SALIDA, Colo. - For about 25 years, people around
here have observed that "the train doesn't stop here any more."
Someday soon, we may be saying that the train doesn't even come
through here any more.
"Here"
is a town of 5,000 in the middle of Colorado. Like many towns in
the West - Cheyenne, Livingston, Ogden, Billings, Flagstaff, to
name only a few - Salida is the product of a
railroad.
For the past 116 years, trains have
rumbled through town, climbing along the Arkansas River and over
the Continental Divide. It began with tiny narrow-gauge loads of
ore bound for nearby mills and smelters, and it continues with
mile-long trains just passing through the Rockies. They carry coal
from mountain and desert mines bound for power plants in Texas,
iron ore from the Great Lakes to a steel mill in Utah, standardized
containers of auto components built in the Orient and headed for
assembly plants in the Midwest.
Even though most
trains these days just pass through, it isn't quite true that the
train doesn't stop here any more. Southern Pacific freight trains
do stop occasionally to take on a carload of coal for a local
limestone processing plant. Or to pick up a tank car of liquid
fertilizer, a byproduct from zinc processing, and move it to
California. Several small quarries export crushed rock for
ornamental use. About 60 miles up the line, the Asarco Black Cloud,
Leadville's last operating mine, ships 30 carloads of zinc and
silver concentrates each month to a smelter in
Montana.
The railroad makes it possible for this
otherwise remote valley to participate in the American industrial
system - a part of the Rust Belt, if you will, albeit a part that
sits two miles above sea level.
But those jobs -
fairly steady blue-collar jobs that pay decent wages - are about to
vanish, and there's no way to blame spotted owls, endangered toads,
or even urban environmentalists.
Instead, blame
two other traditional Western bogeymen, Wall Street and Washington.
To the approval of the stock market, and the further enrichment of
a billionaire, the federal government approved the merger of the
Union Pacific and Southern Pacific railroads last month. UP says it
can handle SP's long-haul traffic on other routes, and that there
isn't enough local freight to matter.
So the UP
wants to rip out these rails - about 170 miles of the old "Royal
Gorge Route" that runs west in Colorado from Caûon City to
Salida and over Tennessee Pass.
Despite the
opposition of wheat farmers on the Great Plains, UP also plans to
abandon about 120 miles of track that stretches east from
Pueblo.
Here in the mountains, the state
government offers to replace rail service with a trail called "the
Heart of the Rockies Historic Corridor." It should be one monster
of a tourist draw with steep gorges, scenic trestles, inviting
tunnels and mile after mile of steady, gentle grade suitable for
$1,800 bicycles that arrive atop $30,000 sport-utility
vehicles.
The railroad abandonment will be
another step in the cultural and economic transformation that is
happening across much of the West, a change from heavy extractive
industry to scenic amenity tourism. Steady union-scale jobs will be
replaced by seasonal burger-flipping and
tourist-smiling.
Wages will drop, but housing
costs will rise, as outdoor-experience writers "discover" new
trails and towns to exploit.
The West will
henceforth labor under a "duopoly" of railroads. More than 90
percent of the rail traffic on the dry side of the 100th meridian
will be hauled by UP and Burlington Northern Santa Fe, each the
product of mergers and acquisitions: No more Western Pacific,
Missouri Pacific, Rock Island, Katy, Great Northern, Northern
Pacific, Chicago & Northwestern, Colorado & Southern, Fort
Worth & Denver, Frisco, Denver & Rio Grande
Western.
The biggest consolidations are recent.
In 1995, the Interstate Commerce Commission approved the merger of
the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe with the Burlington Northern to
form the Burlington Northern Santa Fe. That merger provoked little
notice or opposition, perhaps because they had few parallel routes.
Burlington Northern primarily connected Chicago with Puget Sound
and Denver. The Santa Fe essentially ran from Chicago to Los
Angeles across New Mexico and Arizona.
But the
UP-SP merger contains duplications. A shipper in Ogden or
Winnemucca used to get the UP to bid against the SP. After the
merger takes effect Sept. 12, there will be only UP tracks in the
vast territory west from Denver across Utah and Nevada to the San
Francisco Bay.
The Antitrust Division of the
U.S. Department of Justice estimates that the merger will cost
shippers and consumers, many in the West, more than $800 million a
year as a result of lost competition.
So what?
It is tempting,
even easy, to think "So what? Railroads may have been important
once, but do they matter now?"
Few of us ever deal directly with railroads.
When relatives arrive from afar, we fetch them at the airport, not
the depot. On shorter trips, we drive or ride a bus. Our "mail
orders' arrive via United Parcel Service or Federal Express; we
don't go see the express agent down at the depot. There probably
isn't even a depot any more - if it wasn't torn down, it was moved
and now serves as a museum or senior citizens'
center.
Railroads often seem like a fading
remnant of another age, just hanging on until bankruptcy finally,
mercifully carries them off. The crews are overpaid featherbedders,
the management is mired in the 19th century and trains are
cast-iron nostalgia.
While that might have been
generally true in 1970, American railroads have staged a comeback
since then. In 1980, Congress deregulated freight rates and allowed
railroads to operate more competitively. Railroads now pursue
business aggressively, taking it from trucks, barges, oil pipelines
and each other.
In order to get competitive,
railroads went head-to-head with unions over wages and work rules.
The new agreements, combined with improved technology, meant
smaller crews and the near-extinction of the caboose. Modern trains
roll past computerized trackside sensors which examine each car,
and then a synthesized voice announces a message like "overheated
bearing on the right rear of the seventh car." With microwave
links, fiber-optic cables and computers, one dispatch center in
Fort Worth, Texas, controls all train movements on Burlington
Northern's 31,000 miles of track.
Railroad
employees became three times as productive during those 20 years:
In 1970, American railroads needed 566,000 employees to move 765
billion ton-miles of freight. In 1990, only 216,000 employees
hauled 1,034 billion ton-miles.
Their
transformation to competitive, high-tech enterprises is reflected
in the railroads' rising share of the transportation market. In
1940, railroads hauled 63 percent of the nation's inter-city
freight. Their share bottomed around 1985 at 36 percent. Since
then, the railroad share has started to climb: 37 percent in 1990,
38 percent in 1993. After all, rails can move the goods cheaper
than trucks - shipping a container from Los Angeles to Chicago
costs about $1,200 by rail; $1,800 by truck.
In
the West, rail traffic has also been stimulated by an increase in
freight from Mexico as well as the Pacific Rim, which ships its
goods to ports on the West Coast.
Although this
traffic makes railroads more profitable, it also makes the Mountain
West the rail equivalent of "flyover territory." The stuff is bound
from the West Coast to the Gulf Coast, Mississippi Valley, or Great
Lakes, and the train is a steel conveyor belt. The West just
happens to be in the way.
There is only one
major instance where the West is more than a barrier, and that is
coal.
King
Coal
There's plenty of coal in the East and
Midwest - West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, Illinois. But that coal
contains sulfur, and when it burns, it produces chemicals that
return to earth as acid rain.
Removing the
sulfur after the coal is burned is difficult and expensive; the
easy solution is to burn low-sulfur coal, scarce in the East but
abundant in the West, where railroads are in place to get it from
here to there.
Beyond environmental concerns,
there's politics. Eastern mines are generally unionized, Western
mines aren't. Republicans can support clean air if it means fewer
members of the United Mine Workers, and more business for GOP
stalwarts like Phil Anschutz, a major contributor to the Republican
party and principal owner of the Southern Pacific, and Drew Lewis,
CEO of the Union Pacific and a secretary of transportation under
Ronald Reagan.
The result is a thriving railroad
business in Western coal, called "compliance coal."
It comes in two forms - bituminous and
sub-bituminous. Bituminous produces more heat per pound because it
is drier. It comes from mines in central Utah served by the Utah
Railway, a short line which connects to the UP and SP; the North
Fork and Yampa valleys of Colorado, served by SP; and the Raton
area of New Mexico, served by BNSF.
Sub-bituminous coal comes from the Powder River Basin of Montana
and Wyoming, initially served only by BN, but since 1984 also
served by UP. From a railroad point of view, a route from the
Powder River to a distant coal customer is like owning a license to
print money because the route doesn't go over mountain passes or
gorges, and because the stripmined coal is very cheap, leaving lots
of "room" for high transport costs. Coal that costs $3.50 a ton at
the mine near Gillette, Wyo., will go for $30 a ton at a power
plant in Illinois, Georgia or Texas.
The
difference is the cost of transport - railroad income. Powder River
coal accounted for 30 percent of the BN's income in 1994, and in
1995, the UP hauled nearly 100 million tons out of the Powder River
Basin.
But what about a Western railroad that
didn't serve the Powder River?
The UP had been
in that position. It had coal along the main line in southern
Wyoming, but the coal came from deep underground and couldn't
compete in price with Powder River coal without a lot of help from
the railroad on shipping rates.
UP could have
cut rates, but instead it went into the Powder River Basin in 1984,
a joint line with the Chicago & Northwestern (which it
swallowed last year). The mines in southern Wyoming closed soon
thereafter because their mining costs, combined with freight rates,
made the coal too expensive.
SP also had
expensive coal along its routes, but SP couldn't get into the cheap
Powder River Basin. So it got competitive. It started developing
markets (Colorado and Utah coal isn't only burned in the East, but
in the Far East: South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, and
Taiwan). It also took a big Western customer away from the
competition: Geneva Steel in Utah, which gets iron ore from a
taconite pellet plant at Mountain Iron, Minn., 2,268 miles away.
SP, even though its route was longer and steeper, underbid UP on
the taconite, and came out ahead by hauling coal east in the same
cars that carried iron ore west. SP's aggressive marketing kept the
Colorado and Utah coal mines in business. Since 1989, SP's share of
Western bituminous coal shipments has risen from 7 percent to 64
percent, while UP's share fell from 93 percent to 18
percent.
SP's desire to survive as an
independent carrier allowed coal mining in the West to stay
dispersed rather than concentrated in the Powder River Basin. But
that raises a question: What if SP doesn't need to compete because
it's part of the UP, with access to the Powder
River?
Dismantling a
region's
coal industry
That
question worries Alex Jordan, director of the Salt Lake City-based
Western Shippers Coalition. In the central corridor between Denver
and Salt Lake City, UP will have a monopoly that could eventually
put the coal mines of Utah and Colorado out of
operation.
"We're not saying
that's going to happen," said Jordan, "but we do have a concern
that it could happen and break the back of the coal industry."
Indeed, for geographic reasons, UP has always
seen Colorado as a place to go around, not through. With the merger
on the brink of completion, critics paint a bleak scenario for the
future of coal mines in Colorado and Utah: After UP and SP
consolidate operations, and after UP abandons the Tennessee Pass
line that serves Salida, Colo., UP will have two routes between
Denver and Salt Lake City - the old D&RGW route from Denver
into the mountains via the Moffat Tunnel (central corridor) and
north from Denver to Cheyenne and then west over the prairie and
desert (overland route). UP will shift all possible traffic to the
cheaper, faster overland route.
Under this
scenario, the region's coal producers will have to pay the full
cost of maintaining the tracks, rather than have those costs spread
among the numerous customers who now ship between Denver and Salt
Lake City. When existing contracts expire, UP will raise the rates
to cover the full costs. Coal from Utah and Colorado will no longer
be competitive. The mines will close, and production will shift to
the Powder River Basin, keeping the railroads whole, but damaging
the economies of coal towns in Utah and
Colorado.
After the mines close, the other shoe
will drop: There won't be enough traffic to justify keeping the
Moffat Tunnel line open. So the UP will abandon it. Colorado will
be left without any east-west line across the state, and Utah
shippers will lose a connection. An already crowded Interstate 70
will get more heavy truck traffic to further impair mountain
transportation.
What's to keep that from
happening?
For one thing, UP professes to be
pleased at being able to serve Colorado and Utah coal mines now.
"We want to keep their business," UP spokesman Ed Tramdahl said,
"and you have to realize that utilities tailor their generating
plants to certain kinds of coal. They can't just switch overnight
from bituminous to sub-bituminous. So there will still be a need
for coal from outside the Powder River Basin."
An open market,
or a
sham?
When UP put together its merger proposal,
it attempted to quiet fears of a monopoly by offering trackage
rights to the BNSF along routes where shippers had been able to
choose between UP and SP - primarily on the Gulf Coast and along
the central corridor.
In theory, BNSF will
operate its own trains on tracks rented from UP-SP between Denver
and Oakland, so that shippers like Geneva Steel will still get the
benefits of railroad competition. But none of the nuts-and-bolts
infrastructure - locomotive-service terminals, crew-change layover
sites, or switching yards - has been arranged, according to UP's
Tramdahl. "BNSF operations are something we'll work out after the
merger," he said. The BNSF has yet to announce any plans, and if it
is soliciting business along the corridor, it is doing so in
secret.
There are good reasons to wonder why
BNSF would ever want to run trains through the central corridor. To
understand why, consider that there are two types of freight. One
is local - the stuff that originates or terminates along a given
section of track. The other kind neither starts nor ends on that
track - it just passes through.
As far as
through traffic is concerned, BNSF is in much the same position as
UP-SP: It has faster, cheaper ways to get freight from the Midwest
to the West Coast, and no real reason to use a route that involves
three high mountain crossings - Moffat Tunnel in Colorado, Soldier
Summit in Utah and Donner Pass in California.
Would the merged railroad have any incentive to develop local
traffic?
Fred Simpson, executive vice-president
of Montana Rail Link - a company that has successfully developed
local business in Montana, Idaho and Washington - points out that
local traffic is often sporadic, which means BNSF would have
trouble scheduling crews and equipment to serve a coal mine in
Utah, 500 miles away from the nearest BNSF yard in
Denver.
Simpson argued that there is no way BNSF
can profitably serve traffic along the central corridor, and that
UP's announcement that it is preserving competition is a
sham.
To some degree, the Surface Transportation
Board - the Department of Transportation body that replaced the
Interstate Commerce Commission last year and now oversees railroad
mergers - must share that concern about a monopoly across the
central West. The details probably won't come out until Aug. 12,
when the board issues its full written opinion to explain its July
3 vote in favor of the merger.
But the board did
announce that it planned to monitor the central corridor for at
least five years to make sure that there is a competitive
environment. Does that mean anything? The board is a new body whose
powers are untested. Monitoring traffic along a given route sounds
a lot like government regulation, and we're in deregulatory
times.
Playing
politics
On the day that the Senate was supposed
to vote on which agency would have control of mergers, UP chief
executive Drew Lewis visited Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, who had favored
the Department of Justice providing antitrust oversight to the
deal. So had Utah's other Republican senator, William Bennett.
After the meeting with Lewis, Hatch changed his mind and persuaded
Bennett to go along, and Lewis got what he wanted: the oversight of
what was considered a friendlier group, the Surface Transportation
Board.
That shouldn't come as a surprise. Lewis
is a GOP stalwart, and Phil Anschutz, SP chairman, is a
fund-raising chairman for Robert Dole. The UP contributes heavily
to congressional campaigns.
Anschutz will come
out quite well. He started with a fortune in oil and gas. Back in
1984, he got into railroads when he bought the Denver and Rio
Grande Western Railroad. He used that as collateral to buy the SP
in 1988 for $1.7 billion; although he has sold some SP stock since
then, he still owns about 25 percent of the
corporation.
By selling off $1.5 billion of SP's
extensive California real estate, Anschutz kept the railroad going,
even as it lost money: $66 million in 1989, $35 million in 1990,
$78 million in 1991, $25 million in 1992. Now, UP is paying $5.4
billion for SP, an SP shorn of many assets that Anschutz got when
he bought it eight years ago.
With the merger,
Anschutz will come out about $1.6 billion ahead, tax free. If he
just sold the SP, he'd have to pay capital gains taxes. Merger into
the UP means a tax-free exchange of stock.
Little wonder that he contributes freely to the campaigns of
candidates who support the merger. If it hadn't gone through, he'd
have had to make the SP pay on its own (something he hasn't been
able to do yet - it has lost money in 14 of the past 17 years),
sell it on the market (and pay capital gains taxes), or break up
the SP and sell pieces to interested railroads (more capital gains
problems).
That gave Anschutz every reason to be
persuasive, and he certainly persuaded Colorado Gov. Roy Romer.
Colorado will lose several thousand jobs, as well as hundreds of
miles of main-line track. Romer could have supported any of several
proposals for another operator to buy the central corridor rail
lines and preserve the jobs, trackage and competition. Instead, he
went along with his "good friend, Phil."
One
governor who feared the loss of rail competition, George W. Bush of
Texas, came out against the merger. Others expressed reservations.
Romer settled for a hiking trail.
Why did Romer
support a merger that may cut the throat of Colorado's surviving
rural industries? It beats me. And despite several phone calls,
Romer wouldn't talk to me.
Opponents up in
arms
Some fairly big guns fired shots against
the merger besides the Antitrust Division of the Department of
Justice. The Department of Transportation opposed the loss of rail
competition along the Gulf Coast and in the central corridor. The
Department of Agriculture also came out against it, because as
Secretary Dan Glickman explained, "rail rates are likely to
increase as competition declines. Higher rates would mean lower
prices to farmers."
The National Industrial
Transportation League, a group of about 1,500 big shippers, has
talked with some other merger opponents to consider a lawsuit,
among other actions, but nothing besides rumors and unattributable
statements will appear until Aug. 12, when the STB releases its
full written decision on the merger.
After that,
there might be a scramble in some federal courthouse to get an
injunction since UP and SP plan to start joint operations on Sept.
12, although UP says full consolidation will take at least five
years.
All sorts of things could happen in
court, and a suit could take years - the UP-SP merger application
was itself more than a yard of stacked paper, and when you add
opposing arguments, analysis, depositions and the like, there's a
good start on a big library.
But UP is
proceeding on the assumption that STB's authority, and its approval
of the merger, will stand up in court, and that its purchase of the
SP will pay off.
Take the $800 million a year
that the Justice Department says that a UP monopoly will be able to
gouge from captive customers in Texas and the Interior West, apply
that to the $5.4 billion price of the SP, and it just about covers
the payments. Westerners will benefit from the merger - if they own
UP stock.
Goodbye to a
working West
And so, it appears that some day in
the near future, we will gather by the river and watch the last
train pass through Salida. Rail fans from across the country are
already swarming to this area to get pictures of trains on the
steep grades of Tennessee Pass, at 10,282 feet America's highest
through railroad.
Perhaps there won't be a last
train. Eagle County wants to buy at least part of the line, tracks
and all, to operate commuter trains between Leadville, Eagle and
Vail. Others see potential in tourist operations along the entire
corridor. At least one would-be operator is still trying to
persuade the UP to sell the tracks it plans to
abandon.
If the rails stay in place, we might
end up like Silverton, a historic brick downtown that is open for
three hours a day so that the passengers on the tourist railroad
can buy souvenirs and gee-gaws.
SP has already
signed an agreement with East-West Partners, a resort development
firm, to develop at least 65 of the 121 acres it owns in Minturn, a
railroad town just a few miles east of Vail.
Does Vail need more development? Does Leadville need to lose its
last mine and become nothing more than a bedroom community for
workers at the nearby ski resorts? Must Salida's downtown be
completely over-run by boutiques, galleries, T-shirt shops and
souvenir stands?
There is another, brighter side
to this. When it comes to shipments from the Interior West, both
the BNSF and UP specialize in bulk commodities for export. They're
not interested in displacing the occasional truckload of lumber
from our highways.
The fewer miles of railroad
track in the West, the fewer strip mines, clearcuts and sprawling
monoculture farms. Shippers might be forced to add value at home,
like the farmers in North Dakota who discovered they did better by
making their wheat into pasta, rather than shipping their grain off
into the world commodity markets.
With
transportation costs higher, towns in the West might become more
self-sufficient and less reliant on volatile world markets. That is
worth some conscious deliberation: What kind of places do we want
to live in? How should we get our livelihood in those
places?
But that decision won't be made in the
West.
Carey McWilliams, one-time editor of The
Nation and a chronicler of California, observed in 1949 that the
West's transportation network was "designed to serve national
rather than regional needs."
This deliberate
national policy deprives the region of cohesion and insures that
the important decisions are made on Wall Street and in
Washington.
So it was with the UP-SP merger.
Wall Street can make Phil Anschutz $1.6 billion richer, and
Washington can leave the West with only two railroads, competitive
between the West Coast and the Mississippi Valley, but monopolistic
in between. And some of the working towns of the West will be the
losers.
Ed Quillen publishes
Colorado Central in Salida, Colorado, "the monthly for people who
feel nostalgic for hard labor and unsafe workplaces."
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Yahoo
Google
Spurl
Wists
Simpy
Newsvine
Blinklist
Furl
Reddit
Fark
Blogmarks
Smarking
Magnolia
Ozmozr

