Home > Uncategorized > DEAR JOHN: A letter to Supervisor Woolley

DEAR JOHN: A letter to Supervisor Woolley

First of all, we here at the Humboldt Herald HQ wish to extend our sincere thanks to you for standing strong on the recent TPZ brouhaha. The pressure was immense but you kept to your principles despite big money BS and a crumbling colleague. We appreciate your efforts.

Now that election season is knocking on the door it appears you will face at least one challenger. While the threat level is negligible (so far), there is one issue that could cost you serious support — the railroad.

Many concerned residents would like to see you reevaluate — and change — your position on the trains and throw weight behind the trail so strongly supported by voters.

The landslide election of Pat Higgins, and the near miss by Carlos Quilez in the November election for Harbor District, demonstrated this community’s stance on the port/rail/trail issue currently simmering away on the front burner.

Humboldt County suffers when it is beholden to outside interests with no care for this place. We must reject offers to export our rock and water or let foreign ships use our seaport to export profits while importing economic and environmental damage to those who live and work here.

When presented with actual numbers regarding the frequency of trains expected to utilize the railroad (if such numbers ever become available), we are likely to find Eureka doesn’t want an industrial railroad going through town, blasting its 125 decibel whistle at every street crossing as required by law.

Like the election for Harbor District, the rail/trail issue will be front and center. Where you stand could determine the outcome.

  1. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 1:07 am

    Trail activists make a good show, but they are a minority. That you construe the McK election as a trail mandate, well, it’s kind of funny.

  2. brian
    January 27, 2008 at 7:31 am

    Think like me/us……..are pay.

  3. Not A Native
    January 27, 2008 at 8:28 am

    Yep, trail activists are a minority but railroad believers are an even smaller minority.

    The average person would like to see improvements in amenities for themselves that could also bring the possibility of increased economic activity. Having a trail now could achieve that. Having a railroad never won’t help the average person and they understand that very well.

    This will be put forward very well during the campaign season, Woolley will have to explain his actions. His saying “the mandate of the NCRA gives me no choice but to spend money on this, even without a solid business plan” will show him to be a fool or patsy.

  4. January 27, 2008 at 8:29 am

    And you thought the good-old boy network was bad, people.

    This is pretty blatant – you do what we want or you are dead.

  5. January 27, 2008 at 9:39 am

    No one threatened to kill him, my little alarmist. But this is how elections work — you get to choose between candidates. If a solid, pro-trail candidate challenges John that person will pull a lot of votes on that issue alone.

  6. Not A Native
    January 27, 2008 at 9:58 am

    Yeah Rose, supporting a candidate based on their positions on issues important to you is called Democracy. Of course, your pea brain can’t stand to hear of anyone who would stand firm on principles that disagree with yours.

  7. Trail Rider & 3rd Sup. Dist. Voter
    January 27, 2008 at 10:29 am

    I strongly support Heraldo’s open letter to John. I know John and have supported him over the years, but he is on the wrong side of the rail/trail issue. I ride the Hammond trail about 100 times a year, and usage dramatically increased when it was completed. Rail banking makes sense to me for the segment between Arcata and Eureka. Create a nice packed gravel or even a paved trail on the rail line. If there ever is an alignment of the stars that bewitches the state legislature and governor into putting hundreds of millions of dollars into the rail to nowhere, then under rail banking it can convert back to rail use. I have little confidence that such an alignment of the stars will ever happen (CA infrastructure is endlessly needy in much higher demand areas). Rail banking gives us a trail that will take cars off 101 and improve peoples’ health, while allowing the railroad dreamers to retain the rail option into the future. Mr. Woolley, support this option or lose the support of many of us in the 3rd sup. district.

  8. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 10:59 am

    Most of us seem to agree that John can be beat as a result of many of his inconsistent or extreme stances, not just a misguided fixation on the railroad. Not to mention the desperate need for new blood in many of the entrenched Supervisoral seats. I think he could be beat from either the right, though not too far; or from the even further left. Sometimes change and new perspectives and ideas are a worthwhile goal in their own right. Term limits are not a bad idea. There are any number of innovative and progressive concepts that should be looked at. So the real question is who is going to run against John and for that matter maybe Smith too though I don’t know his district? I do recall he ran on a firm platform of no more than two terms. Is he even going to run again? I would assume his word is good and will not so we need a candidate for that seat too or the Repubs will have an easy win. Rodoni seems to have his hands full already (and ours too) with other candidate options.

  9. gmf
    January 27, 2008 at 11:00 am

    Holy Cow, a message direct from Humboldt Hearald HQ !?

    Aren’t we impressed with ourself.

    This is actually kind of funny. Not really unexpected but funny.

  10. January 27, 2008 at 11:07 am

    gmf, get some new material.

    Anyway, I agree with the comment about the actual number of voters attached to each side of this issue. It may end up being a small block of voters, however, these votes could well determine the outcome.

    I also think that the next few election cycles for supervisor should be very interesting. Many new challengers will come forward, due to the recent issues the Supes have dealt with.

    -boy

  11. January 27, 2008 at 11:08 am

    You’re right, “heraldo” – i should have said do what “I want or I will destroy you.” Interesting message.

    And “Not A Native” – you are also right, and I am sure you will be supporting HumCPR’s right to buy ads to get their message out – something that sends “heraldo” up the wall. Democracy being what it is and all.

  12. pez
    January 27, 2008 at 11:10 am

    I heard a rumor that Her Honor the Mayor is going to resign and run for supervisor. Anyone else confirm it?

  13. January 27, 2008 at 11:14 am

    rose,
    was that a poke at rob arkley? im impressed

  14. curious
    January 27, 2008 at 11:26 am

    speaking of railroad traffic, where do the tracks lie in the friendly city?

  15. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 11:28 am

    Which Mayor, which Supervisor?

  16. January 27, 2008 at 12:21 pm

    HumCPR’s right to buy ads to get their message out

    Another example of the right to lie.

  17. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 12:45 pm

    It is weird that John now has to be a supporter of massive gravel extraction and an international container port in order to make the idea of a train remotely possible. I can’t imagine the 3rd District going for that. Nice guy and all, but no need for a “supervisor for life”.

  18. Yo...
    January 27, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    Well, you sure have done a piss poor of exposing any lies the HumCPR ads have supposedly told, and when MarkyMark Lovelace has come over here to supposedly set the facts straight vis a vis the ad, he’s been corrected as well…

  19. Yo...
    January 27, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    Boy, if gmf needs to “get some new material” I think we can all agree that Heraldo does as well….

    HomeDepot/RobArkely/Rail-Trail/PALCO/TPZ…rinse, lather repeat…

  20. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 1:23 pm

    Who cares about the ads either side takes out. It is not as though Lovelace and Cobb are above a little fact manipulation to make their point. If any ad gets the public interested in important issues facing the community and encourages them to learn what is happening for themselves I’m all for it. If an informed electorate is a scary to either side or any constituancy then those people worry me. Trust in the people. Let them all run ads with their perspectives.

  21. January 27, 2008 at 1:30 pm

    HumCPR’s big lie has not been credibly refuted.

    “The Planning Department Staff is proposing PERMANENT removal of THE RIGHT TO BUILD A HOUSE ON YOUR TPZ PARCEL.”

    That’s a fear-mongering lie.

  22. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 1:34 pm

    New material? That would be good, except these issues can turn local elections, that that can be quite interesting. At least for those of us who obsess about such things. Which is for whom these blogs were invented. And I would say that John Woolley’s choice to stick to a losing cause to be very interesting as he seems to be reasonable on some other issues. Maybe this is a leadership issue.

  23. McKinleyvillan
    January 27, 2008 at 1:54 pm

    Ok, let’s say Pat Higgins didn’t win a landslide over a 16 year pro-RR incumbent because people support trails…then why did Fifth District voters so overwhelmingly support him?

  24. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 1:59 pm

    Ollivier is an asshole, that’s how. He also didn’t know how to run a campaign, or interact with people.

  25. January 27, 2008 at 2:03 pm

    And it took the 5th District 16 years to figure that out?

  26. Not A Native
    January 27, 2008 at 2:07 pm

    I’d have to agree with Hank Simms’ opining about the musical chair game that the Humboldt Democrats are clearly playing.

    Woolley is being a “loyal troop” awaiting his turn for a chair in Sacramento. And there are a lot of State commissions and boards that beckon too. Maybe even a CSU trustee. Woolley’s kids are near college age. I can’t imagine him taking a big pay cut and go back to being a project planner at the Northern California Indian Development Council.

  27. January 27, 2008 at 3:11 pm

    Woolley breaks people’s Constitutional Civil Rights. Would you like to understand? Simply, when you are bound by law to provide a process, but within that process, you manipulate and deny the Civil Rights Laws of a victim, then you are a Constitutional Civil Rights Law Breaker.

    Woolley can not be trusted! Any person who voted for him was voting for someone who mischaracterized his qualities. He is pure evil, no two ways about it. I have the personal experiences that which form the truth. Undeniable imputations.

    Heraldo @ 1:30,

    No lies….Check Out the definition of PERMANENT. In that definition, truth is discovered.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  28. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 3:15 pm

    Don’t think you’re gonna pull that job from him that easily. It’s really too bad his district is gonna spend a bunch of money unseating him.

  29. January 27, 2008 at 3:31 pm

    If Harmony runs, she will make it interesting.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  30. January 27, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    The Arcata-Eureka trail path lies in John’s district. It’s going to be a central issue.

  31. January 27, 2008 at 3:39 pm

    And a big one at that Heraldo.

    If I was in that District, I would not vote for Woolley. He supports fossile fuel usage over pedal power! This hurts water quality! I would rather vote for…….Hmmmm, more candidates to come?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  32. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 4:07 pm

    It’s amazing that even the tourist train people are like Woolley and will tie themselves to the gravel extraction and container port nightmare/fantasy. I can’t imagine how that will really help them in long run. They will lose members and credibility just like the Harbor District. Sad really how these people’s dreams get exploited by the NCRA for political gain.

  33. January 27, 2008 at 5:03 pm

    Do you know ANYONE who is against the trail, “heraldo?” I don’t. Not even the rail proponents. So why are you so up at arms?

  34. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 5:21 pm

    1) Jeffrey Lytle, if that is his real name, should stop beating his gums and run against John Woolley if he thinks he is so much better.

    2) Anonymous posters should be allowed to say almost anything, but they should not get away with calling real people “assholes” from the cover of their anonymity.

  35. January 27, 2008 at 5:24 pm

    You’re right 5:21 – and since we can assume John Woolley is not against the trail, “heraldo” is up to something else, under cover of anonymity.

  36. gmf
    January 27, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    I’m in search of some new material.

    Actually I think I’d rather search for a pizza.

  37. January 27, 2008 at 5:34 pm

    Asking Woolley to change his position on the rail is not calling him or anyone an “asshole.”

  38. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 5:39 pm

    Heraldo, you are never at your best when you get defensive and start jumping to conclusions.

    Do a search for the word “asshole” in the column of words above this, and you will find that an anonymous poster called Charles Ollivier an “asshole.”

    It was to that anonymous poster that I was directing my remarks. Not to you.

  39. January 27, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    My apologies. I saw the Ollivier reference.

  40. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 5:43 pm

    Rose may never read anything I write carefully enough to understand it, but you won’t catch me calling her bad names.

  41. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 5:49 pm

    Sure, no one is against the trail, just like no one is against puppies and kittens. But if someone is preventing action on the trail because it might inhibit reviving the rail (as unlikely as it might be), then the net effect of their actions is the same as if they were “against the trail” in the first place.

  42. January 27, 2008 at 6:16 pm

    Anonymous @ 5:21 pm,

    Define better? Not about “thinking” either.

    More truthful and honest I am, hell yes! However, if you feel that these traits are terrible for an elected official, then I suggest you should vote for John Woolley.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  43. Richard Marks
    January 27, 2008 at 7:20 pm

    There are “other” possibilities for the 3rd. From Arcata actually. Think hard on who could be running against John. Maybe not a Democrat………

  44. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 7:29 pm

    If the biggest opportunity for a trail system is the old rail right of way and if virtually every expert in the country says that there is no chance that a rail is viable in the foreseeable future,
    then pining away for a train or more expensive rail and trail will get us all nothing. This is why there needs to be a change.

  45. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 7:36 pm

    Ah but Richard, I thought your buddy was going to announce at the begging of the year. What happened?

  46. pez
    January 27, 2008 at 7:53 pm

    I heard that Virginia Bass was gonna resign and run for supe. Can’t one of you real journalists at least call her up and ask? Why do we have to do all the heavy lifting on this blog?

  47. January 27, 2008 at 7:55 pm

    She would be in Jimmy Smith’s district I think??

  48. Ghost of Mabel
    January 27, 2008 at 8:22 pm

    Fill me in people….why does the “tourist/commuter train” get such disrespect.? I’m not into mega port eco-hostile development. I LOVE the idea of a clean, green Humboldt Bay with a trail AND rail. Isn’t that the ideal?
    Sorry…….Mass Transit via le Bus Sucks!

  49. January 27, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    who has proposed a commuter train? i think that its a great idea, but the only proposals ive heard consist of freight trains through the eel river canyon.

    i wonder about the demand for a train also. is it worth spending millions devolping a train that will carry folks from arcata to eureka? will many people use it? i could see it bringing people to CR or HSU, but as sad as it is to say, there arent really any other destinations worth building a commuter train to in Humboldt County. it wouldnt be difficult to find out how many people commute from arcata to old town or vise versa. if enough people would use it, im all for it.

  50. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 8:56 pm

    Here is the reality. It is not up to us. Any commuter train would cost at minimum 5 million a mile to build. Do your research and you will quickly find they cost on average over 20 million a mile. The money to build and run this system will not come from us, we can’t afford it. This means that it will come from the Feds or the State. Our population and potential ridership is too small to compete for these kinds of dollars. There are many many more populated communities where commuter rail money can be much better spent. With this few people we can not afford to maintain two transportation infrastructures. Unless you are proposing to get rid of roads to pay for the rail there is no way a commuter train is in our future. Time to get real.

  51. mresquan
    January 27, 2008 at 9:04 pm

    “I heard that Virginia Bass was gonna resign and run for supe.”

    Well if she wins she can take a pay cut since we won’t need to cover her travel expenses as it seems she’s mastered the art of traveling for free.
    It’s too bad that the same effort to finagle some financial deals wasn’t used to help keep some city schools open.

    And folks the Timber Heritage Society has long advocated for commuter type train.It’s a good idea which should be looked into seriously.

  52. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 9:16 pm

    The commuter train has been looked into seriously several times. The conclusion is always the same. Not enough people to be economical. Read the NCRA’s own Economic Feasibility Study at the Harbor District’s website. Just do a little research yourself.

  53. January 27, 2008 at 9:20 pm

    And it would more likely run down the middle of 101 if not the east side… providing park and ride.

  54. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    What would be a cost per mile breakdown for a mono-rail running between the north and south bound lanes of Highway 101. Running, say, from Portland to San Francisco. I mean, as long as we are considering all the realistic possibilities.

  55. Anonymous
    January 27, 2008 at 10:10 pm

    This all goes back to what is realistic and is it time to elect supervisors that are willing to make decisions based on what is realistic? Is John Woolley that person? He looks more and more not to be.

  56. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 1:03 am

    A man of principle and courage who will not cower to the left’s fringe elements.

  57. gulo gordo
    January 28, 2008 at 1:05 am

    What would be a cost per mile breakdown for a mono-rail running between the north and south bound lanes of Highway 101. Running, say, from Portland to San Francisco. I mean, as long as we are considering all the realistic possibilities.

    Ah, that must be my cue… (shuffles a bit awkwardly)

    Having just returned from an extemporaneous survey of potential docking sites along the Great Bleeding Edge — with side-visits to a few purveyors of high-quality carrion (former Republican officeholders are unaccountably numerous this year; must’ve been some kind of blight, eh what?), a detour to visit a half-cousin’s coming-out affair over to Choteau (nothin’ like a genderbending weasel party, I tell you what — though we only had to bounce one grizzly who couldn’t keep his claws to hisself), a bit of lazy wandering snuffling along after the latest wolves to leave Idaho for Oregon (I’m trying to get an exclusive for Predator News, a sort of trade publication for the toothy set), and a bit of a romp along the Cascade crest and down to check on my fisher cuzzies stuck in the southern Sierras (but I digress, even by my family’s wandering measure), I have returned, bearing glad tidings:

    Steampunk zepplins would be cheaper than a train, more hip than a monorail, and flyer than Delta.

    As long as we’re considering all the realistic possibilities, that is. (Not that, in my experience, Humboldt’s really the kind of horse that will readily wear such tight-drawn blinders.)

    But seriously. Don’t you think Wooley would change his mind faster if somebody just offered to eat his leg? (That reminds me — I think I’ve still got a bit of leftover Doolittle flambé around here somewhere).

  58. humboldturtle
    January 28, 2008 at 6:16 am

    Shhhh…I think they’re asleep.

  59. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 7:03 am

    When peak oil hits, what’s everyone’s plan for transportation into and out-of county? In most communities the answer is rail.

    Each family pays for its own elite team of burly, yet lean bicycle riders? If we manage to grow all of our own food locally (so very not likely), that still does not address an array of vital necessities not locally manufactured.

    I’d like to see the trail activists in a cage match with the peak oil activists. Maybe we can enslave the trail activists and put them to work on a human mule-pack route between Arcata and Eureka utilizing the trail they worked so hard to create at the expense of our lost link to the outside world.

  60. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 7:39 am

    Mr. Wooley has also taken a stand on the fluoride decision in Manila. What Manila decides will affect whether some other communities have it included in their water system.

  61. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 7:46 am

    Hopefully Manila makes the right decision because I don’t want to pay for a special water filter or start drinking bottled water.

  62. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 7:47 am

    Second Thoughts on Fluoride

    Scientific American, January 2008

  63. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 7:54 am

    I’ve noticed all the medical associations and dental people support it, as well as the public health left wingers. I read that it occurs naturally in many water sources (like in Switzerland) but at various concentrations, depending on the makeup of the natural spring. I think the idea is to control the levels of it so it is at a level that will mimic those springs where people to use them have decent teeth.

  64. Jane Doe
    January 28, 2008 at 8:15 am

    I read years ago in Utne Reader (I think) that people with naturally occurring fluoride in their water prove that fluoride is of no benefit and can be dangerous. The studies which appeared to demonstrate that fluoridated water improved dental health were discredited by the fact that people who lived in areas with natural fluoride (it occurs in the US as well) showed the same improvement in dental health as those who received it in their water. In other words, the improvements in dental health were not related to fluoride but to more diligent dental care which occurred in the same time period.

    If these health care professionals had done their own research their almost unanimous support of fluoridated water would carry more weight, but since they are all just repeating what they were taught in school, their acclaim is meaningless.

    The fact that they had large amounts of fluoride that needed disposal at the same time they decided to put it in our water is probably just coincidence.

  65. Jane Doe
    January 28, 2008 at 8:26 am

    Also, the dosing of this toxic substance is very inexact when received in drinking water. The amount one would receive on any given day can’t be measured accurately because there may or may not be fluoride in reconstituted juices, sodas, canned vegetables, etc. While fluoride has been shown to be effective in topical applications to the teeth, there is no evidence that it does any good to drink it.

  66. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 8:44 am

    When peak oil happens you will be thanking the trail people for saving the rail corridor for our community (through “railbanking”) from complete abandonment and decay, which is the direction that it is going in right now. Wake up, or our community loses both a trail now and a rail later.

  67. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 8:47 am

    Woolley’s stand on floride is as a Manila resident I assume.

  68. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 8:51 am

    Wait, so for the sake of “peak oil” are we to now build an international container port, deepen the bay to 50 feet and strip mine our rivers of gravel? That is the economics of having rail today. Given that, I will take the trail now. I’ll be happy when the train is able to make it without all that other crap.

  69. Anony.Miss
    January 28, 2008 at 8:58 am

    The major health orgs are still behind adding fluoride in areas where it doesn’t occur in the natural water sources. I believe our public health officers and the American Medical Association’s reviews of the literature more than I believe the scare tactics of those who read skewed studies off the internet. I agree with those who don’t want “mass medication” but I think this is not that. 60 years of use (yes, drinking it) in many communities has shown it to dramatically decrease dental cavities and there have not been any studies (that experts consider to be real and statistically bona-fide) that have shown adverse health effects. This will be another big issue coming up, I think.

  70. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:19 am

    Yeah, Scientific American is a real scare monger. Science is scary!

  71. William
    January 28, 2008 at 9:21 am

    It is true that the current transportation system (largely trucks on highways) is an artifact of cheap oil and a corrupted political process, and the days of cheap oil are gone forever. Therefore an isolated region like the one we live in most likely will require some freight transport in and out of here to maintain any semblance of modern existence.

    Happily we have a bay, and humans have been sailing ships for some thousands of years, and ships can be constructed with technology much more primitive than railroad locomotives and steel rails.

    We could supply ourselves with goods from all over the world with a small well maintained port. One designed just to serve our needs, not the needs of global capitalists.

    Yes a dual use commuter / tourist train running between sohum and norhum would be fun and perhaps even economically viable possibly but the problem is that the forces behind the railway want to make it into a massive pipeline for global goods for the global market, and that would massively impact our quality of life.

    Let’s bank the rail right of way, build the trail, and unelect anyone who can’t see this.

    Have no fear.

    bill@hippiemail.com

  72. Jane Doe
    January 28, 2008 at 9:23 am

    http://www.fluorideresearch.org/393/files/FJ2006_v39_n3_p163-172.pdf

    People who want fluoride can buy it and use it as they see fit. Medicating the masses involuntarily isn’t necessary and shouldn’t be done.

    From: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/medmaster/a682727.html

    Before taking fluoride,

    tell your doctor and pharmacist if you are allergic to fluoride, tartrazine (a yellow dye in some processed foods and drugs), or any other drugs.
    tell your doctor and pharmacist what prescription and nonprescription medications you are taking, especially vitamins. Do not take calcium, magnesium, or iron supplements while taking fluoride without checking with your doctor.
    tell your doctor if you are pregnant, plan to become pregnant, or are breast-feeding. If you become pregnant while taking fluoride, call your doctor.
    tell your doctor if you are on a low-sodium or sodium-free diet.

    If you experience any of the following symptoms, call your doctor immediately:

    unusual increase in saliva
    salty or soapy taste
    stomach pain
    upset stomach
    vomiting
    diarrhea
    rash
    weakness
    tremor
    seizures

    In addition, people are warned not to use fluoridated water to make infant formula.

  73. tad
    January 28, 2008 at 9:26 am

    Peace be with you

    “Solutions” in Arcata sell a counter top filter for about $125 that takes out fluoride. All those store bottled water machines also take out fluoride for about 40 cents a gallon. It is unfair to force people to buy their water in order to avoid consuming poison (yes fluoride is a poison used in bug spray).

    “A recent report by the Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility reviews studies showing that fluoride interferes with brain function in young animals and in children, reducing IQ.” IN HARM’S WAY: TOXIC THREATS TO CHILD DEVELOPMENT

    Also people should think about cutting out aspartame / nutrasweet as it is an “excitotoxin” that also leads to mental health problems and causes obesity.

    Avoid fluoride, excitotoxens, and pharmaceuticals and you will live a healthier and longer life.

  74. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:27 am

    8:51, no, peak oil won’t require a deep water port. Boats need oil just like cars. Trains do not. Trail advocates are going to have to address their peak oil brethren eventually. They will soon realize they are at odds.

    As for fluoride, it’s completely unnecessary with proper education. Brush your teeth properly and you don’t get cavities. Period. Blame the parents, then educate them.

    Better yet, instead of being a fluoride activist, be a Stevia activist. Unlock Big Sugar’s criminalization of Stevia as a food additive and you’ll drastically reduce cavities over night. Why? Stevia is 300 times sweeter than sugar and does not cause cavities. And bonus — it’s low carb, also tackling childhood obesity while you’re at it. You can buy it raw to eat, but it’s illegal in processed foods for no good reason.

    But no… why eliminate cavities and childhood obesity when we can toss fluoride in the water and pretend we’re doing the best we can? It’s sad. We have a childhood dental epidemic today precisely because of fluoride activists. You pretend you’re doing something when you’re actually sitting idly by as things get worse.

  75. Jane Doe
    January 28, 2008 at 9:34 am

    No kidding, 9:19. And they warn people not to use fluoridated water to make infant formula because it is completely safe.

    There have been NO double blind studies which prove eating flouride has any effect on the health of teeth because better dental care was being promoted at the same time and people with naturally occurring fluoride saw the same improvements in dental health in the same time period which shows that fluoride was not the cause of fewer caries, that it was better dental care. I know this is difficult for people not accustomed to thinking critically or questioning authority, but people who want fluoride can buy it. Forcing everyone to ingest a toxin with possible serious side effects is involuntarily medicating people in an impossible to measure manner.

  76. William
    January 28, 2008 at 9:38 am

    Speaking as someone who has experienced dental problems, I think that we need less flouride and more (compassionate) dentists.

    That would really help everyone’s dental health.

  77. tad
    January 28, 2008 at 9:40 am

    Peace be with you 9:27

    Trains run on diesel. And I agree with you on promoting stevia. Can’t call it a sweetener though, the aspartame/sugar lobby made sure of that. Also try agave nectar. mmmm-sweet.

    Sodas also lead to tooth decay, especially colas with phosphoric acid in them.

    love eternal
    tad

  78. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:41 am

    Why bother with science?
    Superstition is more fun and anyone can make up new ones as they go along.

  79. quark
    January 28, 2008 at 9:52 am

    Why bother with democracy? Fascism is more fun and the slaves are much more “productive.”

  80. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:52 am

    Dear Tad,

    In the peak oil future, trains will not run on diesel. Watch Back to the Future again to get your science right.

    love eternal
    Marty

  81. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:55 am

    I like the Scientific American article because fluoride activists have made it their stock and trade to cast anyone who speaks out against fluoride as crazy. Well, the tide is turning as respected research overturns your assumptions.

    Do something real to fight childhood cavities for a change.

  82. curious
    January 28, 2008 at 9:56 am

    meanwhile, how about our own biodiesel or electric or both commuter bus line? with a tourist loop using those old double-decker ones? we could have stops from our victorian seaport to the dunes to the plaza and return on old arcata rd. that would enhance the existing line nicely.

  83. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:56 am

    Most “peak oil” I know understand that a trail is the best way to preserve the rail right of way until a train is viable.

  84. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 9:58 am
  85. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 10:01 am

    9:56, many trail activists are fighting rail. They are not seeking peaceful coexistence.

    Other 9:56, in the peak oil future, tourism will be in steep decline. Retrofitted buses make sense within the county, but you’ll still depend on rail for delivery of goods to and from the county.

  86. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 10:05 am

    “9:56, many trail activists are fighting rail.”

    No, they are fighting rail fantasy, that gets in the way of trail reality.

  87. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 10:07 am

    No, they are fighting rail fantasy, that gets in the way of trail reality.

    Translation: You want to destroy the rail line to get your trail, at the expense of our future.

  88. William
    January 28, 2008 at 10:17 am

    Banking the rail right of way is not destroying it. And rail is not “the future” of Humboldt. As I pointed out above, Humboldt has always been a seaport, not a railport.

    Unless of course you want ‘the future” or your town and county to become a sewerpipe of global commerce.

    Even if things get bad we will survive as a seaport.

    Please do not fear.

    bill@hippiemail.com

  89. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 10:21 am

    William, the seaport is filled with sludge. Dig it out and more pours in. Maybe you didn’t get the memo.

    Humboldt historically (timber-wise) has been about rail, but that’s really beside the point. The point is that in a peak oil future, rail is our link to the outside world.

  90. gulo gordo
    January 28, 2008 at 10:21 am

    The rail’s already dead as the Whigs. It just doesn’t know it yet.

    No matter how much state and federal budget juice is shot through its electrodes, that monster won’t walk again, because the mob’ll have a pitchfork through it before it tumbles off the gurney.

    And besides, there’s no juice to spare for monster games.

    Railfans would do themselves a big favor if they’d just wake up and smell the twenty-first century here.

  91. curious
    January 28, 2008 at 10:22 am

    10:01, thats why the seaport’s the starting point. I agree tourism will decline, but it hasn’t yet. think about it, once the loop is in place, many many locals would need to use it to commute and shop after peak oil (now).

  92. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 10:24 am

    If peaceful co-existence is a rail/trail and that costs 35 million dollars and there is now way that anyone will get funding for that then we have peace without progress.

  93. neomoderate
    January 28, 2008 at 10:25 am

    Any goods that can be shipped into or out of here by rail can be shipped by sea for far fewer $$, especially taking into account the cost of restoring and maintaining the rail. Bank the rail, let us use it as a trail until a miracle happens and a billion dollars magically appears (Remember, construction costs have utterly gone through the roof since that 500 mil estimate in 1998, or whatever it was.) Please? The corridor will be used, and it will be preserved. It’s not really that hard to figure out, is it?

  94. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 10:28 am

    What loop?

  95. William
    January 28, 2008 at 10:35 am

    Dredging a channel for small freighters will never be as expensive as maintaining miles of tracks, bridges and tunnels through mountains and marshes.

    I think that peak oil or not, cheap oil is gone forever. I agree with you on that, and yes it will have impacts on trucking. Trucked in goods will become very expensive and worst case scenario simply unavailable.

    We can dredge the channel tomorrow. It will be years before the trains run- if ever.

    I like trains. I like riding on them. I agree that rail is more economical than trucking. And ships are more economical than rail.

    One question for all the rail proponents. You are asking for massive inputs of PUBLIC financial resources. Will the people of Humboldt then OWN the railroad once we have paid for it? Or will it be in private hands? That’s a question I want answered.

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

  96. follow the money
    January 28, 2008 at 11:06 am

    The only way to move the massive amounts of gravel that are owned by a few gravel mining operations is with rail. Whether through the canyon or by barge. They could give a shit about peak oil or anything else. They are the ones bank rolling the rail effort and stand to make a lot of money if they can convince us to fund their transportation system with tax dollars. Who do think funded the Curless campaign?

  97. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 11:21 am

    Hey, cool, if the gravel industry wants to push for state funds to restore rail, better we get a piece of the pie that is so often eaten by southern Californians.

    Oh, but that’s what this really is about, isn’t it? Stop gravel from ramping up its operation, and down the road a few decades later, passenger rail. And of course, there’s the desire to not have a rail line going through a natural setting to begin with. If you can get a trail out of killing rail, hey, two birds, one stone.

  98. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 11:25 am

    Ships may be more economical than rail, but they’re also very slow for passenger service. In the peak oil future, will we be boating our way inland? No. We’ll be taking the train, assuming we still have a rail line. Better we use today’s funds to restore the line than hope we can do it in a cash-strapped post-economic-collapse future.

  99. January 28, 2008 at 11:33 am

    Good Points all,

    On the Rail / Trail concept. Could it not get on a local initiative ballot like “MEASURE T”. Others have stated that there is support for both uses and that it is feasible. If it is feasible, then let’s see what the whole community thinks about the possible options and vote on it. Pedal Power is a good thing and it would be safer to ride somewhere other than two feet from 45 – 55 mph+ driving patterns along the roadways. Oil hurts in more ways than one.

    My concern is the weather conditions and water quality issues posed by being right up against the water. A Trail should not be paved asphalt because it contains soft toxins. Concrete would be best for weathering purposes and for handicap accessibility. Concrete planks may be good too, instead of slab-on-grade design. Wooden planks a no no. Wood degrades, gets slippery and mossy….the liability will hurt a good thing that a trail will provide. It will make for a great local public infrastructure project…..in addition, I believe Old Arcata Road needs to be widened for continuous safe bike accessibility to and from Eureka and Arcata.

    On the flouride issue John Woolley will be dealing with….remember Arcata voted on it. Also, this idea of flouridation is a tax on healthcare. Could not flouride costs go into dental care for the needy, or is this the CHEAPER method of topical care? When you drink water, do you swish it around before gulping?

    If a consumer is charged for a Flouride System, then those who need a reverse osmosis filtering system or comparible, should have it paid for by those flouridating the water, IMO.

    Also, the reports in favor of flouridation are interesting because it is only when society gets organized and big enough that it is capable of having a water supply system like today for which flouride can be supplied to ALL consumers connected into that system. It is interesting that the reports show a connection to Developmental Growth of society. Could it be the fact that with this growth and development, has too brought dentists? Now, how much has dentistry been an affect? In McKinleyville, the booming growth has been more recent(15- 20 years). Dentists have popped up closer to people as a result, so traveling to Arcata or Eureka is not as necessary as it once was.

    What would the reports show when, including the idea that you have a developed flouride supply system supplying flouride to ALL customers, dentists do not exist for inclusion in those reports? Now, does flouride help teeth? Further, of the needy children I see, the eating habits (sugars) can be excessive. Food health is a part of this flouride issue, IMO. The reports and health officials are correct about brushing one’s teeth. I am just not sold on the delivery system.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  100. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 12:40 pm

    In the “cash-strapped post-economic-collapse future” who is going to pay to rebuild the rail line every time it falls into the river? Travel by boat may be slower (but not by much) than a train, however, it won’t wash away.

  101. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 12:43 pm

    I’m still hip to the Zeppelin idea.

  102. neomoderate
    January 28, 2008 at 12:46 pm

    Realistically, how will we MAINTAIN the line in your “cash-strapped post-economic-collapse future.” ?

    How much more slowly that 15mph (train speed through the numerous towns and the Eel River canyon) does a ship travel?

    It’s going to take forever to make any of this happen, why not bank the rail until then? Believe or not, we are not anti-train, we as a group are questioning how realistic the train really is in this day and age, and whether the trail system should be stalled based on the hope and prayer of a few rail activists. For the money that’s been funneled into the NCRA over the last ten years, we could have banked the whole of the line in humboldt county, and have exactly the same amount of progress on reestablishing the rail to Humboldt as we have now. That is piss-poor use of public funds.

  103. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 12:50 pm

    What about the “cash-strapped post-economic-collapse” now? There is no funding today to rebuild the rail. At least the trails will put people to work today rebuilding the base of the future train infrastructure. Your other choice is to do nothing and let it rot and become even more expensive to rebuild when your “peak oil” collapse comes. Or, I suppose as you are suggesting, that the “peak oil” people are willing to sell out to the international container shipping and gravel mining boondoggle. Parish the thought we should just do something practical like build a trail.

  104. Not A Native
    January 28, 2008 at 12:57 pm

    As far as the “peak oil” future, no one has a certain vision of how we will live when fossil fuels aren’t cheaply available.

    But if a rail transport system is in our fuure as opposed to rubber tire one, I’d say it would more likely go on the 101 corridor than through the Eel river canyon. So a trail today on the NCRA right of way would not preclude a “peak oil” rail system.

    So, you “peak oilers” should be thinking about a much bigger and more complete picture if you want to forecast the future and not limit your visions to just the tracks you see on the ground now.

  105. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 1:24 pm

    I’d say it would more likely go on the 101 corridor than through the Eel river canyon.

    Thank you for that complete guess.

  106. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 1:25 pm

    So Not A Native’s vision for a peak oil future is that we aren’t driving cars, even electric cars or hydrogen cars or solar cars because there’s a railway running down the middle of the street. I think I’ll stick with the Eel River Canyon.

  107. curious
    January 28, 2008 at 1:31 pm

    trouble is, hwy 101 has too many hills for a conventional train. the magnetic cushion electric trains can climb, and go really fast, but you’d need nukes so scew that

  108. January 28, 2008 at 1:39 pm

    Lets not for get there is only one rail line from here to Marin. Very few sidings with little room for more in most places. Not the best scenario for hauling anything much less people. If there is freight (and there will need to be freight to even begin to make it cost effective) the passenger trains will be competing to just to get track time.

    Pile on top of that the other FRA regulations regarding passenger service and you will soon see why riding a train via the NCRA to the Bay Area won’t happen.

  109. cheech
    January 28, 2008 at 1:45 pm

    there’s great new tech for making ethanol from ag. byproducts. now if we only had a good source of stems and leaves….

  110. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 1:47 pm

    Baloney. That rail line worked for decades. Yes, there are more regulations and the whole thing needs to be shored up. It will cost millions, which will gladly be spent.

    I love the cost effective reasoning. Most of our government is not cost effective. Transportation is a necessity. Better food and goods get shipped to us on rail than we go back to living in huts and fighting over the last fish in our rivers and oceans. Peak oil, people. Plan for it now or get left out in the cold.

  111. January 28, 2008 at 2:00 pm

    Right. And the other 40 million folks suffering from “peak oil” in California will be lining up to provide Humboldt a railway.

  112. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 2:15 pm

    Mike, the money is now. If you wait until oil peaks, it’s too late. Game over.

  113. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 2:16 pm

    “Most of our government is not cost effective.” True, which is why you won’t see it spend $$ on the rail.

  114. Jane Doe
    January 28, 2008 at 2:16 pm

    No one is going to build a rail system to Humboldt County for passengers and probably not for freight. It isn’t cost effective and we don’t have a large enough population to justify it at the state level. The money to build it is just the beginning. Maintaining it will be very expensive for the same reasons it isn’t operational today. The state is focusing on moving millions of people between LA and the bay area. Even if 100% of the people here were demanding rail, we wouldn’t get it. There’s no money for it.

    Planning for peak oil should include becoming as regionally self sufficient as possible. Shipping anything anywhere could get very expensive regardless of the source of energy.

  115. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 2:17 pm

    Where is the money now?

  116. January 28, 2008 at 2:17 pm

    Tell me please where the money is now?

  117. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 2:19 pm

    We just spent the last 20 years demanding a rail and what did it get us? Nothing. You can bet the next 20 will be the same.

  118. Not A Native
    January 28, 2008 at 2:51 pm

    OK, my personal vision for Humboldt, post “peak oil” would be a place with a few thousand people who are the “ruggest survivalists” living without benefit of modern conveniences(as we now know them). They would living be truly locally, perhaps trading some salmon and elk meat for metal and medicines a few times a year, via peddlers or ships.

    Everyone else will migrate closer to population centers where shorter distances and denser living minimizes energy needs.

    However, I don’t believe in the “peak oil” scenario. In reality, plentiful non-fossil energy exists that requires more ongoing effort to access than oil extraction. I believe humans will access those supplies and live in a more energy efficient and population limited society and continue to have technology toys as well as affluent lifestyles that allow leisure and travel.

    Global warming is a much bigger threat to human society than “peak oil”, but that’s another blog.

  119. January 28, 2008 at 4:47 pm

    Nah, Not A Native. It’s the super volcanoes that are the real threat. Nuclear winter. Or maybe the asteroids.

  120. Jane Doe
    January 28, 2008 at 6:09 pm

    Peak oil is inevitable. Its impact on us depends on what we do to plan for it.

  121. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 6:58 pm

    Perish the Parish the thought~!

  122. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 7:06 pm

    If everybody would buy stock in oil companies, there would be a lot less bitching when gasoline prices rise.

  123. tad
    January 28, 2008 at 7:50 pm

    Peace be with you

    Haven’t we “peaked” and starting the slide already? It seems the longer “recessions” and multiple wars for oil fit nicely in Hubbert’s peak oil theory.

    Also 9:58 ha ha ha I stand corrected trains will run on “presso logs.”

    love eternal
    tad

  124. Babushka
    January 28, 2008 at 8:19 pm

    The Driscoll piece was proably trying to drum up some readership for the TS blogs, which, like Driscoll’s columns, are b-o-r-i-n-g.
    RE: the RR, we had rail service for eighty-four years, have done without for the past nine. NOT good for business, NOT good for the community. Outside our little enclave of isolation, the trains are PACKED and visionaries like Warren Buffet are investing in railroads. The rest of the state is moving ahead with rail and it will be a tragedy if we do not at least keep our options open.

  125. Anonymous
    January 28, 2008 at 8:28 pm

    Yes, and short rail lines are failing all over the country. That is why railbanking will keep our options open while preserving the physical and legal right of way. The path we are on now of just hoping for the state or feds to rebuild the line will only end up in its eventual destruction.

  126. Anonymous
    January 29, 2008 at 10:01 am

    Heraldo 1/27 at 1:30 said that saying that planning is trying to permanently remove the right to build on tpz as a fear mongering lie.

    H. You ought to read the entire planning update and not just the tpz part. This is because other things to stop the issuance of cup’s is elsewhere in the plan.

    For instance, the principles are to discourage the all growth outside the city. Also to deny any permit to a parcel that does not hook into existing sewer AND existing water services.

    Also, to deny permits in any area that is serviced by CDF and only grant them in areas where there is a fire department other than CDF.

    There is much more.

    No sir, you are the fear mongering liar.

  127. January 29, 2008 at 12:08 pm

    Yes, I have been thoroughly informing people that the Supervisors and Staff are manipulating the General Plan Update process in order to further their agenda to take away human rights in exchange for political votes. O.K., if you want to live like sardines packed into in a can, then say nothing. If you want some space for a healthier lifestyle, step-up and cast your ballot because if you do not, nothing changes.

    Also, the NorthCoast Journal printed an interesting article 5+/- years ago about pigs in a pigpen. It essentially pointed out that on a farm, a few pigs in the pen would seem tolerable. They were o.k. and friendly enough to each other. As the number of pigs in the pen increased, the pigs became more agitated and began to get nippy with each other. After yet more introduction of pigs into that pen, the atmosphere was chaotic. The pigs began to bite and fight at each other.

    The point was that effectively related to humans, we are no different. When you place living standards upon humans that restrict comfort, they will act like the overloaded pigpen filled with fighting pigs. I wish I could remember the exact date of print….Good article and made you think about comfort…hence sardines in a can(pig pen) thought.

    Remember, we all have different personalities and opposing personalities can clash!

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  128. Not A Native
    January 29, 2008 at 2:13 pm

    Well, to make a point Henchman, I don’t have “comfort”(which you say is my “right”) unless you live at least 10 miles from me. And don’t take it personally, that would apply to everyone else too. But I also need to have transportation, communication, public services and consumer products that you and others produce, right up to my doorstep. Do you see any problem with where this is going?

  129. Anonymous
    January 29, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    Yeah – the way I see it Not a Native, you want your cake and eat it too.

    I live in a rural part of the county, not too rural. I don’t see it as my right or anyone elses to have transportation, communication or public services at my doorstep.
    THAT IS WHY I LIVE IN A RURAL AREA!

  130. January 29, 2008 at 2:54 pm

    For 2:13 pm one more time….,

    “When you place living standards upon humans that restrict comfort, they will act like the overloaded pigpin filled with fighting pigs.”

    Answer to your last sentence – No problem as long as we all realise we choose where we live, if we are allowed to have choices.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  131. Anonymous
    January 29, 2008 at 8:49 pm

    But is it your right to take more water from the watersheds and kill more fish?

  132. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 9:21 am

    Oh god 8:49, get a grip.

  133. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 10:01 am

    Oh god 9:21, come to grips that rural subdivisions are one of the biggest impacts to fish survival in our rivers.

  134. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 10:47 am

    Oh god 10:01 – we are not talking about rural subdivisions. We are talking about existing parcels. Are you telling me that my house in TPZ uses more water than you do living in the city. Hardly. Now you get a grip.

  135. William
    January 30, 2008 at 12:56 pm

    Certified copy of portion of proceedings. Meeting of April 17, 2001.
    SUBJECT: 2001 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
    PLANNING/TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE APPLICATION.
    ACTION:
    Council authorized staff to prepare an application to the Department of Housing and Community
    Development requesting funding to prepare a feasibility study for a proposed Humboldt County Excursion Train.
    Adopted on motion by Councilmember KERRIGAN, seconded by Councilmember ARKLEY, and the
    following vote:
    AYES: HUNTER MEEKS, BASS-JACKSON, MCKELLAR, KERRIGAN, ARKLEY
    NOES: NONE
    ABSENT: NONE
    ABSTAIN: NONE
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
    County of Humboldt ) ss.
    City of Eureka )
    I, KATHLEEN L. DEVITA, City Clerk of the City of Eureka, do hereby certify the foregoing to be a true
    and correct copy of the original made in the above entitled matter by said City Council as the same now
    appears of record in my office.
    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
    affixed the seal of the City of Eureka on April 23, 2001.
    KATHLEEN L. DEVITA
    CITY CLERK

    bill@hippiemail.com

  136. "Henchman of Justice"
    January 30, 2008 at 1:01 pm

    10:01 am,

    How are the fish doing right now?

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  137. "Henchman of Justice"
    January 30, 2008 at 1:05 pm

    Thanks William,

    What is your thoughts as to what to consider with this document in the Rail/Trail issue?

    How much money has been involved thus far, if you know. It appears you are tracking down great information from past archives.

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  138. January 30, 2008 at 1:26 pm

    9. Humboldt Bay Short Haul Tourist and Excursion Train.
    Recommendation: Council award a contract for Professional Services to
    Stone Consulting & Design, Inc. of Warren,
    Pennsylvania to prepare to feasibility study for the
    development of a Humboldt Bay Short Haul Tourist and
    excursion Train in an amount not to exceed $42,432.

    Regular Council/Agency Meeting
    Tuesday, May 21, 2002

  139. January 30, 2008 at 1:34 pm

    How about the bucks needed for the loco restoration?

    “The Timber Heritage Association has purchased historic steam locomotive No. 37

    Now we need to move it from Wilmington, Delaware and restore it to operating condition.

    No. 37 will be used to pull the Timber Heritage Museum’s Excursion Train, the SHORELINE SPECIAL, around Humboldt Bay.

    Thank you for your help; we now need to continue towards our goal by raising funds through grants and your continued generosity.

    We Plan to Use Vintage No. 37 to Pull the Timber Heritage Museum’s Excursion Train, the SHORELINE SPECIAL, Around Humboldt Bay.

    The price tag for bringing the locomotive back to excellent working condition is another $476,000.”

    THA

  140. January 30, 2008 at 1:50 pm

    “The City of Eureka has investigated the operation of a short haul tourist and excursion train around Humboldt Bay over track owned by the NCRA. The excursion train was the subject of a feasibility study conducted in 20034, which addressed a number of development phases including Eureka-Samoa, with a terminus in the area of the Samoa Cookhouse and the Roundhouse, and later expansion between Eureka and South Fork. The study concluded the Eureka/Arcata and Humboldt County region has an excellent potential for a moderate level of tourist railroad activity. At the time, the excursion train did not consider the potential for integration with cruise shipping activities. While no evaluation has been undertaken in this study, TranSystems believes that an excursion train could potentially be an attractive activity for the cruise shipping industry, allowing passengers to disembark at Redwood Marine Terminal and board the excursion train around to Eureka, returning to Redwood Marine Terminal either by train or boat across the Bay. One of the most successful excursion trains in North America, the White Pass & Yukon5 in Skagway, Alaska, is driven by the cruise shipping business. As with the proposed museum discussed above, the District should consider any proposals for an excursion train terminating on District property in the context of overall strategy for developing cruise business. In addition, operation of an excursion line over NCRA track should not interfere with any freight rail activities tied to cargo handling at the Redwood Marine Terminal.”

    Redwood Marine Terminal Feasibility Study

  141. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    “Oh god 10:01 – we are not talking about rural subdivisions. We are talking about existing parcels. Are you telling me that my house in TPZ uses more water than you do living in the city. Hardly. Now you get a grip.”

    Yes, typically rural house holds use much more water than urban, look it up. Also our local municipalities take water directly from the river. This is very different, and has much less impact to fish habitat than taking water from watersheds that feed small creeks. These small creeks provide crucial cold water and riparian habitat necessary for fry to survive though the summer. So your TPZ (along with others) if developed can have an impact on fish. And this doesn’t even go into sediment from your gravel driveway.

  142. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 2:10 pm

    Skagway, Alaska? Are you serious? A trip around Humboldt Bay to Eureka has nothing on that train.

  143. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 2:41 pm

    2:05 – keep deluding yourself. I pump from a well and use less water than I ever did in the city. Where the hell did you get the idea that rural households use more water? Just pulled it out of…?

    and I have a paved driveway.

  144. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 3:02 pm

    Basic hydrology will tell you that pumping from a well removes water from the water shed and reduces surface flows. If you are not on the flat lands this can have the same effect as pumping from a creek. And as far as per capita urban vs. rural water consumption, just look it up in any related text book. I know you’re special.

  145. William
    January 30, 2008 at 4:05 pm

    Thanks Mike,

    I didn’t know for sure if that study ever got funded.

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

  146. January 30, 2008 at 4:16 pm

    Now we just need to find a copy.

  147. William
  148. William
    January 30, 2008 at 4:26 pm

    It looks like it is “unavailable.” But Stone Consulting kind of looks like a company that might favor rail development. :)

  149. William
    January 30, 2008 at 4:30 pm

    http://www.stoneconsulting.com/touristrail/tourism2007.pdf

    City of Eureka, Eureka CA
    Short Haul and Excursion Passenger Train Study
    SC&D investigated the feasibility of operating excursion passenger services in
    Humboldt County between the towns of Samoa, Arcata, Eureka and points south
    into the redwood forest districts.
    The project includes:
    Engineering and capital cost evaluation
    Operations
    Equipment analysis
    Economic impacts
    SHN Consulting Engineers of Eureka conducted ridership studies during
    the summer of 2002 at over 13 sites in Humboldt County, including campgrounds,
    state parks, visitor centers and the waterfront.
    The surveys focused on:
    Gross potential markets
    Visitor interests
    Source of potential riders
    Preferred equipment
    Proposed routes
    Schedules and fares
    Potential routes include connecting the historic company town of Samoa to the
    historic downtown areas of Arcata and Eureka.
    Partners in the project include the Northern California Logging Interpretive Association,
    the owners of a large collection of stored Pacific Lumber Co. locomotives
    and historic logging equipment.
    2002-2003—$45,000
    Contact: Cindy Trobitz-Thomas,
    Deputy Redevelopment Director, City of Eureka
    707.441.4209
    SC&D retains specialty tourism subconsultants in
    national & regional market analysis, economic impact
    analysis to Federal EDA standards, and ‘handson’
    development of marketing programs and materials
    development.
    SC&D’s nationwide experience in feasibility studies,
    project development, marketing and master planning
    is available for your railroad today!
    Stone Consulting & Design, Inc. Tourist Rail Industry Page 6

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

  150. William
    January 30, 2008 at 4:56 pm

    Mike,
    Maybe you can find a copy here:

    http://www.shn-engr.com

    The local company that apparently actually did the study, perhaps as a subcontractor?

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

  151. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 4:58 pm

    3:02,
    your textbook says that because the logic is larger lot size = larger landscaped area and thus more water use since the majority of residential water use is “outside”. This is a formula for truly urban areas with large lots – as in one to five acres – on the perimeter. It does not fit a rural area like humboldt where you are talking about a house on an 8000 square foot lot vs. a house on 10 acres that is the same size and probably has the same landscaped area. Who uses more water? Who knows, it depends on how much each person runs their sprinklers really. Probably the person with the well uses less because they do not have a virtually unlimited supply like those of us on city water. At least that’s how the rural people I know operate.

  152. William
    January 30, 2008 at 5:28 pm

    Eureka Intermodal Transportation Facility

    The Intermodal Transportation Center, conceptually, will be a public-private partnership, that will generate revenues that will support HTA operations. This Facility will become the western anchor for the Eureka Old Town area. SHN prepared a Section 3, Federal funding application to the federal sections of the Humboldt Transit Authority’s Five Year Transit Plan. We coordinated input, reviewed and prepared financial projections, and overall funding feasibility.

    http://www.shn-engr.com/

  153. William
    January 30, 2008 at 5:53 pm

    There is an odd connection between the realignment in Richardson Grove and the push for a deep water container port.

    See below.

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

  154. William
    January 30, 2008 at 5:55 pm

    http://www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/documents/hbmp2007/s2-c2_harbor.pdf
    2.2.6 landside Transportation

    Considerations

    The market competitiveness of any port depends

    to a considerable extent upon efficient connections to

    inland areas by truck and rail transportation modes.

    These connections are critical factors in determining

    the long-term, economic well-being of a port. The

    Harbor Revitalization Plan addressed Humboldt Bay’s

    “transportation competitiveness” as part of a market

    opportunity analysis for the harbor. Port-related

    transportation issues for Humboldt Bay have also been

    addressed in a number of other studies by the District,

    County of Humboldt, Humboldt County Association

    of Governments, City of Eureka, and advisory and

    trade groups, including the California Marine and

    Intermodal Transportation System Advisory Council.

    Humboldt Bay’s transportation competitiveness

    is limited by a number of economic and geographic

    conditions that do not constrain other potentially

    competing ports, including the area’s relative remoteness

    and rugged topography. In terms of rail transport, the

    Northwestern Pacific Railroad line, which formerly

    served Humboldt Bay, has been out of service since

    1996 after the line washed out at several points in the

    Humboldt Bay Management Plan May 2007

    0

    Eel River canyon. The line was closed by Federal

    Railroad Authority in 1998. Since that time the North

    Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA), the current owner

    of the line, has pursued state and federal funding and

    support for restoring service on the line; major right-ofway,

    track, station and yard, service, and environmental

    cleanup improvements are needed. The NCRA has

    made some progress in restoring service on the south

    end of the 300-mile line; reopening the line north of

    Willits depends on the availability of state and federal

    funds, a number of agency and environmental approvals,

    and stabilization of the line through highly unstable

    geological materials along the northern route.

    Humboldt Bay’s competitive range by truck is also

    limited. The Harbor Revitalization Plan identifies a

    truck-competitive “hinterland” that includes a relatively

    small area bounded approximately by Medford and

    Klamath Falls, Oregon, on the north, Redding on the

    west, and Willits on the south. Beyond that area, truck

    shipping rates are generally lower to competing ports.

    Truck competitiveness to and from Humboldt Bay is

    further limited by truck length restrictions that do not

    apply at competing ports. The trucking industry uses

    longer trailers of 53 to 56 feet in length to help cut costs

    and improve efficiency. California currently allows

    trucks with 53-foot trailers to operate on the National

    Network and terminal access routes throughout the

    state. Currently, however, Humboldt County has

    truck restrictions on all state highways entering the

    county from the north, east and south, and no portion

    of Humboldt County (or Trinity County) is served

    by truck routes meeting federal interstate truck length

    guidelines. In addition, truck routes in all directions

    to and from Humboldt Bay currently do not meet

    California legal truck length requirements, which allow

    a king-pin-to-rear-axle (KPRA) length on semi-trailers

    of up to 40 feet. Advisory routes at three locations limit

    KPRA length in and out of Humboldt Bay to 32 feet

    or less: on CA 299 to the east at Buckhorn Summit,

    to the south on U.S. 101 at Richardson Grove, and to

    the north on U.S. 101 nine miles north of Trinidad

    (Harbor Revitalization Plan 2003; HCAOG 2004).

    See, for further discussion, HCAOG 2004.

    Improvements to the east side of the Buckhorn grade

    have been identified by various studies as potentially

    providing the greatest travel time reduction and benefit

    to truck transport to and from Humboldt Bay on State

    Route 299 corridor; however, this project would be

    expensive and require major environmental reviews.

    CalTrans has considered approximately $120 million in

    Buckhorn Summit improvements that would remove

    the Advisory Route restrictions and allow California

    legal truck lengths connecting to I-5 at Redding;

    additional improvements at about six locations along

    CA 299 would raise the route to Federal interstate

    STAA standards (Harbor Revitalization Plan 2003;

    HCAOG 2004).

    2.3 Harbor-Related, non-Cargo activities

    In addition to port-related functions discussed

    above, other commercial, non-cargo activities also

    rely on Humboldt Bay. These other uses are described

    separately from port activities in this subsection mainly

    as a convenience for discussion; these activities comprise

    important facets of harbor-related activities with

    significant contributions to the local economies.

  155. William
    January 30, 2008 at 7:25 pm

    The Harbor Revitalization Plan identifies a
    truck-competitive “hinterland” that includes a relatively small area bounded approximately by Medford and Klamath Falls, Oregon, on the north, Redding on the
    west, and Willits on the south. Beyond that area, truck shipping rates are generally lower to competing ports.

    Truck competitiveness to and from Humboldt Bay is further limited by truck length restrictions that do not apply at competing ports. The trucking industry uses
    longer trailers of 53 to 56 feet in length to help cut costs and improve efficiency. California currently allows trucks with 53-foot trailers to operate on the National Network and terminal access routes throughout the state. Currently, however, Humboldt County has truck restrictions on all state highways entering the county from the north, east and south, and no portion
    of Humboldt County (or Trinity County) is served by truck routes meeting federal interstate truck length guidelines. In addition, truck routes in all directions
    to and from Humboldt Bay currently do not meet California legal truck length tequirements, which allowa king-pin-to-rear-axle (KPRA) length on semi-trailers
    of up to 40 feet. Advisory routes at three locations limitKPRA length in and out of Humboldt Bay to 32 feetor less: on CA 299 to the east at Buckhorn Summit, to the south on U.S. 101 at Richardson Grove, and tobthe north on U.S. 101 nine miles north of Trinidad STAA standards (Harbor Revitalization Plan 2003;

    HCAOG 2004).

    There is more here:
    http://www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/documents/hbmp2007/s2-c2_harbor.pdf

  156. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 8:39 pm

    “The Intermodal Transportation Center, conceptually, will be a public-private partnership, that will generate revenues that will support HTA operations.”

    This is very very wrong. SHN should be more careful than this.

  157. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 8:52 pm

    You can ask the City of Eureka for the Stone report. The planning department should have it. I don’t think the THA will like having that rehashed. You will be surprised at the results. More big dreams, and no funding. You can also read about it in the NCJ article.

    http://www.northcoastjournal.com/063005/cover0630.html

  158. January 30, 2008 at 9:05 pm

    The market competitiveness of any port depends…upon efficient connections to inland areas by truck and rail transportation modes. These connections are critical factors in determining the long-term, economic well-being of a port.

    Thanks for drawing attention to that, William. Port development is connected to highway expansion like the leg bone is connected to the knee bone.

  159. William
    January 30, 2008 at 10:09 pm

    Do you mean they shouldn’t put this on their website?

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

    Anonymous Says:

    January 30, 2008 at 8:39 pm
    “The Intermodal Transportation Center, conceptually, will be a public-private partnership, that will generate revenues that will support HTA operations.”

    This is very very wrong. SHN should be more careful than this.

  160. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 10:11 pm

    This is just not true. I’m not a fan of the whole Richardson’s Grove thing but to ship containers or gravel on trucks 300 miles to a market that has five local ports is crazy, and the 2003 Humboldt Bay Revitalization Plan explains it in detail. It just costs way too much.

  161. Anonymous
    January 30, 2008 at 10:16 pm

    “Humboldt historically (timber-wise) has been about rail”

    Wrong, the port has always shipped more wood products than the rail, always.

  162. pez
    January 30, 2008 at 10:41 pm

    “will be a public-private partnership, that will generate revenues that will support HTA operations.”

    Benito Mussolini would have loved this.

  163. January 30, 2008 at 10:42 pm

    did you know him?

  164. pez
    January 30, 2008 at 10:45 pm

    No but I have read some of his writing. He was a fascist. He believed in combining the power of the state with the power of the corporation.

  165. January 30, 2008 at 11:07 pm

    ive heard an awful lot of talk of spending by the state and very little talk of spending by corporations…..in fact, i dont see any corporations named in the above posts…….

    does that mean that socialists would “love” it too?

  166. Anonymous
    January 31, 2008 at 9:25 am

    You are right! NCRA gave away the publics ROW to the “operator” in a more than 100 year “lease”. What a “partnership”.

  167. William
    January 31, 2008 at 12:51 pm

    Where will the Intermodal Transportation Facility be placed so that it will “anchor the west side of Old Town?” Somewhere on the Balloon Tract?”

    Bill
    bill@hippiemail.com

  168. January 31, 2008 at 1:07 pm

    North Coast Journal on the excursion train feasibility study

    “But the consultants also made clear just how expensive it would be to set up the railroad operation. After reviewing an engineering study and making their own analysis of the railroad’s condition, the consultants estimated the cost of repairing the tracks, building a depot and outfitting an engine and train cars at between $5 million and $8 million.

    Just for a steam locomotive and a couple of passenger cars, the group is looking at about $625,000. While it has purchased — for $33,000 — an 80-year-old steam locomotive with historic ties to the North Coast, the old No. 37 is still in Delaware awaiting an estimated $450,000 in repairs. [in photo above]

    To operate a passenger railroad, the heritage group would have to bulk up to become a professionally staffed organization. The group could use volunteers as car hosts and off-season shop helpers, but it would need to hire a full-time manager, as well as a train crew and shop employees. Liability insurance alone would exceed $40,000 a year.

    And even it they sell the projected 35,000 to 50,000 tickets a year, the Shoreline Special would still require a “locally funded operating subsidy” of as much as $100,000 annually, according to Stone Consulting.

    In four years of fundraising, the THA has raised about $100,000.”

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,161 other followers