Western Railroad Discussion > Colorado Pacific/SLRG more info

Here's more details in the Alamosa Valley Courier.  For those not familiar the San Luis & Rio Grande  (ex-D&RGW) runs from near Walsenburg, Colorado past Alamosa to South Fork, with a branch to Antonito (once the Rio Grande's famed 3-rail track).  Colorado Pacific owns the old MoPac main in eastern Colorado and has bought it back from the dead, as had been mentioned in the thread below, has huge agriculture money behind it.  

https://alamosanews.com/article/colorado-pacific-railroad-wins-auction-for-slrg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/18/22 10:48 by DRGW483.

Are they any good maps out there online showing these lines. I wonder if they will be able to get trackage rights linking thier two lines now. Whatever happned with these same companies trying to reopen TN. Pass?

Congratulations Colorado Pacific RR-!

Photo shows newly delivered (September 2022) units CXR 1964 and 1923 at NA Junction east of Boone, CO, 15 September 2022.

DRGW483 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Colorado Pacific owns the old MoPac main
> in eastern Colorado and has bought it back from
> the dead, as had been mentioned in the thread
> below, has huge agriculture money behind it.  
 

---

mococomike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are they any good maps out there online showing
> these lines. I wonder if they will be able to get
> trackage rights linking thier two lines now.
> Whatever happned with these same companies trying
> to reopen TN. Pass?

Distance from Pueblo to Walsenburg is about 50 miles. Colo Pacific trackage ends at NA Jct which is about 9 miles east of Boone Colo. So based on that, probably about 34 miles from NA Jct to Pueblo then 50 south to Walsenburg. SLRG Trackage begins pretty much in downtown Walsenburg Co. Venturing a guess then you would be talking abot 84 miles of needed Trackage Rights if possible o get in order to connect the 2 section of RR.. Be a stretch any way ya look at it. Ben

BNSF can be your friend.   I think CoPac was talking about  running grain via BNSF to west coast for export.

IDK how much out of the way it would be to run grain southwest via Raton and then the BNSF transcon west.  That would avoid a huge amount of running on UP via BNSF trackage rights, and the nonsense currently going on abt TP, with UP coming up with BS excuses why thry dont want to sell, and the Train Hater counties along the rout also.  
In the long run, the train haters have no standing, they can just make noise and prolog things.  Colorado could go to UP and say "use it or lose it", but that could be a long court battle too.    If UP had any sense, they would sell TP and take the money and run.   Im guessing backroom politics is at the bottom of it all. 

Sounds like a lot of trackage rights for probably little if any direct freight routing either existing or possibly developed. It would however, be handy for equipment moves.
Go

SL&RG grain is primarily barley and goes North and the sizeable potato harvest goes East, not much use for
a connection between the lines. But good things happen with commonality of ownership, you have enough
employees for everything from a decent health plan to a 401k program. Your managment overhead can be
consolidated and best of all your sales people (person) has knowledge of the economies, crops and issues
for both operations. I can see some good things happening here.

Out 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/22 10:18 by callum_out.

pdt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BNSF can be your friend.   I think CoPac was
> talking about  running grain via BNSF to west
> coast for export.
>
> IDK how much out of the way it would be to run
> grain southwest via Raton and then the BNSF
> transcon west.  That would avoid a huge amount of
> running on UP via BNSF trackage rights, and the
> nonsense currently going on abt TP,

Very plausible to move grain to west coast via BNSF.  But it will not move via Tennesee Pass, the Moffat, or Raton Pass--the grades are too steep.  It will go south to Amarillo and west on the Southern Transcon.  BSB 

BigSkyBlue Wrote:
- Very plausible to move grain to west coast via
> BNSF.  But it will not move via Tennesee Pass,
> the Moffat, or Raton Pass--the grades are too
> steep.  It will go south to Amarillo and west on
> the Southern Transcon.  BSB 

Sad part about this is it would have to go north to Pueblo from Walsenburg first. Then east to La Junta and eventually Las Animas Jct where it would then head south to Amarillo and the Transcon. Ben

Go South to Trinidad and head for the Alps, no need to go to Pueblo.

Out 

callum_out Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Go South to Trinidad and head for the Alps, no
> need to go to Pueblo.
>
> Out 

Probably not gonna happen tho Rich. BNSF runs the track you are talking about as directional NB. From what I have been told thru the years, they pretty much stick to this plan. I thought about that routing also but seeing how the way BNSF operates it, can't see it happening. They run the Coal that they receive ,when they get one,at the newly reopened Mine west of Jansen, north to Pblo Jct then east to LJ/LAJct /Boise City/Amarillo. Same goes for running east to La Junta over the trackage that AMTRAK runs over. Ben

Ben you certainly have a point and it's pretty much a whatever considering the number of years that
line ran in a bidiectional manner. But when you consider that they run empty LA IM from Portland by
way of Denver then rules is rules.

Out 

Mist be able between a break in traffic to heat Trindad  and make it LaJunta with a larger movement, UP runs a local now to Walsenburg, BNSF does not that I am aware of.  Jansen coal has been rumored to go west over Raton, but I think darren sates there are only 2 trains a month currently?

To go west from trindad the train would do sections to Raton then built there?  

Grain from either line could head northwest to the PNW on BNSF via Fort Collins and Laurel, MT, or via UP via Cheyenne and Pocatello.

The combined ownership of the two lines by an operator like Colorado Pacific that wants to grow traffic makes it a more attractive interchange partner for either Class 1 and maybe even gives it a bit more clout in setting rate divisions.

While I don't personally believe in the Tennessee Pass fantasy, maybe Colorado Pacific would want to consider trying to purchase the Rock and Rail connection to Cañon City from UP for similar synergistic reasons of traffic growth in southern Colorado that a UP can't/won't try to pursue as a higher cost operator. 



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/20/22 14:35 by pbouzide.

pbouzide Wrote:

> While I don't personally believe in the Tennessee
> Pass fantasy, maybe Colorado Pacific would want to
> consider trying to purchase the Rock and Rail
> connection to Cañon City from UP for similar
> synergistic reasons of traffic growth in southern
> Colorado that a UP can't/won't try to pursue as a
> higher cost operator. 

But Rock & Rail did not purchase what they operate from the UP. What they received was all the ex ATSF that was between Pueblo and Canon City. Rock & Rail along with the Canon City and Royal Gorge OWN thetrackage from basically 9th St in Canon City west to the west end of the Parkdale siding. UP Maintained trackage rights to connect what they operate on to bridge the gap between Canon City and Parkdale, they still own from there west. And Martin Marietta owns the Rock & Rail. The quarry at Parkdale has a projection of 150 years of rock available to mine. There are also a few other, tho not many, that Rock & Rail serves. There is NO agricultural business along the way between Pblo and Canon City. To me it appears that Colorado Pacific is geared more for movement of grain and car storage, which is currently their major contributor of their bottom line. Ben



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/22 09:24 by ns2557.