"Up North" Gawking (District 1 sightings)

My understanding of the rights (both the previous MEC/GTI ones and the current CSX ones) is that they're haulage rights, not trackage rights. The difference is that haulage rights allow (for example) CSX to bill the traffic under CSX pricing (and don't have to split the rate) for the entire trip to SJ, but they don't allow CSX to run trains over the line to get to SJ. Irving runs the trains and hauls the cars at a set rate with CSX regardless of what kind of traffic it is.

Yes, thanks for clearing up the difference between trackage and haulage rights.
I believe the the RR granting the haulage need to agree on the per car charge for the rights. Whatever the rate is it must cover the cost of providing service and a profit margins for the terminating railroad.

I think things are a bit different on the Irving side of things. A lot of the mixed freight they move are non-revenue moves, since the parent company owns both the railroad and a good portion of the customers on the railroad. I am not sure how things work in great detail, but I have heard before that the railroad side of Irving's operations get reimbursements for fuel and wages from the other Irving owned companies which ship by rail. But yet again, that information is roughly 15 years old at this point, so that might not be the case any longer.

If these train lengths continue to grow I think some type of run through job with power pooling (CSX and Irving crews stay on their respective railroads) may make the most sense. Of course they would still need those long yard tracks too, because I am sure even if this becomes the case there will be instances where an inbound train needs room because the outbound hasn't been recrewed yet. It seems like the interchange is more of a hassle for Irving than CSX.

If anything they will just continue to do a live swap at Mattawamkeag with the Irving job. I could be wrong, but I don't believe the CSX units are leader compliant with the TSB requirements. I think Irving is pretty well done with using power from other roads. They have been burned by CP and further back MMA and the other class 1's which sent power up on the oil trains. They will have 20 SD70M-2's on property by years end, because they don't intend on using other roads power, which as it stands I think 3 of the ones they have on property are already in a storage line because traffic levels don't warrant that many units. It might be worth CSX using the Irving power between Waterville and Mattawamkeag considering power sets still get swapped at Waterville. Plus with the amount of problems the existing fleet of exPan Am C40's, in addition to the CSX SD23's and SD40-2's are having, it might be worth having some bigger/newer power on those jobs.

My understanding of the rights (both the previous MEC/GTI ones and the current CSX ones) is that they're haulage rights, not trackage rights.

Just for fun, I checked the STB filing for the acquisition for confirmation (not that I doubted, but figured something like this would be covered in the filing):

Springfield Terminal accesses Saint John via a haulage agreement with New Brunswick Southern Railway and Eastern Maine Railway.

Now that I am thinking of it, I am wondering if Guilford ever had trackage rights to McAdam and then to Saint Stephen for the Woodland IT traffic.

From 1995. Don't know if these are still in effect.

"EMR, the owner of the line, has granted ST the
right to operate its own trains with its own crews
between Mattawamkeag and the Maine/New
Brunswick border to enable ST to exchange traffic
with the New Brunswick Southern Railroad."


https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... 5-7173.pdf

CPF66 wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 9:49 am Now that I am thinking of it, I am wondering if Guilford ever had trackage rights to McAdam and then to Saint Stephen for the Woodland IT traffic.

When I was there the Woodland Branch was still run by GTI (WD-1 I think) and there were no trackage rights at least. The power was islanded at the mill in Woodland. I don't know if we had haulage to get the cars to/from Keag or if it was all line rate handled. We used to joke about getting bumped up to Woodland all the time lol.

When I was living down there in the 90's (back when the lumber and OSB plants were going) they had enough traffic that they had a second job which worked down there. WD-1 did the Woodland-Calais turn and I assume what could only be WD-2 did the switching at the mills.
Then once it got sold from GP to LP or vice versa, is when things went down the tubes. Its a shame because the OSB side of the mill was fairly new and pretty high tech for the time. They built most of that production line in the 80's (which included undercutting the slab & foundation without any disruptions to the product they were making at the time) including the giant OSB press. In hindsight, they should have kept the dimensional lumber side of the mill. That would have been a good asset these days.
There was also a plan by the DOT to rehab the line, then build a north wye leg at Moosehorn, with the intent to rebuild the Calais Branch to Ayers Jct and relay the Eastport Branch to Perry where a container yard and transload would be built. By the sounds they actually had a few customers lined up for that project, and there were actual grant requests filed with the feds. But in the end the funding bill didn't go through so the project got canned.

A few links for those interested in that topic. I know its Irving territory now, but at one time it was District 1:
http://gro-wa.org/rail-to-port-alternat ... alysis.htm
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... apter1.pdf
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... apter2.pdf
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... pter3a.pdf
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... pter3b.pdf
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... apter4.pdf
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... .pdf[url] http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... apter6.pdf[/url]
http://gro-wa.org/assets/files/transpor ... apter7.pdf

Railfan & railroad magazine recently had a feature article on current operations at woodland
Apparently Irving is investing in track work, I including upgrading a rickety bridge at the border

Thats probably a good thing, its just rumors at this point, but the mill wants to add a new $800 million tissue plant somewhere down there in the next few years.

F74265A wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 10:14 am From 1995. Don't know if these are still in effect.

"EMR, the owner of the line, has granted ST the
right to operate its own trains with its own crews
between Mattawamkeag and the Maine/New
Brunswick border to enable ST to exchange traffic
with the New Brunswick Southern Railroad."


https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- ... 5-7173.pdf

It wouldn't surprise me (and wouldn't conflict with the previous information about haulage rights to SJ), since the line was originally MEC to the border only, at which point it became CP-owned.

We were down to only a small handful of cars when we turned the Woodland business over to Irving, I know that. I remember reading about how the rail traffic rebounded heavily thereafter though. I think it was a combination of better service and the mill being able to expand operations by taking advantage of Irving's rail network vs the Guilford island.