Greenway - old ROW in Mt. Morris, NY

Not quite true. If you read the Creation of Conrail book this is discussed. It basically says you would have thought it would be easy to work this out because of ownership but it was actually difficult and time consuming. This was part of the problem as you got into the 60s and 70s that was causing the downfall of the PRR, NYC, etc. Management style was changing.

lvrr325 wrote:What allowed the PRR to abandon much of this line was their control of the LV; being that they owned most of the LV the trackage rights over the LV from Buffalo were relatively easy to come by. Some of the last of it in Rochester lasted into Conrail, I believe the last bits of it went to the R&S and there may be still one small segment left.

It's still pretty obvious where you cross it on the Thruway -

Matt Langworthy wrote:Depending on when Shaughnessy et al got out to western NY, they might not have even had the chance to photograph steam... which is the point of my earlier post. Why would they spend valuable time on a sleepy branch when they could capture more action elsewhere?

Steam was still running when they were around. Buffalo, Rochester and Elmira lines. Rochester was easy to follow just one train though, most of the time.

I think LVRR325 was referring to remaining PRR track. There is still a segment left at the old Genesee Jct. to service the scrap yard (R&S does this). Some rail is still in place south of Chili Ave on the Terminal Branch.

Don't forget that the LV's P&L yard was expanded to handle the PRR. Some of those remaining tracks were PRR owned and installed.

scottychaos wrote:

lvrr325 wrote:What allowed the PRR to abandon much of this line was their control of the LV; being that they owned most of the LV the trackage rights over the LV from Buffalo were relatively easy to come by. Some of the last of it in Rochester lasted into Conrail, I believe the last bits of it went to the R&S and there may be still one small segment left.

Only two small segments of LV in the area discussed in this thread..
a small section of LV *double track* mainline at P&L junction!
now used for car storage by R&S and/or "Commodity Resource Corporation" at P&L junction..

and a remnant of the LV Rochester branch in Henrietta..in use by the LAL..

Scot

nydepot wrote:I think LVRR325 was referring to remaining PRR track. There is still a segment left at the old Genesee Jct. to service the scrap yard (R&S does this). Some rail is still in place south of Chili Ave on the Terminal Branch.

Don't forget that the LV's P&L yard was expanded to handle the PRR. Some of those remaining tracks were PRR owned and installed.

scottychaos wrote:

lvrr325 wrote:What allowed the PRR to abandon much of this line was their control of the LV; being that they owned most of the LV the trackage rights over the LV from Buffalo were relatively easy to come by. Some of the last of it in Rochester lasted into Conrail, I believe the last bits of THE PRR LINE went to the R&S and there may be still one small segment left.

Only two small segments of LV in the area discussed in this thread..
a small section of LV *double track* mainline at P&L junction!
now used for car storage by R&S and/or "Commodity Resource Corporation" at P&L junction..

and a remnant of the LV Rochester branch in Henrietta..in use by the LAL..

Scot

Sorry, I assumed everyone would know by the topic being the Greenway Trail/PRR Rochester Branch, that was what I meant. I don't see where anywhere in the thread there's discussion of what LV track remains, and I believe the trail that follows the former LV has a different name.

As to the difficulty of PRR's rights on the LV to reach the segments that remained after 1963, with PRR owning 80% plus of the LV, long term leased PRR locomotives on the LV, and PRR men in the LV management ranks, it made it hard for the LV to say no. There are several examples of consolidation in the 1960s where the PRR shifted to LV facilities, and then after the PC merger the LV shifted to use former NYC track from Geneva to Auburn as well. Not to mention the locomotive trading that went on. The paperwork may have been complicated and a pain in the behind, but it was mostly a formality.

Not according to "The Railroad Mergers and the Coming of ConRail" by Richard Saunders. The point was it should have been easy for all the points you mention but it was not. And because it was not easy a lot of other things that could have been done were not (other lines). Plus the ICC had to approve it.

lvrr325 wrote:As to the difficulty of PRR's rights on the LV to reach the segments that remained after 1963, with PRR owning 80% plus of the LV, long term leased PRR locomotives on the LV, and PRR men in the LV management ranks, it made it hard for the LV to say no. There are several examples of consolidation in the 1960s where the PRR shifted to LV facilities, and then after the PC merger the LV shifted to use former NYC track from Geneva to Auburn as well. Not to mention the locomotive trading that went on. The paperwork may have been complicated and a pain in the behind, but it was mostly a formality.

Regardless what the book says, for these things to happen the PRR had to nearly take over the LV; and they did happen, in a relatively reasonable period of time figuring for ICC and other approval. They got a ton of benefits that might come with a merger, without actually having a merger. Seems like if it was possible but difficult without stock control, it would have happened sooner, I'm sure PRR wanted out of some of these marginal operations well before they quit the lines.

PRR owned the majority of stock since the 1930s. The PRR still only had 51% ownership when it applied to abandon the line and use the LV for rights. It still was apparently a pain to negotiate even with 51%. The book is clear in talking to the the executives that even with a 51% ownership, it was very difficult for the PRR and LV to negotiate the deal.

It wasn't until the ICC was nearly ready to rule that the 85% ownership kicked in. I think it could have helped (speculation) but the principle players had already testified to the ICC and trackage rights already drawn up and negotiated by the time the 85% kicked in. Plus there was more to the LV ownership than needing to end service on the Rochester line (i.e. the purpose of LV ownership was not to abandon the Rochester line). The PRR only changed a few things in Buffalo and the Rochester rights with the LV control. Most of the control was utilized towards New York City.

I'm basing my info on books with sources and ICC testimony in my hands.

Your paragraph appears to be speculation. "Seems like", "if it was possible", "would have" and "I'm sure" are speculative.

lvrr325 wrote:Regardless what the book says, for these things to happen the PRR had to nearly take over the LV; and they did happen, in a relatively reasonable period of time figuring for ICC and other approval. They got a ton of benefits that might come with a merger, without actually having a merger. Seems like if it was possible but difficult without stock control, it would have happened sooner, I'm sure PRR wanted out of some of these marginal operations well before they quit the lines.

My wife and I bicycled it from Mt. Morris south to Tuscarora (half of which is necessarily on public roads because the railroad needed to cross the river multiple times and those bridges are all gone south of Sonyea), and the next day from Mt. Morris north to the Rochester Airport. I dumped the car off there and took a taxi back, so we were "committed" to completing the ride. It's a very nice ride -- I recommend it highly.

North of Mt. Morris it's 100% on the railbed (except for a little portion in Rochester where there are still active rails). South of Mt. Morris there are extended stretches where the railbed is unusable.

scottychaos wrote: I would guess 1952 to 1955 as a reasonable date for "last PRR steam" through Letchworth..anyone know for sure?

Scot - I know by 1955 steam was gone from the Rochester branch.

In late 1954 my family moved into a house in Scottsville that had the PRR ROW almost in our front yard. I never once saw a steam on the branch (and as a kid I watched it closely!). Rather motive power was exclusively 1st generation EMD switchers or Alco RS1/3's.

So it seems likely steam thru Letchworth would have been finished by the '52 - '55 time frame you suggest.

...FB

You are correct Bob.

nydepot wrote:

Matt Langworthy wrote:Depending on when Shaughnessy et al got out to western NY, they might not have even had the chance to photograph steam... which is the point of my earlier post. Why would they spend valuable time on a sleepy branch when they could capture more action elsewhere?

Steam was still running when they were around. Buffalo, Rochester and Elmira lines. Rochester was easy to follow just one train though, most of the time.

I wouldn't call foilowing the Pennsy's branchline to Rochester easy. The area around Mt. Morris was mostly back roads in the 1950s. There were very few 55 mph highways (according to my older relatives) and I can remember when I-390 was built in the early '80s, so a chase of that branch may have been very, very challenging. With steam being gone by 1955 at the latest, I have to wonder why someone like Shaughnessy (who was very much a steam enthusiast) would want to chase the branch.

Not to mention that there are very few road intersections with that line. It makes for a quiet rail-trail, but it also means that there's not really ANY place to buy bottled drinks between Scottsville and Mt. Morris. And even in Scottsville there's nothing close by the railroad (anymore).

The RR parallels the road from Mt. Morris to Sonyea. You can make a right and get into Tuscarora before it does as it struggles to head uphill. Head over to Nunda and from Nunda to outside Oakland, again within sight of the road. Maybe make it to the top of the bridge in Portage to look down as it crawls through the gorge with slow orders.

Then head back down and catch up to it south of Portageville and follow it along Rt. 19 all the way to Oramel befor it heads away. You could try again along Rt. 305.

North of Mt. Morris is harder even with denser population. Between Mt. Morris and Cuylerville the road parallels it. River Rd follows it in many places and is how I photographed it originally (pre-trail). Then Scottsville Rd.

You just keep jutting over and grabbing photos.

I have a series in my collection of several chases from the late 40s and early 50s.

Trains were really slow back then and south of Mt. Morris even slower. Even the Erie's parallel River line was high-speed rail compared to this branch.

Max sped was 30mph with a whole lot of 15s and slow orders. Derailments were very common. It was relatively easy to chase if you knew the area.

Easiest to follow was the Buffalo line with the road within shooting distance. Then the Rochester and then the Elmira. Elmira had the convenience of Rt 14/414 but it was not close and you needed to keep jutting over to it. It was also a faster line. With the traffic density, people tended to wait at a location and have the trains come to them.

Shaughnessy was taking photos when it was still steam. Again, I talked to him.

I'm not guessing on this stuff. I talked to Shaughnessy and others (1000+ interviews). I'm not an expert but I know firsthand from many people who lived and chased the line what as possible and not.

Matt Langworthy wrote:

nydepot wrote:

Matt Langworthy wrote:Depending on when Shaughnessy et al got out to western NY, they might not have even had the chance to photograph steam... which is the point of my earlier post. Why would they spend valuable time on a sleepy branch when they could capture more action elsewhere?

Steam was still running when they were around. Buffalo, Rochester and Elmira lines. Rochester was easy to follow just one train though, most of the time.

I wouldn't call foilowing the Pennsy's branchline to Rochester easy. The area around Mt. Morris was mostly back roads in the 1950s. There were very few 55 mph highways (according to my older relatives) and I can remember when I-390 was built in the early '80s, so a chase of that branch may have been very, very challenging. With steam being gone by 1955 at the latest, I have to wonder why someone like Shaughnessy (who was very much a steam enthusiast) would want to chase the branch.

Here is a link to the History of the Canal System of the State of New York.

http://www.history.rochester.edu/canal/ ... tents.html

RailKevin wrote:Here is a link to the History of the Canal System of the State of New York.

http://www.history.rochester.edu/canal/ ... tents.html

Whitford's book is great. Thanks for finding the link.

Charles