Well, Ken, you have conflated two different industries: commuter rail service and tourist railroading. Now it is quite clear to me that Mr. Tower is referring to commuter rail and he has a real negative opinion about the "Over the River" project. That has translated into opposition to any activity--such as commuter trains--that would further the "Over the River" project.
However, Mr. Tower is right in one important respect: there isn't a commuter rail operation anywhere in North America (and probably Europe and Asia too) that isn't heavily subsidized. Face it, the railroads themselves lost a ton of money over the decades running passenger service; it was just chalked up to public relations costs. Having been involved for three decades in Front Range Colorado commuter rail advocacy, I know the harsh realities. Commuter rail along the Arkansas just ain't gonna happen.
The tourist railroading business is a different beast. Some operations are strictly "for profit," like the CC&RG. Not that they are getting rich fast; tourist railroading is a chancy business. The CC&RG just happens to have the advantage of another major tourist attraction in the area to draw visitors. It also had a partner early on that helped spread the capital cost of a start-up. On the other hand, you have non-profit tourist railroads like the C&TS that are remotely located, struggle to attract ridership, and depend on subsidies to stay afloat. Long ago the states of Colorado and New Mexico agreed that ongoing subsidies were the price they were willing to pay to draw tourism to that region and provide employment opportunities for locals. So the C&TS will likely receive handouts as long as it is around.
Back to the Arkansas. In the commuter rail arena we have a concept called the "seat-mile." It's not a complex concept; it is simply the distance one rider occupying one seat travels. For every seat mile there are fixed and variable costs. The farther that rider rides, the greater the seat-mile cost. To meet those costs over long distances, you have to push up the income stream in some way to meet the fixed and increased variable costs. In the case of Amtrak it is government subsidies. In the case of the train rider along the Arkansas, it means increasing the fare. You finally reach a point-of-no-return; you can't attract riders at the prices you have to charge to cover your seat-mile costs, no matter how gorgeous the scenery through which you travel. Result: no riders.
The CC&RG is a very expensive operation to run; witness the fact that the fare in the dome diner (for example) is (or was last year) $105.00/person. That pays the cost for carrying each seat-mile in the dome-diner 24 miles and serves them an upscale meal. Now multiply that cost by the some 194 miles round trip between Pueblo and Salida. Doing a rough interpolation from the existing dome diner fare, the round-trip fare would have to be $848.75!!! OK, there are a lot a variables involved that I haven't considered that might bring that number down somewhat (even if I cut the fare in half, it is still $424), but the fact of the matter is that the CC&RG could not offer the excursion train service you envision at a price than anybody but the most affluent could afford. If you ran a deluxe, premium-fare diner/sleeper service (something like the American Orient Express) between Pueblo and Vail/Minturn/Beaver Creek, you
might just make a go of it. But neither you nor I would be on that train.
Regarding steam, I would say that I love it--but it would take someone with very deep pockets to make it happen. A big, running steam locomotive runs $500-800,000 to purchase these days. You have huge overhead with steam. For example, you are confronted every 15 years with the mandatory FRA Form 4 inspection, which can run upwards (very upwards) of $500,000. And so on. Remember, a steam locomotive is a magnificent machine designed to beat itself to death. They require constant, expensive maintenance. The only entity that I know of with that kind of deep pockets to support a long-distance steam train is the Uncle Pete. Witness thye Grand Canyon Ry (that had very little to do with environmental concerns).
BTW, the rest of the Tennessee Pass line is
not for sale. The UP flip-flops continuously over what they are going to do with Tennessee Pass. But the one thing they will absolutely NOT do is to take any action that might possibly allow the BNSF to gain access to that corridor. The State of Colorado should have bought Tennessee Pass a dozen years ago when the UP offered it for sale back then . But that was then and this is now. So it sits.
PS. Much of the Tennessee Pass line needs extensive (and expensive) rebuilding, all the way from Pueblo to Dotsero. I have personally inspected track in the Eagle River Gorge where the rail head has been ground down until it is 1/3-inch thick (!!!); much of the rail on the line needs to be replaced to make the line safe. I suspect there has been no tie replacement for probably at least 15 years, likely longer. And on and on. Alas, dreams are cheap; running a railroad is not.
Whew--another rant comes to a close!
Mike Rowe
