Re: A third rail to Alamosa.

Glad this subject came up. A word which has not arisen in this conversation is "insular". I remember when the states bought the C&TS, a stick of rail was temporarily removed in Antonito to make the C&TS an insular railroad, and thereby (supposedly) exempt from FRA rules and regulations.

Now it is apparent that the FRA does exert its influence on the C&TS. My question is whether or not this is a legal right by the FRA to do so, or are they involved through some sort of agreement with the states. I'm not arguing against their presence as I think it is a good thing.

Now going back to the current topic of restoring the third rail between Antonito to Alamosa: I'm guessing, but I would suspect that replacing the third rail, even in the localized Antonito area would once again cause the C&TS to be a part of the interstate transportation system, and therefore no longer "insular". And this change in designation probably would be applied to the entire C&TS, and not just the Antonito-Alamosa area.

As has been pointed out this would probably trigger a host of rules and regulations which heretofore have only been loosely applied to the C&TS - if at all. As neat as it would be to see the third rail in place in Antonito, I have to question whether whether this would be cost effective.

CJ