Comment EI-5435
Received or sent (printed as 2/14/2008)
Having read the case documented in Docket No. AB-1014, I can only conclude that the historical group is in the right. Creede has shown no intention to do anything with the mile of track in question that serves the public good. When there is a group trying to preserve a rail line, should the STB allow adverse abandonment? I think not. If there was not an active effort to operate the line, I might feel differently, but if you rule for Creede, then any operator (common carrier, non-profit) who is busy raising funds for restoration would be under risk of having their ROW taken away. This case should be a slam dunk. Let the current operators get out of the courts and onto the rails. Creede should not be allowed to throw them out. And how, if this track was not already officially abandoned, did Creede build a playground on it? Very odd. Rob Davis
Submitted by: Robert John Davis · Red Bank, NJ
The Board publishes this comment in its environmental-comment table for this proceeding. It is quoted here as printed; nothing is inferred from it, and it states the commenter's own position in their own words, not this record's.
Permanent address docketyard.org/d/AB-1014/comment/EI-5435 · back to the docket sheet