[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: (erielack) Re: Boonton Line
Paul,
There are a couple of schools of thought on Boonton Line sale. The Thomas
Taber school (expressed in the Aftermath chapter in his three-volume book
on the DL&W) believed that the former Erie managers of the EL were hellbent
on destroying whatever they could of the former DL&W. He noted that there
were sympathizers in EL management, but they were told to keep their mouths
shut. Another school of thought is that the sale was done more out of
short-sightedness and incompetancy than any real plan to dismantle the DL&W
side. As Zimmermann points out in his book on the EL, in the short run
there wasn't any significant change in freight or commuter traffic. If
anything, the downgrading of the remaining Totowa Industrial Spur (east of
Mountain View) made it easier to service the myriad industries along that
short section. What was lost, of course, was a freight route that was
clearly superior to the Greenwood Lake. The issue of the Kingsland Tunnel
may or may not have been raised as a rationale for the abandonment at the
time. I just don't know, and I haven't seen anything from that era written
about it. Whether Taber or Zimmermann knew anything about that is unknown,
but neither mentioned it in their books. I think the issue may have been
moot as far as the EL management was concerned since they wanted virtually
all the traffic to go via the Erie side anyway. None of this might have
mattered if the EL hadn't decided to move virtually everything back to the
DL&W side later on. That's when, as Zimmermann points out, the decision to
sever the Garrett Mountain section came back to haunt the EL. The
"haunting" continued after Conrail took over, since CR indicated that it
might have considered retaining the DL&W side had it not been for the
break-up of the Boonton Line.
Chuck
"Paul Brezicki"
<doctorpb_@_bellsouth
.net> To: "EL Mailing List" <erielack_@_lists.railfan.net>
Sent by: "Paul R. Tupaczewski" <paultup_@_optonline.net>
erielack-owner_@_list cc:
s.elhts.org Subject:
(erielack) Re: Boonton Line
03/16/2006 09:27 AM
Please respond to
"Paul Brezicki"
I wonder if there was also an element of misguided management stoicism,
reminiscent of Espee's T&NO culture. A similar thing (on a smaller scale)
happened around the same time on the Erie side when NY DOT offered to
replace the "leaning tower of Suffern" when the Thruway was constructed
nearly on top of it, and EL declined. Another Boonton Line problem
unforeseen in 1963 was that Kingsland tunnel could not clear tall trailers
(req'd 17' ), and I doubt the EL had the cash post-Agnes to fund a
clearance
project. BTW, does anyone know which train derailed in Bloomfield?
Paul B
If the EL management hadn't been so desperate for cash, the route might
have remained intact, as Gary points out. As far as I know, the initial
plan was to include one track, but the DOT commissioner (it was actually
the Highway Department in those days) hatched a plan to avoid having to
condemn additional houses adjacent to the right-of-way by enticing the EL
with money to drop the idea of keeping the one track. I think a couple of
million dollars was involved, but don't quote me on that. No matter what
the "enticement" was, it wasn't worth it in the long-run. When I go
through that section of I-80 I try to imagine how the track would have
run--whether in the center or off to the side of the ROW--and sometimes
fantasize that the track could be put back...but the cost of doing so now
would be astronomical. This was clearly, in my opinion, at the top of the
list of EL boneheaded moves.
Chuck
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
Sponsored by the ELH&TS
http://www.elhts.org
The Erie Lackawanna Mailing List
Sponsored by the ELH&TS
http://www.elhts.org
------------------------------