Re: Disused line permission

[Eddie Oliver <eoliver@efs.mq.edu.au>]

Robert Parnell wrote:

> This comment was in relation to a disused line, where by heritage operators
> may lease a disused line and also maintain it. (As LVR did from Cowra to
> Blayney mid 80s to 1997).
> 
> Bruce is not one to be doubted on such issues. (trust me!)

No, but the point at issue was that RAC (in all probability) did not own
the Ropes Creek line in the first place, and therefore Bruce's
statements were not applicable to the original context.

Just to add a bit of background, since this thread seems to have become
rather distorted: The Ropes Creek line was built as a defence measure by
the Commonwealth (1940's era). It was mainly on Commonwealth land, and
was not vested in the NSWGR or any of its successors. The Commonwealth
effectively contracted with the NSWGR (and PTC etc) to run trains over
it, and ticketing etc was integrated with the main rail system; but that
did not alter the fact that the Commonwealth continued to own the tracks
and the land on which they were situated.

The Commonwealth paid the NSWGR and its successors to run trains - both
passenger trains and the (rare) freight movements beyond Dunheved.
However I do not know what the financial arrangements were for the
freight movements which ran to the industrial siding on the up side of
Dunheved (did the industries or the SRA-predecessors pay the
Commonwealth for the use of their line?) nor do I know what arrangements
have been made in recent years for the other uses of the tracks between
St Marys and Dunheved.

Whatever those arrangements may be (can anyone advise?), there would
have been no reason for the Commonwealth to transfer ownership of the
"dead" line between Dunheved and Ropes Creek to anyone. Why would they,
and why would anyone want it except for scrap or historical purposes?

Eddie