D&H Rights on Sou. Tier /CNJ Rail

I thought we had a "The Southern Tier: So Long, And Thanks For All The Fish?" thread?*

http://railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9728

Back to the CNJ "proposal" discussion, please.

-otto-

*Please pardon my Douglas Aadams reference.

s4ny wrote:By 1955 it would have made no sense for the Nickel Plate to merge with the Lackawanna. The NKP was in excellent fianancial shape, its stock price and dividend increasing. The NKP had both the DL&W and Lehigh Valley with whom to interchange at Buffalo.

The Lackawanna had a line from Binghamton to Buffalo that generated very little traffic and was designed for westbound rather than eastbound freight. The NY/NJ taxes, inflexible unions, unprofitable branch lines and passenger operations have already been noted.

The LV actually had a better line for eastbound freight but, like the Lackawanna, originated little online traffic on its westernmost 200 miles. That the LV had a better line than either the Erie or the DL&W is evidenced by the speed with which it was dismantled west of Waverly by Conrail, lest it fall into the hands of a competitor.

The Southern Tier Line survives today as the secondary NY-Buffalo line more because of the sequence of events than any other reason. Now, as in the days of Gould, Drew and Fisk, it is pawn in the game of players.

The lines that were not part of Conrail such as the Lehigh Valley (most of
it anyway) were NOT torn up by Conrail. Conrail NEVER owned these
lines in the first place so how could they have torn them up? They were
torn up and the property disposed of by the Lehigh Valley estate or the
remnant of the Lehigh Valley. Same for the Erie Lackawanna sections in
Ohio and west of, they were owned by the Erie Lackawanna and never
part of Conrail.
The former Lackawanna cutoff in New Jersey was part of Conrail so that
particular line was dismantled by Conrail. New Jersey was offered every
opportunity to buy that property in the early 1980's but they chose to do
nothing except collect taxes on it so Conrail did what they had to do.
I do not think it is fair to place the blame on Conrail for the demise of the
vairious un-needed lines in the northeast.
As I and others have stated on here several times, even in 1976, there
was no need for all of the railroad lines between the New York area and
Buffalo. The best routes were kept, the rest sold, downgraded or
abandoned.
The former New York Central route had the most favorable grades, the
best physical plant, the highest capacity and served the best traffic areas
and larges cities, that is why it is still operating.
Noel Weaver

s4ny wrote:By 1955 it would have made no sense for the Nickel Plate to merge with the Lackawanna. The NKP was in excellent fianancial shape, its stock price and dividend increasing. The NKP had both the DL&W and Lehigh Valley with whom to interchange at Buffalo.

The Lackawanna had a line from Binghamton to Buffalo that generated very little traffic and was designed for westbound rather than eastbound freight. The NY/NJ taxes, inflexible unions, unprofitable branch lines and passenger operations have already been noted.

The LV actually had a better line for eastbound freight but, like the Lackawanna, originated little online traffic on its westernmost 200 miles. That the LV had a better line than either the Erie or the DL&W is evidenced by the speed with which it was dismantled west of Waverly by Conrail, lest it fall into the hands of a competitor.

The Southern Tier Line survives today as the secondary NY-Buffalo line more because of the sequence of events than any other reason. Now, as in the days of Gould, Drew and Fisk, it is pawn in the game of players.

As much as I love LV, it was not a better route than DL&W. In fact, LV was a longer route between Buffalo and northern NJ than either Lackawanna or Erie. Lackawanna actually had the shortest route between Buffalo and the NY/NJ area of any railroad. Furthermore, the Lackawanna reached some cities that LV missed (or entered on trackage rights), such as Binghamton, Corning, Elmira, Syracuse and Utica. Not the largest cities in the world, but they did generate traffic. And Lackawanna's successor EL certainly had many more trains per day than LV.

True, NKP was scared of DL&W's debt and taxes but H. Roger Grant's book also has a valid point when it quotes a source who felt that NKP's management balked on the merger because Perry Shoemaker, not NKP's President Lynn White, was likely become president of the new corporation. Perhaps as a larger company with better financial resources, the DL&W/NKP hybrid would have had the clout to lobby NJ and NY for cessation of commuter service, or at least taxes. Lawyers and lobbyists don't work for free!

Unfortunately for LV, it was alot easier to move their bridge traffic to EL than vice versa. Who tore up the LV west of Van Etten doesn't matter- the line would've survived if it wasn't redundant. And to get back to D&H, why didn't they buy LV? Answer: it was cheaper to utilize trackage rights on the ex-EL.

How ironic: it's my 100th post here and I have to defend DL&W at the expense of LV!

Guys? CNJ proposal? Remember that? Let's drift back on-topic, shall we?

There is a complete and lengthy discussion of the past, present, and future of the Southern Tier, from Erie/DLW to EL to Conrail, located here:
http://railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=9728

This thread is for the discussion of the CNJ "proposal."

-otto-