa Shops-the Roundhouse and related buildings.
I totally support the Timber Heritage Society's efforts. I love old trains. Just pointing out the fiscal obstacles that need to be addressed regarding rail in general.
The excursion train and museum are completely different issues than bring the railroad back.
I was taking issue with this comment from Mary:
"The restoration of the rail around the bay is useful to the entire population...in that we would have multimodal transportation, increased employment through the tourisn industry, more light industry, and many recreational and cultural opportunities."
I agree.
However:
Excursion train = feasible.
Commuter train = not.
There just isn't the population base to make it viable.
Nice idea but it couldn't pay for itself.
"Commuter train = not.
There just isn't the population base to make it viable.
Nice idea but it couldn't pay for itself."
And this is precisely what makes the Eureka / Arcata trail attractive.
If you knew anything at all-you would know the Eureka/Arcata trail is no where near where you think it is.
Hey, I didn't say the excursion train can't be done.
Like I said, if you look at the excursion train idea separate from the restoration of the rail between here and the Bay Area and/or the idea of a cummuter train you are more likley to be successful.
You can't use the Larkspur Ferry or CalTrain on the penninsula as any sort of justification for a commuter train here. We just don't have the people.
Sure it would be nice.
Excursion train = feasible.
You should read the excursion train feasability study and you will find that it will take much more capital and operating costs than even mighty Mary can muster in her hunt for funds. I can't belive that THA will have the insurance together so that NCRA would allow anything on their line by this summer. Good luck.
Mary: Thank God there are people who have not given up. I really think once a small portion of the railroad is up and working, then people will be more apt for a "buy in." People need a tangible project where the process is clearly defined and there is light at the "end of the tunnel." Hey, was that a train metaphor? Let's see this train project make some "steam way." Anyone else out there want to get on board?
But seriously, as Mary said, there is plenty of volunteer work ahead. So if you have time down the road, here is a chance to help. I am willing to pound a few spikes, so put me down!
(I know there are afew anonymous posters out there I would like to hold the spike for me.)
"Why does this have to be just trail not both to you?"
Putting the trail on the railroad right of way whould be far and away more doable than trying to get a trail built next to the rail. The cost of that EIR alone would probably kill it. We are talking just too much wetland to make work whereas the trail on rail would be much less complicated and undeniably much cheaper.
But the NCRA will never let that happen anytime soon. So the tease the trail folks into thinking the trail can go next to the rail because it gets them out of their hair.
"If you knew anything at all-you would know the Eureka/Arcata trail is no where near where you think it is."
Do tell...
Doug Bosco is the reason is the reason I (as a Democrat) voted for Republician, Frank Riggs, although only for his first term. I voted for Dan Hamburg, who (sadly) only served one term.
The excursion train is a completely separate issue from rail service/freight use and has been for a few years.
"This map will be utilized as a basis for trail planning and will illustrate physical and resource constraints such as wetlands, high tide levels, various ownership rights-of-ways, endangered species habitat, and other relevant issues to trail development and operation. "
Bingo.
In the end those who plan trails know this is a no-go from the start. But it is a way to get the trail on the table. In the end it will be trail on rail bed or no trail at all.
And we will wait and wait. All we will get is a whole bunch of nothing until it is understood that one path is more feasible than the other. Seems like all we are going to get is two infeasible projects instead of one that could be built soon.
There is so much funding out there for trails now and almost none for excursion trains. This part of what makes a project more feasible than another. When you start a capital campaign you will soon figure this out.
It seems all the current excitement about the train is only in response to the growing enthusiasm for the trail. Nothing else has really changed.
Mary: So now that you are on the Board of the THA have you read the feasibility study?
6:24 That is where you are wrong.
In the end those who plan trails know this is a no-go from the start. But it is a way to get the trail on the table. In the end it will be trail on rail bed or no trail at all.
The trail isn't a no-go and neither is the rail... there isn't room for both in some locations which is obvious if you've ever taken a walk down the tracks.
There are 'constraints' to adding a pedestrian trail next to the rail right of way-starting with the rules that pedestrians have to be located x-number feet away from the rail...and the rail is like-almost in the bay in places-check the rail location at high tide on the Manila end of the tracks.
Zandra Manns at a December Port Development meeting, suggested elevated piers-which to me sounded terrific and extremely attractive! But the Coastal Commission sees elevated piers in the same light as filling in the wetlands/bay.
The teleconference discussion of the HBT trail planning team left me with the impression Indianola rights of way and the 101 corridor would be involved in the planning of the Eureka/Arcata trail-that doesn't seem very close to the rail does it?
For more information, you may want to contact Barbara Rice of the National Park Service. I think you would be pleasantly surprised to hear this isn't an either/or project.
Great information Mary. Thanks for the time and effort on covering all sides of this issue. One of my best friends, Nick Mitchell, was one of the last engineers who ran rail over the Northern end of the rail line in 1998. The railroad ultimately shut down due to poor management by Railways Inc. The leader at the time, a Mr. Darling, is still going through litigation for wage violations. The rail workers were actually working for hopes of a paycheck in the end. And many "union" (Local 3) workers have not been paid as far as I know to this day.
"My having the feasibility study isn't the point-but yes!"
Great, you have it. But have you read it?
"The people who have been working on this excursion train have hundreds(!) of years of combined experience on me. They also have long held licenses to run trains and I haven't even taken the class yet."
That doesn’t make them qualified to evaluate its economic feasibility.
"The trails groups are just as diverse as our train guys and yes there is money available. The HCAOG money shot up from around $30,000 to over $80,000-to study rails/trails just here lately. As I said before HCOAG is giving the city of Eureka an additional $3800. to do a further aerial study of the planning area."
This is trails planning money not rail planning money. It is not a rail/trail project. It is a trail project with rails seen as a constraint. At least according to what you posted.
"I hate writing the word 'study' when I'd rather write 'ground breaking' or 'work to begin'. I would like to see the trails as much as you-but not at the cost of losing trains running around the bay...and I'll take speeder rides until I get the rest."
So you would choose private speeder rides over public trails? Can't wait.
"For a great slideshow of the entire rail line keep an eye on the public access channel. Moss Bitner took about 1500 shots of the rail line and put it together into an beautiful and informative presentation that will surprise you at how close we are to restoring at least some rail activity."
Moss is not in any way qualified to give an assessment of the rail line.
"For a great slideshow of the entire rail line keep an eye on the public access channel. Moss Bitner took about 1500 shots of the rail line and put it together into an beautiful and informative presentation that will surprise you at how close we are to restoring at least some rail activity."
What a load of crap. Anyone with a brain that has heard and seen Moss's show knows it is nothing more than a cheerleading exercise.
Look at the facts. Read the NCRA's own studies before you leap off on a dream and hinder (really obstruct) anything that is contrary to rail and container shipping. The studies have been done numerous times and they say the same thing... it is a long shot at best and likely to take many years to achieve and decades to come close to being out of the red if it succeeds at all.
All this while Coos Bay is achieving becoming THE container port for this part of the west coast. They are in a deal to sell 800 acres to an international shipping firm for a container facility. They already have a deeper channel for the current class of ships. The rail connection is much shorter... and oh, it is in use right now. That while the state of Oregon has committed real dollars to maintaining and upgraded that line. Gee... didn't the NCRA recently get skipped over by Arnold? Ya think Rob can change that?
Start talking rail banking.
"It takes time and everything won't happen overnight"
According to the THA website they have been at it for 27 years. If this is as far as this vision has gotten in 27 years then it will take at least 100 years to complete. If there was a collective decision to have a trail instead we could have it done in 5 years. So how much longer do we have to wait for reality to set in?
Seems like the plan is to have the publicly owned right of way be for the exclusive use of the five (maybe) people with speeder cars. Whoopie.
Wow! Didn't know what they were called. Thanks!
Yeah, there could be a whole fleet of em. Though I remember them to be pukey little 2 cycles spouting a trail of blue smoke. Folks on the trail in the bay won't like that.
Hand cars would be more environmentally friendly than speeder cars.
Too bad only one verbose anon poster had anything to add to Mary's effort. What a windbag!
My read was that she supports the trails and would put her efforts into both projects.
Moss B may be a dreamer but I saw his presentation somplace and its true, a picture tells a thousand words. There isn't that much rail missing between Arcata and Fortuna. The rail is already a reality. Trails need to be developed but I personally would like to see them someplace other than the rail right of way from time to time along the route.
Mary do you have contact information for the National Parks Service? I would like to ask some questions about how to get involved.
The rail 'constraints' to having adjacent trail is space. There is no room for a parallel trail next to track when considering the requirements for safety.
Its obvious your naysayer hasn't gotten attached to any working group on the issues. Thanks for bringing this up Richard.
"Its obvious your naysayer hasn't gotten attached to any working group on the issues."
Virtually every person actually working on this issue knows the challenges of the rail/trail concept would tell you all the same things, in private.
Mary needs to separate the excursion part of rail from the return of the North Coast Railroad. Two quite distinctly different things.
However, both have done feasibility studies that show they are both very unlikely to be economically successful in the near or distant future. This will become very evident when she starts to write all these grants she talks about.
True. It's just that she was mixing up the issues.
Lets just say that the excursion train is a separate issue from the railroad museum, and those are separate issues from restoration of the rail to willits.
I remember reading something she wrote about writing grants for the excursion train-what RU talking about?
Doesn’t Humboldt County already have a railroad museum in Fortuna? Is there a need for two?
and if we need another put it at the Blue Ox.
11:22 You may want to study the Blue Ox situation a lot more before you make that kind of suggestion.
From what we have heard so far there isn't going to be any new school in a tsnami zone.
From Freds blog:
Friday, October 21, 2005
Rob Arkley Speaks
"I was pleased to see him (Arkley) once again step up to the plate and offer to pay for a study to determine the feasability and/ or practicality of getting the North Coast Railroad up and running again."
So I guess this study was completed? Has anyone seen it?
Nope. No Ox move to Samoa.
maybe a move to Samoa maybe not maybe five or six years maybe never maybe it will happen when Eric pays some people back .....for a change?
Waiting to hear how the work party for pounding spikes went last weekend.
I guess so much for excursion rail enthusiasm.
The excursion plan is more than plausible, it is nearly a reality for this summer. I will help on this end in Samoa. Pounding spikes and such.
What happened to Mary? Fall off the train?
Post a Comment