Re: 35 years of history *LINK*

What have we learned in the past 35 years about operating, preserving and growing the Cumbres & Toltec RR? I can’t help thinking of the old parable about giving a man a handout vs. teaching him to fish or cultivate a crop so he won’t go hungry is analogous to the long term future of the Cumbres & Toltec. It would appear that some strategic planning/marketing would return the investment and is absolutely critical to the RRs survival. Sorry to be so blunt but creating separate funds to save this or that is just not helping solve the bigger problem of creating a sustainable tourist RR.
Perhaps a detailed marketing plan has been done by one of the operators at some point, if someone knows this to be a fact then I am wondering where the data, plan and/or reports may now reside. 70,000 people rode the RR in 1998 so what were the factors that resulted in this level of ridership? I would call your attention to the linked 5 year Capital Improvement plan created by the current operator. I am wondering where we are vis-à-vis the plan given $20 million is required for ROW improvements and we are now heading into the second of year of this plan. It is interesting to note that both engines # 492 and # 497 were to undergo restoration in this fiscal year which started July 1, 2005.
Here are some observations some of which may be “controversial” but honestly they need to be dealt with or I am afraid the problems of the past will continue to resurface.
1. Rethink how the RR is operated
Many tourists really don’t want an all day excursion on a RR. As much as we may enjoy the experience I submit many people would just as soon not invest a full day riding a train. If we look back on the D & RGW San Juan as our “model” then it is possible to make the one way 64 mile trip from Antonito to Chama in a little over 3 hours (assuming track is upgraded). Since the economic benefits to the communities (most directly Chama and Antonito) and to a lesser extent surrounding locations is better served by having tourists dine in the local towns elimination of the Osier lunch stop may have more economic benefit for merchants as well as reducing the ticket price. Again this is assuming that multiple train(s) would make both a morning departure and early afternoon departures from Antonito/ Chama and arrive mid day and early evening (roundtrip still possible ala D&S schedule). This increases the tourist presence and spreads visitors to each location over the course of the day. Return bus transportation one way would still be required whether trains departed Chama or Antonito for one way riders. The eastbound train could also be timed to drop passengers at Cumbres for return on the westbound while through passengers would continue to Antonito or given sufficient demand Cumbres turns could be made.
2. Market the experience as a package
The impact on how many visitors stay over in Chama is the big unknown and probably one reason the current all day trip creates more overnight visitors in Chama. Who is looking at the big picture though of the tourist experience vis-a-vis quality control (restaurants, motels and ancillary merchants) and related activities to enhance the visitor experience before or after riding the train? The chambers of commerce and RR need to do more to ensure that tourist’s needs/ experience are a key focus. It is not just all about riding the train! This is a tall order given this effort is only 5 1/2 months of the year which is partly why I don’t think Chama will ever be able to duplicate the infrastructure that Durango has (nor would many want it to). So attracting tourists to the area may have to draw to a larger degree on day tourists and tours. This is where this whole discussion gets politically messy as the railroads purpose and economic benefits to the communities are so intertwined. The railroad needs more passengers to prosper and meet its commitment to the states and the community wants to see the economic benefits trickle down to the merchants/ residents. How do you do both, given the resources available?
So in a nutshell what I am not seeing is an actionable marketing plan that details how the operator meets the long term goals of 1. Meeting the financial commitments to the states as set forth in the 5 year plan while preserving the historic character of the RR and 2. Have both states adopted the 5 year plan for financing the RR in the current fiscal year and beyond regardless of ridership numbers?
Rod Jensen