Lackawanna Cutoff Passenger Service Restoration

Bank Tower wrote:No one makes many friends by seeing the world as us versus them. As someone who worked in the 'environmental' field for 35 years I truly love the outdoors and the good earth - but more to the point so did those 'working' railroads. I highly recommend reading Alfred Runte's " Allies of the Earth: railroads and the soul of preservation" for insights that may help to bridge the gap between those who mourn the loss of trees growing on a historic rail embankment and those who see those who mourn as impediments to restoration of rail service. This book should be required reading in US History classes!

Is that some sort of super Turboliner on the cover?

Is a super Turboliner more powerful than a locomotive?

Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound! I don't know if the portrait is of an actual engine or is a fantasy - the theme certainly is a hopeful one: the portrait is entitled "Spirit of the Water Gap." It was commissioned for Mr. Runte's Book (see my post, above). I am not getting any commissions from Mr. Runte for hawking his book, I just believe that the man sincerely and succinctly frames the restoration point of view: "Once it would have been unthinkable that Americans would abandon a technology so complementary of natural beauty, but we did abandon it" he writes in his preface. I was at one time a member of the Sierra Club - I believe in John Muir's legacy - but found it's selling of my name and address to every other non-profit and subsequent generation of mountains of junk mail - hypocritical. What hacks like Jeff Tittle don't realize or carefully forget is that Muir and the Sierra Club allied with the Southern Pacific Railroad to preserve Yosemite! (http://www.fss.gsa.gov/pub/mtips/Mar_Ap ... erving.pdf) The Santa Fe made the Grand Canyon a "destination resort" for vacationers with its El Tovar Hotel; the Northern Pacific did the same at Yellowstone with its Old Faithful Inn. We need to try to help those who see what's left of the railroads and aren't impressed to see what was lost and could be regained!

I've noticed that in the Sierra Club literature that I've read while at my grandmother-in-law's home that their opinions towards urban mass transit (subway, light rail, trolley etc.) are consistently very favorable. I've not read much about their opinions on longer distance commuter rail projects. Though I disagree with their (perhaps now reversed) stance against the Cutoff, I can appreciate their concern for sprawl. I might not happen to agree with that assessment, but everyone's allowed to have different opinions on these things.

One way or another, I think you'll find a much more favorable attitude towards mass transit amongst the environmentalist community than you will in the defecit-reduction community. Mass transit produces defecits and, as such, is a very easy target for people whose beleifs in the role of government tend to lean towards reduction in spending.

Patrick Boylan wrote:Is a super Turboliner more powerful than a locomotive?

Appears to be an MP-36 in Lackawanna livery operating through Delaware Water Gap. Also interesting how I-80 and PA 611 have simply "vansihed'.

Amazon preview

funny Mr Norman does not know difference between Turboliner ad a MPI-mp36 ??
http://www.amazon.com/Allies-Earth-Rail ... 1931112525

DutchRailnut wrote:funny Mr Norman does not know difference between Turboliner ad a MPI-mp36 ??
http://www.amazon.com/Allies-Earth-Rail ... 1931112525

Yeah, it's so funny. You're a laugh a minute.

SemperFidelis wrote:I've noticed that in the Sierra Club literature that I've read while at my grandmother-in-law's home that their opinions towards urban mass transit (subway, light rail, trolley etc.) are consistently very favorable. I've not read much about their opinions on longer distance commuter rail projects. Though I disagree with their (perhaps now reversed) stance against the Cutoff, I can appreciate their concern for sprawl. I might not happen to agree with that assessment, but everyone's allowed to have different opinions on these things.

One way or another, I think you'll find a much more favorable attitude towards mass transit amongst the environmentalist community than you will in the defecit-reduction community. Mass transit produces defecits and, as such, is a very easy target for people whose beleifs in the role of government tend to lean towards reduction in spending.

I can't believe one could find a rational environmentalist who would argue that it is better to have thousands drive 120 miles round trip every day than it is for those thousands to take a commuter train, the environmental cost of which is primarily cutting down 25 years' growth of trees on a man-made ridge originally built for trains.

JasW wrote:

SemperFidelis wrote:I've noticed that in the Sierra Club literature that I've read while at my grandmother-in-law's home that their opinions towards urban mass transit (subway, light rail, trolley etc.) are consistently very favorable. I've not read much about their opinions on longer distance commuter rail projects. Though I disagree with their (perhaps now reversed) stance against the Cutoff, I can appreciate their concern for sprawl. I might not happen to agree with that assessment, but everyone's allowed to have different opinions on these things.

One way or another, I think you'll find a much more favorable attitude towards mass transit amongst the environmentalist community than you will in the defecit-reduction community. Mass transit produces defecits and, as such, is a very easy target for people whose beleifs in the role of government tend to lean towards reduction in spending.

I can't believe one could find a rational environmentalist who would argue that it is better to have thousands drive 120 miles round trip every day than it is for those thousands to take a commuter train, the environmental cost of which is primarily cutting down 25 years' growth of trees on a man-made ridge originally built for trains.

You'd think, right?

Btw, great avitar pic of the Bahia Honda Bridge! That must of have been a hair raising ride over it when that was open!!!

The impression I got reading some of the Sierra Club's literature was that they don't think the restored cutoff will result in thousands of passengers getting diverted from highway to rail, and that they also feel there are other rail projects that should be higher priorities than the restored cutoff.

I have seen some of those same arguments in this thread's many pages.

Jtgshu wrote:

JasW wrote:

SemperFidelis wrote:I've noticed that in the Sierra Club literature that I've read while at my grandmother-in-law's home that their opinions towards urban mass transit (subway, light rail, trolley etc.) are consistently very favorable. I've not read much about their opinions on longer distance commuter rail projects. Though I disagree with their (perhaps now reversed) stance against the Cutoff, I can appreciate their concern for sprawl. I might not happen to agree with that assessment, but everyone's allowed to have different opinions on these things.

One way or another, I think you'll find a much more favorable attitude towards mass transit amongst the environmentalist community than you will in the defecit-reduction community. Mass transit produces defecits and, as such, is a very easy target for people whose beleifs in the role of government tend to lean towards reduction in spending.

I can't believe one could find a rational environmentalist who would argue that it is better to have thousands drive 120 miles round trip every day than it is for those thousands to take a commuter train, the environmental cost of which is primarily cutting down 25 years' growth of trees on a man-made ridge originally built for trains.

You'd think, right?

Btw, great avitar pic of the Bahia Honda Bridge! That must of have been a hair raising ride over it when that was open!!!

Yup, if there were any rail trip I could go back in time and take, that would definitely be the one! Taking the Phoebe Snow over the Cutoff would not be all that far behind, though.

Thank you, Boylan.

I like the Cutoff project, but I'm a Scranton resident and have other (business related) reasons to want to see the line rebuilt. Again I'll say, you're bound to find more friends of mass transit amongst the ranks of the environmentalist movement when compared to other political/social movements in this country.

Good to see something happening with this...especially after all these years of conversation.

SemperFidelis wrote:I've noticed that in the Sierra Club literature that I've read while at my grandmother-in-law's home that their opinions towards urban mass transit (subway, light rail, trolley etc.) are consistently very favorable. I've not read much about their opinions on longer distance commuter rail projects. Though I disagree with their (perhaps now reversed) stance against the Cutoff, I can appreciate their concern for sprawl. I might not happen to agree with that assessment, but everyone's allowed to have different opinions on these things.

One way or another, I think you'll find a much more favorable attitude towards mass transit amongst the environmentalist community than you will in the defecit-reduction community. Mass transit produces defecits and, as such, is a very easy target for people whose beleifs in the role of government tend to lean towards reduction in spending.

The point about environmental organizations is only true at higher levels. Try to put a rail line through a forest somewhere, and you can bet your sweet @zz that the local "Clean Air <insert vaguely warlike term here>" group will be showing up with signs depicting locomotives running over bunnies. Been there, done that, seen that more times than I can remember.

I just visited byram and work is moving along nicely. Will they reach Andover before 4/1? Still lots to be done in 9 days!