posted
I hadn't even left for my first Amtrak trip when I became convinced that Amtrak was in fact an essential service. As I waited in Fargo's station patiently the westbound came in and dropped people off. I had to wait awhile for the eastbound. Anyways, I noticed that the first destination of a mother and her daughter was a hospital in Fargo. I don't know if it had to do with the leg injury the daughter appeared to have, or if they new someone who was in there. Either way, it was a legitimate trip and they used the train to get there. From what I could gather they had came all the way from Whitefish, Montana. (Of course there is always the possibility she got injured on the train and Fargo was the first stop they came to, though we'll hope that was not the case)
Each station along the route seemed to have someone getting on or getting off. One woman along the way got off at West Glacier Park. Many would assume that the only people who stop there are people from a large city looking to take a vacation there. However, this happened to be here home station. One of the many examples that it is the preferred means of tranportation for many along this line, and one wouldn't help but assume that train lines running in other rural regions throughout the country would also experience high ridership.
Of course there was the stereotype to. A guy in the diner was going across the country and I swear he was dressed up like an old time conductor. I think people like him should be hidden from the view of politicians when people are trying to show that Amtrak is an essential service. Sometimes I think too many people think that the only people riding Amtrak are those looking to take a "Land Cruise."
fixj Member # 3179
posted
Good observation. It would be nice to know the true mix of Amtrak riders. As for myself, I am a combination of “riding for fun” and “I’m going there anyway” kind of traveler. However one of the very frequent routes I travel is the Heartland flyer from OKC to Ft. Worth. This train is very much a valuable asset to the towns and cities it serves along the route. Sure, I see a few school groups taking there first train ride and some who ride just for fun. However the majority of people I see on that train are using the train as part of their every day life. The train is almost always at least half full, and on weekends is often nearly sold out. The state subsidizes this train, and it is always in danger of loosing its funding, but should that happen, the loss to the communities that support and use it would be colossal.
Jim Fix
clwood Member # 3297
posted
I, for one, am really uneasy flying, so I am grateful Amtrak still exists. Just look up the SOAR Fear of Flying forum, and you'll see how many of us there are, from all walks of life. I realize, however, this is a worthless argument to a politician (or maybe not-- I vote, after all).
On another note, Greyhound just announced they are ending service this week to my own nearest transportation hub, La Crosse, WI. The newpaper story said that about 15 people a day board buses in La Crosse. We have 2 Universities here and a regional technical college, and students make up most of the riders. Poor, elderly, and/or disabled people make up most of the rest. We have an airport in La Crosse that offers Northwest service to Minneapolis and American service to Chicago. Even those that don't mind flying sometimes don't care for the ride, and the leg to the big city often costs more than the longer leg to the final destination.
Hopefully a positive note of all this will be that Amtrak ridership out of La Crosse will increase. That may not happen, however. The train, after all, doesn't go to Madison, a popular destination. Yes, there is a Thruway bus, but that makes the trip that much more complicated for someone who may be poor, frightened of a new mode of transport, or has difficulty getting on and off buses. The Builder arrives at another popular destination, St. Paul, at a time of day that's inconvenient for many and scary to some. I'll keep my fingers crossed about Amtrak, though. At least we are not as unlucky as Eau Claire, another college town of similar size (~50k) that now has no bus service, nor any train.
Grandma Judy Member # 3278
posted
I wish I could supply the citation, but I remember reading a couple years ago that 3/4 of the population of North Dakota rides Amtrak at least once a year. Essential service - definitely! Since my daughter is moving to Walla Walla, WA, I expect to find myself on the Empire Builder from Milwaukee 2-3 times a year. I'm already heading to Rcohester, NY to visit my son on the LSL 2-3 times each year, so I anticipate many happy hours spent on trains the next few years.
Mr. Toy Member # 311
posted
The Empire Builder gets most of the attention when it comes to the "essential service" argument, due to the fact that it passes through states that have limited options, especially in winter.
But I think you'll find that people on all of the LD trains are using them for basic transportation first and foremost. The proportion of tourists to "legitimate" (for want of a better term) riders on Amtrak is about the same as it is for other forms of transportation.
TwinStarRocket Member # 2142
posted
See another recent post about a SWC reroute off Raton Pass. That would leave many western Kansas, eastern Colorado and northern New Mexico cities without service also.
espeeboy Member # 3346
posted
Thinking back over three transcon trips over the past 4 year, my observation would be that on the LD trains the coaches are "transportation" riders (small towns or fear of flying, and the sleepers are full of Land Cruise tourists. That's my experience haveing done the route both sleeper and coach. True of the Canadian, #2, #4, #6,#7, as well as the Cardinal and whatever is impersonating the Broadway Ltd these days.
posted 
Sometimes I think too many people think that the only people riding Amtrak are those looking to take a "Land Cruise."