Catskill Mountain Railroad Fighting for it's Future, Again.

NJDixon · **Joined:** Mon Dec 06, 2021 4:36 pm **Posts:** 304

Appears that once again the trail folks have the CMRR in their crosshairs, after already claiming a bunch of their rail corridor to rip up for trail. Now the Woodstock Land Conservancy and Open Space Institute are trying to get their hands on another 1.67 miles that CMRR was hoping to rehabilitate and use to extend their operations.

From the CMRR's Facebook page regarding the most recent meeting:

Quote:

"The previous meeting in February they were working on a resolution proposing Rail With Trail. This time they completely turned around and proposed that the CMRR could cross Rt 28A with enough track west for the train to clear the crossing and then start the trail from there. No extension, no Basin Road terminal and they tried to take it to a vote. The result of a handpicked committee being lead by an Ulster County Legislator who has been trying to kill the CMRR for almost two decades. Fortunately one committee member stopped the vote and called for more information. They will meet again on April 24th."

I feel bad for this poor operation, seems like they're just constantly fighting for their existence, even with constantly rising attendance and having been nominated by Ulster County Regional Chamber of Commerce as the Best Ulster County Tourist Attraction for 2023.

PaulWWoodring · **Posted:** Wed Mar 26, 2025 5:46 am

Just another reason I absolutely hate the greedy Rails-to-Trails people. They never met a rail RoW they didn't want to rip up, regardless of whether it was rail banked for future passenger use or not. This is going on in Ohio as well.

NJDixon · **Joined:** Mon Dec 06, 2021 4:36 pm **Posts:** 304

PaulWWoodring wrote:

Just another reason I absolutely hate the greedy Rails-to-Trails people. They never met a rail RoW they didn't want to rip up, regardless of whether it was rail banked for future passenger use or not. This is going on in Ohio as well.

Yep, I just saw where the vote was passed to rip up the rails that the Zanesville & Western has been running on.

scratchyX1 · **Joined:** Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:17 pm **Posts:** 152

NJDixon wrote:

PaulWWoodring wrote:

Just another reason I absolutely hate the greedy Rails-to-Trails people. They never met a rail RoW they didn't want to rip up, regardless of whether it was rail banked for future passenger use or not. This is going on in Ohio as well.

Yep, I just saw where the vote was passed to rip up the rails that the Zanesville & Western has been running on.

Because there is such a shortage of trails there....

PMC · **Joined:** Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:55 pm **Posts:** 2585

A lot of times it is property developers pushing bike trails on railroads, not because there is a need for bike trails, but because the sort of upscale people they want to sell housing to don't want even the hint of industrial activity where they live. So it is addition by subtraction for them.

Randy Gustafson · **Posted:** Fri Mar 28, 2025 9:27 am

Don't underestimate the local trails lobby there. I've been all over the US and involved with many trails, rails to trails, rails with trails projects.....
This is one of the most rabid left, likely deep blue, anti-tourism areas I've ever seen.
I was in a hearing where it was OPENLY advocated to close the railroad to openly discourage tourism simply to lessen vehicle omissions, and it wasn't just one person.
The property owners thing is real, but not here. This is different. It's just across the river from Poughkeepsie, easy rail commuter range to the City, and this has become a 'bedroom county' in some respects, all others can keep out. It's not everyone, for sure, but a rather interesting and very vocal minority. The fact that the railroad has become popular and successfully developing additional visitation is actually used against them, and I can't say as I've seen that one anywhere else.
You get across the next county line, and they are begging for visitors. Too far out to commute, you're on your own. Please come.

superheater · **Joined:** Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:54 pm **Posts:** 2516

Why is this surprising?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1766&p=6283&hilit=trails#p6283

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7377&hilit=puff+piece&start=0

superheater · **Joined:** Sun Aug 22, 2004 11:54 pm **Posts:** 2516

PMC wrote:

A lot of times it is property developers pushing bike trails on railroads, not because there is a need for bike trails, but because the sort of upscale people they want to sell housing to don't want even the hint of industrial activity where they live. So it is addition by subtraction for them.

Technically referred to as rent seeking.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/rentseeking.asp

Randy Gustafson · **Posted:** Mon Mar 31, 2025 11:39 am

There's no shortage of villains here, but on two of the ones I've worked on, and very familiar with a third, the adjacent property owners aggressively campaigned to keep the railroad in. A track was bad, but a trail full of strangers was considered far worse in their back yard.

The really interesting one on that was the conversion of the Port Royal Railroad to a trail (Spanish Moss Trail). There are some plantations adjacent to that, and the property owners set up such a battle they had to come up with a new trail alignment around their property. Pretty obvious on the map. The further north they got at Beaufort, the hotter the battle got.
https://www.spanishmosstrail.com/visit

So the property owners and the railroad can make strange bedfellows, too.

On the Minuteman Bikeway (Cambridge, MA) the higher-density residential structures have put up high steel security fences along the trail, with locks and doors so the residents only have access. Near Fresh Pond.
It could be argued both ways. Want a trail in your back yard, or a relatively quiet track?

The other 'odd thing' I've seen is the presence of fiber-optic ROW activity that can make a total mess out of trail conversion if the communications company has rights to keep the line open to vehicles, access, etc. Can't pave over it, usually trench-dug right off the edge were ties were.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV · **Posted:** Wed Apr 16, 2025 8:40 pm

Latest:

https://www.timesunion.com/hudsonvalley ... 240104.php

Quote:

KINGSTON — Last fall, the Catskill Mountain Railroad, a tourist attraction that brings passengers from Kingston into the foothills of the Catskill Mountains and back, issued a statement about winning three state grants.

The grants were from the Passenger and Freight Rail Assistance Program and totaled nearly $4.5 million. They were to build an engine house for the train near the rail line’s start at Kingston Plaza, to upgrade the engines to clean diesel, and to construct a terminal near the Ashokan Reservoir.

However, documents obtained by the Times Union show Ulster County needed to cosign parts of one of the grant applications for it to be valid. The county would not comply, but the Catskill Mountain Railroad applied for the cash anyway and was awarded $667,000 in state funds.

The money for the terminal was suspended before it was paid out after Ulster County notified the state about issues with the grant.

Additionally, Catskill Mountain Railroad has no claim on the land leading to the site of the proposed terminal. The company has a permit from Ulster County to operate on land from Kingston to within 1.8 miles of the terminal site and has a lease with a private property owner where the terminal would be built. But the company would need land rights to the 1.8-mile section to connect the two areas if it wants to extend its operation to the terminal.

This section — referred to as “the undesignated section” — is the subject of intense ongoing debate. An advisory committee of county legislators has been meeting since last year to decide what to do with it. Should it be a rail line, a hiking trail, or should it be widened to include both?

Catskill Mountain Railroad Fighting for it's Future, Again.

Who is online