A study of Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Studynorthwoodsrail.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/FINAL... · 2017-03-15 · Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Study Page

Wisconsin Northwoods

Freight Rail Market Study

September 2013

A study of

freight movement in counties near the

US 8 highway corridor and of the potential for the

region to increase its rail shipments

Authors

Liat Bonneville Tom Frackleton

Dennis Leong David Leucinger

Tonia Rice Kathleen Spencer

Dan Thyes

PICTURE

PICTURE

Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Study Page 2 of 60


Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ 5

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 7

Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................... 18

Chapter 2: Wisconsin’s Current Freight Rail Network ...................................................................... 19 Wisconsin’s Changing Economy and Infrastructure Needs ............................................ 23 Environmental and Economic Benefits of Using Rail ..................................................... 24

Chapter 3: History of Rail in Wisconsin ........................................................................................... 26 History of Rail in Northern Wisconsin: A Summary ....................................................... 27

Chapter 4: Rail Transit Commissions and Rail Preservation ........................................................... 33 Wisconsin Rail Assistance Programs ............................................................................ 36

Chapter 5: Northern Wisconsin Study Area Profile .......................................................................... 37 County Freight Profiles .................................................................................................. 39 Identifying Rail Freight Stations ..................................................................................... 41

Chapter 6: Surveying Northwoods Businesses ................................................................................ 43 Northwoods Rail Transit Commission Membership ....................................................... 45 Survey Methodology: Development of the Mailing List ................................................. 47 Summary of Survey Results .......................................................................................... 48

Chapter 7: Recommendations and Suggested Next Steps .............................................................. 55

Related Web Sites ........................................................................................................................... 57

Glossary........................................................................................................................................... 58

Appendix 1: History of Rail in Northern Wisconsin ...................................................................... A1-1

Appendix 2: County Freight Profiles ............................................................................................ A2-1

Appendix 3: County Profiles ........................................................................................................ A3-1

Appendix 4: Instructions for Using the FRA’s Freight Station Mapping Tool ................................ A4-1

Appendix 5: Complete Survey Results – Rail Users .................................................................... A5-1

Appendix 6: Complete Survey Results – Businesses That Do Not Use Rail ................................ A6-1

Notes ........................................................................................................................................... N1-1


Tables

Table 1: Statewide Freight Profile ................................................................................................... 19

Table 2: Top Wisconsin Commodities by Weight, Transported by Rail ............................................ 20

Table 3: Top Wisconsin Commodities by Value, Transported by Rail .............................................. 20

Table 4: Wisconsin Rail Transit Commissions ................................................................................. 34

Figures

Figure 1: Wisconsin Railroad System .............................................................................................. 21

Figure 2: Wisconsin Rail Operation Status ...................................................................................... 22

Figure 3: Wisconsin Rail Transit Commissions ................................................................................ 35

Figure 4: Study Area ....................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 5: Locations of Businesses That Responded to the Survey .................................................. 48

Figure 6: Potential Use of Reactivated Rail Lines by Current Rail Users ......................................... 50

Figure 7: Potential Use of Reactivated Rail Lines by Businesses Not Currently Using Rail ............. 52

Figure 8: Location of Potential New Rail Users, If Lines Were Reactivated ..................................... 53


Acknowledgements

This report is a product of the combined efforts of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation

(WisDOT) and the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission (NRTC). WisDOT is grateful to the NRTC

members and the economic development professionals from Barron, Florence, Forest, Langlade,

Lincoln, Marinette, Oneida, Price, Rusk and Vilas counties for helping to develop and promote the

business survey that serves as the foundation of this study. We also extend our thanks to the many

businesses that chose to participate in the survey by providing us with their essential input and

information for this research project.



Executive Summary

This report was produced in response to an initiative that came out of Wisconsin’s first Governor’s

Freight Industry Summit in November 2011. The event sought to obtain feedback from

manufacturers and shippers from around the state, as to what they felt were their “most pressing

freight transportation challenges.” One of the problems that many participants identified was

inadequate rail service in northern Wisconsin.

Several segments of a rail line that stretches across northern Wisconsin – from the Minnesota border

in the west to the Michigan border in the east – have had their service discontinued over the last 25

years. The majority of the deactivations occurred after 2001. The reduction in service left many

counties with fewer options for shipping by rail; one county lost its rail access entirely. To address

this, WisDOT proposed a study of the area to begin the process of determining whether this trend

could be reversed.

Within the time period that this report was being developed (2012 – 2013), two inactive sections of

the rail corridor being studied were put back into service. The rail segment between Poskin (in

Barron County) and Ladysmith (in Rusk County) is now active. However, about half of the entire

corridor remains without service.

As a first step in understanding the issues, WisDOT conducted a survey of businesses in the region

to get a sense for what the current level of freight rail use was, and what the potential might be if the

network regained its connectivity. The survey was offered to businesses within (and in some cases,

near) 10 counties that are located along the rail corridor that roughly parallels US 8. Conducted in

November/December 2012, the survey was reviewed and promoted by the newly-created

Northwoods Rail Transit Commission, an organization formed to support rail service in northern

Wisconsin and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. This report provides the results of that survey.

In addition, a significant part of this study is devoted to examinations of the region’s commodity flows

and freight profiles. Also included are discussions of Wisconsin’s rail transit commissions, rail

history, and funding sources for rail development and preservation. Technical information about

freight stations and the tools to locate them is provided as well.

Rounding out the report are sections on the benefits of rail transportation, recent trends affecting rail

use, and suggestions for planning for the future of freight rail in northern Wisconsin.


Wisconsin’s Rail History

Since 1847, railroads have played a key role in Wisconsin’s transportation system and economy.

The state’s railroad network reached its height in 1920, at about 7,600 miles. However, the next

decade saw rail abandonments begin to surpass new construction.

Fifty years later, rail’s future remained uncertain. Railroad companies across the country faced

multiple challenges that were to take a toll: competition from other modes of transport, increased

government regulation, and a recession, among others. Railroad bankruptcies and abandonments

were frequent contributors to the industry’s instability in the 1970s. Wisconsin’s own rail history is

interwoven with mergers, sell-offs and bankruptcies that occurred regularly.

Communities that sought to preserve rail service were aided in their efforts by several federal and

state reform measures. The Federal Rail Passenger Service Act of 1971 created Amtrak, relieving

the freight railroads from having to provide passenger service. The Federal Railroad Revitalization

and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 gave railroads some new options for setting rates. In 1977,

Wisconsin created the Rail Corridor Preservation Program, a state-funded assistance program

directed at preserving light-density lines by encouraging local rail operators to provide service.

New impacts to the rail network were to follow. The Staggers Railroad Act of 1980 brought major

changes to how railroad companies were to do business. This federal action deregulated the

industry, allowing for more competition but also relaxing the requirements necessary for

abandonments. As a result, over 1,200 miles of Wisconsin’s rail network, as of 1980, were

abandoned in the following nine years. This amounted to a 20 percent loss of rail line. In this same

decade, short line and regional railroads became more involved with buying and leasing the systems

that the larger railroads no longer served.

By the 1990s, the railroad industry had adjusted to the upheaval of the previous years and started to

become profitable again.

Freight Rail in Wisconsin Today

Wisconsin’s freight rail network is a combination of active and inactive lines held in both private and

public ownership. The 3,600 miles of active lines, located primarily in the southern two-thirds of the

state, serve 82 percent of Wisconsin’s counties. In the northern part of the state, rail service has

been sharply reduced from its former levels.


The system also includes several former rail corridors that are being preserved for potential future

transportation use, through rail banking arrangements where the track is usually left in place, or as

interim recreational trails, where the track is usually removed.

Ten rail companies currently operate in Wisconsin:

Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railway

Canadian National Railway

Canadian Pacific Railway

Escanaba & Lake Superior Railroad

Progressive Rail

Tomahawk Railway

Union Pacific Railroad

Wisconsin Great Northern Railroad

Wisconsin & Southern Railroad

In 2011, over 518 million tons of freight moved into, out of, within or through Wisconsin. The freight’s

value exceeded $530 billion. Of the total volume carried by all modes of transportation, 31 percent

of the tonnage and 23 percent of the value was transported by rail.

By weight, the top five commodities moved by rail were coal (26.6 percent), chemicals or allied

products (12.6 percent), farm products (9.7 percent), metallic ores (9.3 percent) and food or kindred

products (6.8 percent). These five commodities made up 65 percent of the tonnage shipped by rail

in 2011.

By value, the top five commodities moved by rail were miscellaneous mixed shipments (36.8

percent), chemicals or allied products (16.2 percent), transportation equipment (14.8 percent), pulp,

paper or allied products (7.9 percent), and food or kindred products (5.1 percent). These five

commodities amounted to 81 percent of the value shipped by rail in 2011.

Emerging Shifts in Transportation

Changes in a country’s economy sometimes require changes in its transportation system. The

recent acceleration of the petroleum industry’s use of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) to extract oil

and natural gas in the U.S. has translated into just such an equation for Wisconsin. Fracking

provides both opportunities and challenges for Wisconsin’s economy and transportation

infrastructure.


This method of petroleum extraction requires large quantities of high-quality sand. Wisconsin has

long been home to sand mining operations, but the number of its mines and processing facilities has

increased dramatically in recent years, particularly in western Wisconsin.

Counties in northwestern Wisconsin are affected by these new trends. Their traditional economy is

expanding to include new sand mines, and its transportation system is expanding to meet the

mounting demand being placed on it. The region is experiencing new investment in rail lines and the

reactivation of some of the idle segments.

The paper industry, however, has been contracting. In both historic and current terms it is a strong

contributor to Wisconsin’s economy, but the consolidation of its facilities has resulted in a reduction

in its need for rail transportation. Rail providers have responded by reducing their service overall,

which affects other rail users.

The logging industry is one in which rail customers have been impacted by the reduction in rail

service. Like the paper industry, logging is a traditional source of economic stability in northern

Wisconsin. Loggers had more opportunity in the past than they do today, to transport forest

products by rail. According to comments WisDOT received from the survey it conducted for this

report, many loggers would like to see a return of freight rail to the Northwoods, as a complement to

trucking.

The case for shipping by rail can be supported by its environmental and economic benefits. Rail’s

ability to transport a ton of freight an average of 480 miles, on one gallon of fuel, makes it an

attractive choice for moving certain high volume commodities. The same ton of freight shipped by

truck, over the same distance, would require at least three times as much fuel.

An additional benefit is the reduced negative effect on the environment. The level of greenhouse

gas emissions produced by freight trains is less than one-eighth of what is created by trucks, per ton

of freight moved one mile. In addition, using the same measurement, the number of gallons of

hazardous fluids spilled by rail carriers is less than half of what is spilled by the trucking industry.

Rail Preservation in Wisconsin

Beginning in the late 1970s and continuing into the next several decades, a collection of

interconnected rail initiatives was put into place in Wisconsin.


Communities concerned with the declining health of the rail industry formed rail transit commissions

(RTCs) to help preserve service and influence its future. There are currently seven RTCs

functioning in Wisconsin, and almost a third of the state’s counties belong to at least one. Many are

located in the southern part of the state, where most of the rail lines are concentrated, but renewed

interest in rail has prompted an increase in participation by many of the state’s northern counties.

An amendment in 1992 to Wisconsin’s constitution gave the RTCs a tool to increase their chance for

success. The amendment granted permission for public funds to be spent on the purchase of rail

infrastructure. Joint agreements between the RTCs and WisDOT enabled the RTCs, with combined

state and local funding, to operate and manage portions of rail line. Service to these publicly-owned

systems is provided by private railroad companies.

As a result of the partnerships between the state and the RTCs, Wisconsin has well over 500 miles

of publicly-owned rail corridors, 80 percent of which provide rail service. The remainder serves as

recreational trails or is being held in reserve for future rail use.

Additional tools exist in Wisconsin for supporting freight rail. WisDOT offers local governments and

other organizations three programs that assist with rail projects:

Freight Railroad Preservation Program (FRPP)

Provides grants for up to 80 percent of the cost of preservation and rehabilitation of rail lines

Transportation Economic Assistance (TEA) Program

Provides grants for up to 50 percent of the costs of road, rail, harbor and airport projects that

help attract new employers to Wisconsin, retain existing ones, and expand either new or

existing businesses’ facilities in Wisconsin

Freight Railroad Infrastructure Improvement Program (FRIIP)

Provides loans for up to 100 percent of the cost of various rail system improvements

Overview of the Study Area

The study area is comprised of the following 10 Wisconsin counties: Barron, Florence, Forest,

Langlade, Lincoln, Marinette, Oneida, Price, Rusk and Vilas.


From 1970 to 2010, the combined population of these 10 counties increased by about 26 percent, to

nearly a quarter of a million people. The increase was just slightly lower than the state’s increase of

29 percent for the same time period. Vilas County experienced the greatest population increase by

far, at 96 percent, followed by Oneida County’s 47 percent.

Like much of northern Wisconsin, the study area’s economy is based on tourism, forestry, mining,

and manufacturing. There are over 400 manufacturing facilities in the study area, led by 91 in

Barron County and 79 in Marinette County, and followed by the counties of Langlade, Lincoln and

Oneida with an average of about 48 facilities each.

Inbound Freight

In 2011, according to the figures reported by IHS/Global Insight’s Transearch freight database

(Transearch), a total of about 7.9 million tons of freight was brought into the study area. Just over

7.2 million tons (almost 92 percent of the total) were shipped by truck, about 495,000 tons (6

percent) moved by rail, and about 165,000 tons (2 percent) were transported by water. A small

amount was shipped by air.

The products with the highest tonnage shipped to the study area by truck were nonmetallic minerals,

lumber or wood products, farm products, secondary traffic (commodities moving to and from

warehouses and distribution centers), and food or kindred products. These products were shipped

from counties within or near the study area, and from the Minneapolis, Minnesota region.

The majority of the products shipped to the study area by rail were coal, pulp or paper products,

lumber or wood products, chemicals or allied products, and food or kindred products. Most of the

products came from the Evansville, Indiana area, St. Louis County, Minnesota, and parts of British

Columbia and Alberta, Canada.

The counties in the study area that received the most rail freight were Lincoln (over 183,000 tons),

Marinette (nearly 137,000 tons), Oneida (over 75,000 tons) and Price (about 69,000 tons). The

county that received the highest percentage of their freight by rail was Lincoln (17 percent of their

total inbound freight).

Outbound Freight

Just over 11 million tons of freight were shipped out of the study area in 2011, as reported by

Transearch data. Nearly 10 million tons (almost 91 percent of the total) were transported by truck,


and just over 1 million tons (9 percent) were transported by rail. Most of the rest was shipped by

water.

The top commodities shipped out of the study area by truck included nonmetallic minerals, farm

products, lumber or wood products, and food or kindred products. They were shipped to other

counties in Wisconsin and to Minnesota and Michigan.

Top commodities that were shipped out of the study area by rail included pulp or paper products,

lumber or wood products, and clay/concrete/glass/stone. The majority was sent to other Wisconsin

counties and to Indiana and Minnesota.

The counties in the study area that shipped out the most rail freight were Marinette (about 392,000

tons), Lincoln (over 350,000 tons), Price (nearly 175,000 tons) and Rusk (nearly 46,000 tons). The

counties that sent out the highest percentages of their freight by rail were Lincoln, Price and

Marinette (33 percent, 28 percent and 17 percent, respectively, of their total inbound freight).

Survey Development and Results

The formation of the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission occurred around the same time the state

was putting a stronger emphasis on reviewing the condition of its freight transportation system. As

part of this fresh focus, WisDOT planned a study of the freight market in northern Wisconsin, in the

region surrounding the rail corridor that lies near US 8. The study would include a survey of

businesses in the area, aimed at gauging their interest in freight rail.

With the commission’s help, WisDOT created a mailing list of businesses in the 10-county study area

that might be good candidates for using rail to ship or receive freight. WisDOT mailed each of the

1,094 businesses on the list a set of two surveys – one for rail users and one for non-rail users – and

the recipients were asked to complete the appropriate one. The respondents also had the option of

completing the survey online. The surveys were mailed and returned during November and

December of 2012.

WisDOT obtained a response rate of about 17 percent. Of the 190 completed surveys WisDOT

received, 39 (20 percent) were from businesses that used rail, and 151 (80 percent) were from

businesses that did not use rail. The businesses that responded were scattered in a fairly equal

distribution pattern across the study area.


The majority of the survey questions were identical for both the businesses that used rail and those

that didn’t. To obtain blank copies of the survey documents, please contact WisDOT at the address

shown on the back page of this report.

Below is a summary of the responses received from all of the businesses that returned a survey.

The results for most of the survey questions are shown here; a full review of all of the questions can

be found in the appendices section of this report.

Commodities – Rail Users

The major commodity types, both inbound and outbound, were lumber/wood products, followed by

pulp/paper products.

Commodities – Non-Users

The major inbound commodity type was lumber/wood products, followed by primary metal products

and then machinery. The major outbound commodity type was also lumber/wood products, followed

by machinery and then transportation equipment.

Shipping modes – Rail Users

The businesses that use rail also receive freight by truck. All but three of them receive more freight

by truck than by rail, and more than half receive at least 90 percent by truck. A few businesses also

receive some of their freight by water and/or air.

More than three-fourths of the rail users ship at least 90 percent of their outbound freight by truck.

All but two ship more freight by truck than by rail. A few businesses also use water and/or air for

shipping their outbound freight.

Shipping modes – Non-Users

All but 23 of the respondents that do not use rail ship or receive freight entirely by truck. The rest of

the businesses also use water and/or air to ship or receive freight.

Origins and destinations – Rail Users

The businesses that utilize rail ship and receive freight all over the United States and Canada.

Wisconsin is the most common origin and destination. Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois are also

major trading partners. Ontario and Quebec are the most common Canadian trading partners.


Origins and destinations – Non-Users

In addition to other counties in Wisconsin, the major trading partners are the border states of

Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois. Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec are the most common

origins or destinations in Canada.

Reasons for using rail – Rail Users

The most common answer was that rail is cheaper than other modes. The efficiency and

convenience of rail were also cited.

Reasons for NOT using rail – Non-Users

The most common answer was that service is not offered. The other most common responses were:

their freight is not typically shipped by rail; rail is less convenient; and they do not have enough

volume.

Potential use of out-of-service rail lines – Rail Users

Sixteen current rail users would be interested in utilizing currently-inactive rail lines if they were put

back into service; 17 were unsure. As for what improvements may be needed to take advantage of

these lines, the most common responses were the replacement or improvement of sidings or spurs.

Potential use of out-of-service rail lines – Non-Users

Forty-three businesses that currently do not use rail would be interested in utilizing currently-inactive

rail lines if they were put back into service. As for what improvements may be needed to take

advantage of these lines, the most common responses were the replacement or improvement of

sidings or spurs. The businesses that said they would consider becoming new users were scattered

in a fairly equal distribution pattern along the US 8 highway corridor.

Potential increases in rail shipments with improved service – Rail Users

Sixteen current rail users said they would ship or receive additional volume if there were

improvements in rail service. These improvements include access, timing, reliability, and the

number of rail cars.

Potential rail shipments from interested businesses – Non-Users

By analyzing the commodities shipped and received by the 43 businesses that stated they would be

interested in using rail, WisDOT estimated the potential freight volume that those businesses could

ship by rail rather than by truck. Potentially, an additional 2,300 carloads could be shipped by rail to


the study area annually, and another 4,800 carloads could be shipped out of the study area each

year. These estimates are based on the amount of rail-related commodities that were shipped or

received in 2011, according to the Transearch database. Almost all of this potential rail freight is

logs, pulpwood and lumber.

Impact of losing rail service – Rail Users

The most common reason rail users gave for what the effect would be if existing rail lines were no

longer served by a railroad was that shipping costs would increase. Other potential impacts included

less revenue and less volume. Nine businesses predicted no significant effect.

Impact of having rail service become available – Non-Users

When asked what the effect would be if rail service became available to them, the most common

response businesses gave was that there would be no significant effect. Other frequent responses

were that gaining rail service would decrease their shipping costs, and their volume of freight

shipped would increase.

Interest in a transload or intermodal facility – Rail Users

Fourteen current rail users would like a transload facility, and 12 said they would be interested in an

intermodal facility. Suggested locations varied from areas near their businesses, to larger

transportation hubs such as Wausau, Superior, Milwaukee and Chicago.

Interest in a transload or intermodal facility – Non-Users

Thirty-seven businesses that do not currently use rail would like a transload facility, and 33 said they

would be interested in an intermodal facility. Suggested locations varied throughout northern

Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The most common suggestions for the location of a

transload facility were Rice Lake and Crandon.

Additional topics

The respondents were also asked several open-ended questions, primarily aimed at their opinions

and experiences. A complete list of their quoted statements can be found in the appendices section

of this report.


Suggested Next Steps

Because this east/west rail corridor functions as a link to other rail corridors in and beyond

the state, research into freight profiles and commodity flows should be expanded to include

the counties lying north of the study area. This would present a broader view of the region as

a whole and may explain how it fits into the rail network nationwide.

Industrial activities that are currently underway, such as the development of an iron mine in

Iron and Ashland counties, will have an impact on northern Wisconsin’s transportation needs

and should be evaluated for how they may affect freight rail in particular.

Northern Wisconsin’s county leaders should develop a comprehensive record of the rail

facilities in their area, which would include the location, condition and capabilities of the rail

spurs, sidings and transload yards in their jurisdiction, whether public or private.

The counties should share and compare this information, with the goal of creating a regional

image of their operational abilities. The discussion should include an evaluation of where

rail-related improvements could be made to benefit the entire region.

The Northwoods Rail Transit Commission could play a leadership role in this process.

An economic analysis of the region is warranted, specifically targeting rail users and their

impact on the economy. The picture that is developed from this analysis would help clarify

freight rail’s role in the region. This, in turn, may supply the information necessary to pursue

funding for improving the rail system’s infrastructure or for obtaining expanded service.

Most importantly, continued outreach efforts to the potential rail users identified in this report

is also recommended, to estimate what types and volumes of freight they might ship by rail.

Outreach should also include an ongoing conversation with operating railroads about the

possibilities for increasing service. Contact with railroad companies interested in acquiring

trackage rights and/or providing rail service to the area is also strongly encouraged.


Chapter 1: Introduction

During the 2011 Governor’s Freight Summit, Wisconsin shippers and manufacturers expressed

concerns about the lack of rail service in the northern part of the state. As a result, WisDOT made

plans to study the area. In addition, in 2012, nine northern Wisconsin counties joined together to

form the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission to work together to restore and improve rail service in

northern Wisconsin.

As part of its research, WisDOT evaluated freight rail activity in northern Wisconsin, focusing on the

rail line running between the communities of Almena and Pembine. This segment was operated by

Canadian National Railway, a Class I railroad. At that time, a large majority of the rail line was out of

service. (Two sections on the west end have since been reactivated, but about half of the total

length still remains without service.) The rail corridor was analyzed with respect to the type, tonnage

and value of commodities transported both to and from the study area counties. Freight tonnage

and value analysis is also provided for the entire state of Wisconsin.

WisDOT also explored businesses’ shipping operations and their dependence on rail. Selected

companies were surveyed on whether they use rail, the type and volume of products shipped to and

from their facilities, and the other types of transportation modes used to move their products.

Respondents also provided comments about their impressions of freight rail. They offered

recommendations to WisDOT regarding transportation infrastructure improvements needed to better

utilize rail in their community and in northern Wisconsin in general.

The results of this report have been shared with the commission and local economic development

professionals with the goal of restoring out-of-service rail lines, supporting and promoting a healthy

railroad network and growing northern Wisconsin’s economy.


Chapter 2: Wisconsin’s Current Freight Rail Network

Wisconsin’s rail system consists of a network of mainlines, branches, industrial leads, spurs, rail

yards and terminals. Currently, active rail lines total over 3,600 track miles and serve 59 of

Wisconsin’s 72 counties. This represents about 2 percent of the nation’s rail network. The state’s

rail network also includes inactive lines still in private rail company ownership, and former rail

corridors that have been preserved for possible future transportation use. These corridors are

protected under rail banking agreements or are currently being used as trails under the protections

of the National Trails System Act.

Over 518 million tons of freight moved to, from, within or through Wisconsin in 2011.1 Rail

transported 31 percent (162 million tons) of the total freight tonnage and 23 percent (over $122

billion) of the total freight value.2 See Table 1 for details about the statewide modal breakdown.

Table 1: Statewide Freight Profile

Source: IHS/Global Insight, Transearch freight database 2011

Wisconsin freight shipments by tonnage, 2011 (all modes)

Outbound Inbound Within State Overhead TOTAL

Rail 15,190,084 60,778,026 2,959,120 82,890,539 161,817,769

Truck 100,928,873 75,544,535 100,602,278 40,651,214 317,726,901

Water 29,342,788 7,449,605 395,851 - 37,188,244

Air 20,805 15,113 372 - 36,290

Other 14,182 16,040 - 1,484,204 1,514,427

TOTAL 145,496,734 143,803,320 103,957,621 125,025,957 518,283,631


The major commodities transported by rail in 2011 included coal, chemical products, farm products,

metallic ores, food products, pulp/paper, and lumber/wood. Tables 2 and 3 provide additional detail

on rail commodity movement.

Table 2: Top Wisconsin Commodities by Weight, Transported by Rail

Commodity Tons % of Total Coal 43,122,984 26.6% Chemicals or Allied Products 20,331,774 12.6% Farm Products 15,663,447 9.7% Metallic Ores 15,127,352 9.3% Food or Kindred Products 11,016,552 6.8% Nonmetallic Minerals 10,922,123 6.7% Misc Mixed Shipments 9,573,480 5.9% Pulp, Paper or Allied Products 7,836,160 4.8% Lumber or Wood Products 7,213,496 4.5% Clay, Concrete, Glass or Stone 5,557,904 3.4% All other 15,452,497 9.5% Total 161,817,769 100.0 %


Table 3: Top Wisconsin Commodities by Value, Transported by Rail

Commodity Dollars % of Total

Misc Mixed Shipments $ 44,737,818,029 36.8% Chemicals or Allied Products $ 19,643,302,029 16.2% Transportation Equipment $ 18,007,112,483 14.8% Pulp,paper or Allied Products $ 9,593,000,474 7.9% Food or Kindred Products $ 6,255,223,961 5.1% Primary Metal Products $ 5,163,642,587 4.2% Petroleum or Coal Products $ 3,438,588,151 2.8% Farm Products $ 3,242,114,200 2.7% Machinery $ 2,008,894,396 1.7% Lumber or Wood Products $ 1,644,466,007 1.4%

All other $ 7,882,825,816 6.5% Total $ 121,616,988,133 100.0%



The map below shows Wisconsin’s railroad system and the principal operators of each route.

Operators are not the owners in all cases. The routes operated by the WGN are state-owned lines,

as are most of the routes operated by the WSOR.

Figure 1: Wisconsin Railroad System


The map below shows the operation status of Wisconsin’s rail lines. WisDOT maintains a database

illustrating the rail lines that are in operation and the rail lines that are currently out of service.

Figure 2: Wisconsin Rail Operation Status


Wisconsin’s Changing Economy and Infrastructure Needs

County roads, state and federal highways, and freight rail systems provide the means to transport

raw and processed goods throughout Wisconsin and to other states and countries. Changes in the

economy and increased demand for certain commodities translate into changing demands on the

state’s transportation infrastructure network.

Northern Wisconsin’s economy relies on tourism, forestry, the paper industry, manufacturing and

nonmetallic mining. Most recently, “frac sand” mining has received a lot of attention in the state

because of the increasing demand for silica sand used to extract natural gas and oil from the

nation’s shale reserves. In a recent report by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,

Silica Sand Mining in Wisconsin, January 2012,3 the demand for the sand has increased

exponentially in the past two to three years. Wisconsin has approximately 60 mining operations

involved in extraction of frac sand and approximately 30 processing facilities operating or under

construction.4 Even though sand and gravel have been extracted in Wisconsin in the past, the

increase in demand for frac sand has increased the demand for freight infrastructure in the central

and western counties.

Hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) extracts natural gas or petroleum from deposits in sedimentary rock

known as oil shale. The process pumps a pressurized mixture of sand, water and chemicals deep

into the underground shale formations, fracturing them. The resulting fissures are held open by the

sand particles, so the oil or gas can flow up the well. The procedure requires sand that has a high

quartz (silica) content and well-rounded grains. Wisconsin’s mines produce some of the highest

quality frac sand in the country.

One method of collecting the sand is to strip surface land and then sift out the unwanted materials.

The sand is washed, sorted and dried onsite before being transported to a processing and

packaging facility.5 The dry sand weighs about 100 pounds per cubic foot.

When Texas-based Superior Silica Sands Corporation (Superior Silica) expanded their sand mining

operations to Barron County, they also established a processing facility just west of the city of

Barron. Sand excavated from other parts of the county was trucked to the plant, but rail

transportation for shipping out the finished product proved to be a challenge. The rail lines between

Barron and points east and south – where the sand needed to be shipped – were active, but the

segment linking the Superior Silica facility with the city was not.


To address this, Canadian National Railway (CN) and Superior Silica financed the rehabilitation of

that rail segment, so the frac sand could be sent to natural gas fields in North Dakota, Texas and

Pennsylvania. This improvement facilitated the movement of industrial sand from Wisconsin to other

regions in an efficient, cost effective way that minimized damage to roads and reinvigorated freight

rail transportation. According to a report by financial consulting firm Raymond James from

September 14, 2012, it is estimated that sand producers can save as much as $10 per ton by

shipping sand products by rail.6

Recent plant closings and lay-offs in the paper and packaging industry have also diminished the

need for rail service in northern Wisconsin. Large paper mills receive a significant volume of raw

wood and pulp and ship out finished paper and packaging products by rail cars. When the need for

freight rail diminishes, the level of existing rail service disappears. The result is that the remaining

industries that depend on rail must switch to trucks to transport freight, which may be more

expensive.

The logging industry in northern Wisconsin has also used freight rail to transport forest products to

other parts of the state and country. As rail service diminished, loggers relied more on trucks to haul

their freight. With the fluctuation of gas and diesel prices, trucking can be a costly option for logging

companies.

Environmental and Economic Benefits of Using Rail

Rail service provides a low cost transportation alternative for high volume, lower value commodities

that are essential to many of Wisconsin’s manufacturing industries.

Both rail freight and passenger service provide an energy efficient and environmentally friendly way

to move goods and people. One gallon of fuel transports an average of 480 ton-miles, over three

times the distance that can be transported by truck (155 miles).7

A joint study by the Texas Transportation Institute and the National Waterways Foundation also

measured 2001-2009 levels of emissions (greenhouse gases), fatalities, injuries and large

hazardous spills across transportation modes. Greenhouse gas (GHG) levels generated by trucks

were eight times higher than by rail (21.13 versus 171.83 tons of GHG per million ton-miles). The

number of fatalities was seven times higher for truck-transported freight than rail-transported freight

(132 versus 18.1 fatalities per million ton miles). The ratio of injuries was over 16 times higher for

trucks (1,609.6 versus 95.3 per million ton-miles traveled). Finally, there were fewer than half the


gallons of large hazardous spills of freight transported by rail than by truck (4.89 gallons spilled per

million haz-mat ton miles versus 10.41 gallons).8


Chapter 3: History of Rail in Wisconsin

Railroads have been an integral part of Wisconsin’s transportation system and economy since 1847.

Wisconsin’s railroad network peaked around 1920 at about 7,600 miles. From 1920 to 1929,

abandonments exceeded new construction, and this pattern continued and accelerated for the

remainder of the Twentieth Century.

The 1970s proved especially difficult for the railroad industry nationally and in Wisconsin. Intermodal

competition, economic regulation, the energy crisis and a recession all contributed to the distress of

the railroad industry. Increased regulation by the federal government contributed to many distortions

in the freight rail industry: pricing did not reflect costs, unprofitable lines remained in service, and

competition was restricted. Rail company bankruptcies and abandonments were common

throughout the United States in the 1970s. Particularly detrimental to the state economy was the

1977 bankruptcy of the Milwaukee Road system, one of the state’s historically dominant railroads.

The difficulties encountered by the railroad industry in the 1960s and 1970s prompted public

initiatives designed to preserve rail service to the communities affected by the rail abandonments.

The first such national initiative was the Federal Rail Passenger Service Act of 1971. This act

created Amtrak and relieved the freight railroads from the responsibility of providing passenger rail

services. Another initiative was the creation of the Federal Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory

Reform Act of 1976 that gave railroads some new flexibility in setting rates. Meanwhile in Wisconsin,

state rail assistance programs designed to preserve light density lines were created. In 1977, the

state legislature created the Rail Corridor Preservation Program, a state-funded assistance program.

The program’s goal was to help communities and shippers preserve rail service through

development of locally-based freight rail operators. The program:

Allowed WisDOT to exercise its “first right of acquisition” for purchase of abandoned

rail rights of way

Allowed WisDOT to direct funds to local governments for rail infrastructure

improvements and operating subsidies

Provided the state the ability to preserve unused rail corridors for future use

Major changes in the federal regulation of the railroad industry came in 1980. The Staggers Railroad

Act provided widespread deregulation in the railroad industry. While the legislation allowed for more

market-oriented competition in the freight industry, it also allowed for easier abandonment of lines

and led to significant changes among carriers. These changes were manifested in Wisconsin, as


sales and abandonments of lines were widespread. More than 1,200 route miles were permanently

abandoned in Wisconsin from 1980 to 1989. This represented about 20 percent of the state’s 1980

existing rail network.

The 1980s saw smaller railroads in Wisconsin have a larger impact on the freight rail industry. Short

line and regional railroads bought and leased light density lines and systems that the larger railroads

abandoned. In Wisconsin, about 600 miles of track were purchased by the public sector and leased

to newly-created short line carriers.

In the 1990s, the railroad industry continued to adjust to the structural changes of the previous

decades. The industry stabilized, began showing profits, and won back some of the freight market

that had been lost to trucks.

History of Rail in Northern Wisconsin: A Summary

The history of rail service throughout northern Wisconsin has included operations that serve

customers within the state, as well as overhead transportation (serving customers with both origins

and destinations outside of the state). Virtually all of the development and construction of the rail

corridors currently in existence occurred in the 45-year period from the end of the Civil War (1865)

through 1910.

Most of the corridors across the region were north-south, including the current dominant corridor for

overhead traffic – the Canadian National route between Duluth/Superior and Chicago. While timber

and ore shipments were critical for the north-south lines, the region’s development was catalyzed

and sustained by a west-east overhead corridor – the initial Soo Line corridor between

Minneapolis/St. Paul and Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan/Ontario.

Of note, Canadian rail companies (Canadian Pacific and Canadian National) have played major

roles in the development and use of rail lines across northern Wisconsin. The following summaries

cover the development and retrenchment of the three dominant rail companies across the study area

during the late Nineteenth Century and Twentieth Century. A more detailed history (including

discussion of short lines) can be found in Appendix 1.


THE SOO LINE

The most extensive and important historic rail system across northern Wisconsin was the Soo Line –

which, in operational structure, was an affiliation of two rail companies brought together (along with a

third company) by merger in 1961.

The dominant company was the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Sault Ste. Marie (MStP&SSM). The

company was formed to bypass costly and time-consuming shipping routes through Chicago. By

1888, the MStP&SSM had completed the line from St. Paul to Sault Ste. Marie – through the

Wisconsin communities of Amery, Barron, Cameron, Ladysmith, Prentice, Rhinelander and

Pembine. The cost of construction and service for this corridor compelled the MStP&SSM

management to give controlling interest of the company to the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) later

that year.9

Eventually, many north-south rail lines would cross and/or interchange with the MStP&SSM along

this corridor, pieces of which remain intact. This corridor transects most of the counties within the

study area. Other later extensions by the MStP&SSM included a corridor from Dresser north to

Duluth, and a line from Argonne south (through Crandon, White Lake, Shawano and Black Creek) to

Appleton.10 Timber, pulpwood and paper products were important commodities11, with ore,

agricultural products and manufactured items also providing substantial revenue12.

In 1908, the MStP&SSM took control of another important railroad in the development of northern

Wisconsin: the Wisconsin Central (WC – not to be confused with the later Wisconsin Central,

Limited). Soon, both companies were using the “Soo Line” moniker13.

One of WC’s predecessors was awarded the land grant to build a rail line between Stevens Point

and Superior. Under WC, the first major segment completed (in 1871) was between Menasha and

Stevens Point (through Waupaca); from there, the line was built to Ashland by 1877 (through

Marshfield, Medford, Phillips, Park Falls and Mellen). A line to St. Paul (via Owen, Chippewa Falls

and New Richmond) was completed in 188414. Shortly before falling under control of the

MStP&SSM in 1908, WC finished its line from Spencer to Superior via Owen, Ladysmith and

Gordon. Lumber and iron ore provided large volumes of revenue in the early years15; by the 1900s,

that had shifted to coal, pulpwood/paper,and grain/flour. By 1958, manufacturing had taken

prominence, with 55 percent of WC revenues coming from manufactured and miscellaneous

commodities16.


In 1961, the MStP&SSM formally merged with WC and a smaller line, the Duluth, South Shore, and

Atlantic (DSS&A). The DSS&A’s presence in Wisconsin was limited, serving mostly the mining

areas in Iron and Ashland counties. Manufactured goods, miscellaneous commodities, forest

products, and ores were key revenue sources17.

Following the merger, the new Soo Line was sustained by grain shipments from its system west of

Minneapolis and from overhead traffic provided by CP18. In 1985, the Soo acquired several former

Milwaukee Road assets, including the central Wisconsin line from New Lisbon to Heafford Junction

and the main line from Chicago to the Twin Cities via Milwaukee, Portage, Tomah and La Crosse19.

Two years later, in 1987, the Soo then divested itself of all its heritage lines (briefly classified as the

Lake State Division) and some of the Milwaukee Road’s low-density lines, selling them to Wisconsin

Central, Limited (WCL)20. Ultimately, Soo retained only the Chicago – Twin Cities main line and a

spur from Portage to Madison. In 1992, the Soo’s remaining shares were acquired by Canadian

Pacific to be fully integrated into the CP rail system21.

The former Lake States Division became the initial system for WCL. Pulp and paper products,

lumber and wood products, and clay/glass/stone comprised more than half of its commodity volume

at its inception22. A 1991 study noted that 60 percent of WCL car loadings were related to the paper

industry23.

In the early 1990s, WCL went through a phase of expansion. The company purchased Soo Line’s

Ladysmith – Superior and C&NW’s Cameron – Superior lines, giving WCL a corridor from Superior

to Chicago. WCL also acquired the former C&NW line from Green Bay to Ishpeming, Michigan via

Marinette and Escanaba. In 1993, WCL acquired the Green Bay & Western (GB&W) and the Fox

River Valley (FRV) Railroad. The GB&W was a long-standing bridge line between the Mississippi

River and Lake Michigan; the end of rail ferry service lessened its value. The briefly-lived FRV was

comprised of former C&NW lines from Menasha to Manitowoc and Menasha to Milwaukee via Fond

du Lac24.

Through the 1990s, Canadian National (CN) became increasingly reliant on WCL as a bridge line

between Superior and Chicago, under a 1996 partnership between CN, WCL and CSX for a

transcontinental intermodal shipping corridor25. The link became even more crucial in 1998, when

CN acquired Illinois Central, providing CN with direct access to ports along the Gulf of Mexico26. In

2001, WCL was acquired by CN for $800 million, plus assumption of $400 million in WCL debt27.


Subsequently, WCL/CN began paring back the system. The largest piece to go through formal

Surface Transportation Board (STB) abandonment was from Shawano to Crandon; however,

WCL/CN also withdrew service from Prentice west to Ladysmith (prior to 2008)28 and from

Rhinelander east to Goodman (between 2008 and 2012). A segment that had its service

discontinued between Ladysmith and Almena was returned to service in 2012 as the exponential

growth of frac sand mining generated sufficient revenue to restore service29.

CHICAGO & NORTHWESTERN

The story of the Chicago & North Western (C&NW) is one of two semi-separate companies across

northern Wisconsin. In the northeastern part of the state, the ‘parent’ C&NW had extensive

coverage, developed between 1875 and 1910. A significant portion of this trackage was acquired in

the 1893 merger/acquisition of the Milwaukee, Lake Shore, & Western. At its peak, C&NW operated

three north-south corridors across northern Wisconsin:

Green Bay – Marinette (and Michigan’s Upper Peninsula)

Green Bay – Iron River, Michigan (via Gillett and Laona)

Oshkosh – Watersmeet, Michigan (via Eland, Antigo and Eagle River), and to Ashland (via

Eland, Antigo, Monico, Rhinelander, Woodruff and Hurley)

The C&NW also operated along two east-west corridors in the region:

Green Bay to Marshfield (via Shawano and Wausau)

Along the Michigan – Wisconsin state line from Iron Mountain, Michigan to Ashland (via Iron

River, Michigan and Ironwood, Michigan/Hurley, Wisconsin)30

Metallic ores, timber and pulpwood were the major commodities hauled on these corridors31. Most

of these rail lines were sold off or abandoned from the 1960s through the 1980s. A portion of the

Laona line was operated (unsuccessfully) as a short line in the 1980s and early 1990s32. Of all these

lines, only the line between Green Bay and Marinette (now owned by Canadian National) remains in

operation.

In west central and northwestern Wisconsin, the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Omaha

(CStPM&O, known otherwise as the Omaha Road) was a sister company to the C&NW. The

Omaha’s ownership was under control of the C&NW from the 1880s onward, but operations had


substantial autonomy. The C&NW purchased the Omaha in 1957 and formally merged the company

into C&NW in 197233.

The Omaha’s geographic presence across northwestern Wisconsin was that of an “X” centered at

Spooner, with end points at Superior, Bayfield/Ashland, Eau Claire and Hudson. The Omaha also

operated a branch from Tuscobia (near Rice Lake) through Birchwood to Park Falls34. Timber35 and

agricultural products36 were the major commodities of the Omaha in Wisconsin. Following the

C&NW purchase, the Omaha’s lines were pared back in the 1960s and 1970s through sale and

abandonment. By the time the C&NW was sold to Union Pacific (UP) in 1995, it was a much smaller

system than had existed three decades earlier37.

The legacy segments of the Omaha include a segment from Spooner to Hayward Junction operated

by Wisconsin Great Northern, while CN has a spur to Hayward. UP has leased the Cameron to

Chippewa Falls segment to Progressive Rail (operating as Wisconsin Northern). UP operates over

former C&NW lines from St. Paul to Milwaukee via Hudson, Eau Claire (with a branch to Chippewa

Falls), Merrillan, Wyeville and Adams38. UP also has trackage rights on CN from Necedah through

Wisconsin Rapids and Junction City to Duluth39.

THE MILWAUKEE ROAD

The other major north-south railroad company across northern Wisconsin was the Chicago,

Milwaukee, St. Paul, & Pacific, better known as The Milwaukee Road. While the system was more

active in southern Wisconsin, the Milwaukee had two corridors into northern Wisconsin:

Green Bay – Channing, Michigan (and other cities in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, via Crivitz,

Wausaukee and Iron Mountain, including a branch from Crivitz to Marinette)

Tomah (and later, New Lisbon) to Minocqua and points north (via Babcock, Wisconsin

Rapids, Wausau, Merrill and Tomahawk); this corridor had extensive branch lines prior to

World War II

A third Milwaukee line into the region was a spur off the La Crosse – St. Paul main line from

Wabasha, Minnesota to Eau Claire (via Durand, with a spur to Menomonie). All of these corridors

were constructed between the 1870s and 1900s40. Ores and timber were frequent cargos for the

line north of Green Bay; the central Wisconsin line carried timber, pulpwood, and paper products,

while the Eau Claire line transported agricultural products.


Although the Milwaukee Road was restructured in a 1925 bankruptcy, its extensive system (which

was the country’s last transcontinental railroad to be completed) proved to be too expensive to

maintain after World War II. Repeated sales and abandonments of low-volume lines failed to bring

solvency. In 1977, the Milwaukee went into reorganization under bankruptcy41.

The line from Eau Claire to Wabasha was briefly operated as a short line but ceased operation in

1981 due to structural concerns over a bridge in Eau Claire and lack of traffic42. The line from Green

Bay north to Channing, Michigan, with a branch to Marinette, was sold to the Escanaba and Lake

Superior (E&LS) in 1980. It remains in operation, hauling wood and paper products, canned goods,

steel and agricultural items43.

The central Wisconsin line was acquired, along with many other lines, by the Soo Line in 198544. In

turn, Soo sold off this corridor (along with much of its historic northern Wisconsin lines) to startup

Wisconsin Central, Limited (WCL) in 198745. WCL was sold to Canadian National in 200146. The

line from New Lisbon (through Wisconsin Rapids, Wausau, Merrill and Tomahawk) to Heafford

Junction remains in operation under CN47.


Chapter 4: Rail Transit Commissions and Rail Preservation

Wisconsin’s efforts to preserve freight rail service began with the passage of an amendment to the

state constitution in 1992 that allowed state dollars to be used to purchase rail infrastructure. Rail

Transit Commissions (RTCs) have been created to help preserve rail service or the potential for rail

service, and to influence policies on the future use of rail corridors if rail service is discontinued.

Grant agreements between WisDOT and the RTCs determine how the lines can be used. Much of

the responsibility for operations and management is transferred to the RTCs which, in turn, contract

with private railroads for service.

Wisconsin has approximately 562 miles of publicly-owned rail corridors that are jointly owned by the

state and seven RTCs. Currently, 451 of these miles have rail service. About 90 miles are

recreational trails, and 21 miles are banked for future rail use. See Table 4 for a list of RTCs and

their member counties and Figure 3 for a map of their locations.

Rail Transit Commissions are staffed by their member municipalities and, in some cases, by regional

planning commission staff. Their respective level of activity and scope of efforts vary significantly.

The commissions continue to be important partners with WisDOT in preserving rail service. In this

partnership arrangement, WisDOT provides resources, information, staff support, general oversight,

and funding. The commissions provide project management, matching funds, and coordination with

shippers, freight rail operators and local governments.


Table 4: Wisconsin Rail Transit Commissions

Name Created Counties Purpose

East Wisconsin Counties Rail Consortium

Late 1970s

Winnebago Dodge

Green Lake Washington Fond du Lac

Manages 150 miles of track in cooperation with Wisconsin & Southern Railroad (WSOR)

Pecatonica Rail Transit Commission

1978

Rock Iowa Green

Lafayette

Manages 34 miles of track between Monroe and Janesville, as well as a recreational trail between Monroe and Mineral Point

South Central Wisconsin Rail Transit

Commission 1978

Dane Green

Manages 59 miles of rail corridor that is currently a recreational trail

Wisconsin River Rail Transit Commission

1980

Crawford Dane Grant Iowa Rock Sauk

Walworth Waukesha

Largest and most active commission manages 254 miles of track; contracts with WSOR to provide service over its network

Pink Lady Rail Transit Commission

1988 Sauk

Created to work with Union Pacific Railroad, communities, and shippers to maintain area rail service

Washburn County Rail Transit Commission

1998 Washburn

Manages 18 miles of rail line and currently has an operating agreement with the Wisconsin Great Northern Railroad

Northwoods Rail Transit Commission

2012

Ashland Florence Forest

Langlade Lincoln

Marinette Oneida Price Rusk Vilas

Organized to negotiate on behalf of its counties and take actions designed to improve local rail service for the communities of northern Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan


Figure 3: Wisconsin Rail Transit Commissions


Wisconsin Rail Assistance Programs

WisDOT currently has three local government rail assistance programs: the Freight Railroad

Infrastructure Improvement Program (FRIIP), the Freight Railroad Preservation Program (FRPP) and

the Transportation Economic Assistance (TEA) Program. The FRIIP offers loans to enable the state

to encourage a broader array of improvements to the rail system, particularly on privately-owned

lines. It also provides funding for other rail-related projects such as loading and transload facilities.

The FRPP provides grants to local units of government, industries and railroads for the purpose of

preserving essential rail lines and rehabilitating them following purchase. Since 1992, $118.1 million

in FRIIP loans have been awarded, and, since 1980, $160.8 million in grants have been awarded

through the FRPP program.

The FRIIP provides loans for up to 100 percent of the cost of rail projects that:

Connect an industry to the national railroad system

Make improvements to enhance transportation efficiency, safety and intermodal freight

movement

Accomplish line rehabilitation

Develop the economy

The FRPP provides grants for up to 80 percent of the cost:

To purchase abandoned rail lines in an effort to continue freight service or for the

preservation of the opportunity for future rail service

To rehabilitate facilities, such as tracks or bridges, on publicly-owned rail lines

A third WisDOT funding source, the Transportation Economic Assistance (TEA) program, also

assists with rail-related projects. The TEA program provides grants to governing bodies, private

businesses, and consortiums for up to 50 percent of the costs of road, rail, harbor and airport

projects that help attract employers to Wisconsin or encourage business and industry to remain and

expand in the state.


Chapter 5: Northern Wisconsin Study Area Profile

Nearly 250,000 people live in the 10 counties in the study area, a 26 percent increase since 1970.

The median household income for these counties was $41,809 in 2007-2011, below Wisconsin’s

median household income of $52,374 for the same time period.48 There are over 23,000 non-farm

business establishments in the study area and over 400 manufacturing facilities.49

Figure 4: Study Area

These 10 counties represent diverse populations and industries. While northern Wisconsin may be

known for tourism, forestry and mining, the region’s economy is also made up of a variety of

manufacturing-related industries that rely on an efficient freight infrastructure system to transport

their commodities. The source for the following freight data is IHS/Global Insight’s Transearch

freight database, 2011.

Inbound Freight

Most of the freight that was shipped to the study area was transported by truck, but some freight

moved by rail and a small percentage was transported by water. Almost 92 percent was shipped by


truck (valued at almost $5 billion), 6 percent by rail (valued at $150 million), and 2 percent by water

(valued at $101 million). Of the 7.9 million tons of freight that were shipped in, about 7.2 million tons

were transported by truck, about 495,000 tons arrived by rail, and about 165,000 tons were shipped

by water.

The products with the highest tonnage shipped to the study area by truck were nonmetallic minerals,

lumber or wood products, farm products, secondary traffic (commodities moving to and from

warehouses and distribution centers), and food or kindred products. These products were delivered

from the Wisconsin counties of Langlade, Marinette, and Marathon, and from the Minnesota portion

of the Minneapolis Business Economic Area (BEA). (A “BEA” is a geographic area defined by the

U.S. government and used in IHS/Global Insight’s Transearch freight database. Please see the

Glossary for additional information.)

The majority of the products shipped to the study area by rail were coal, pulp or paper products,

lumber or wood products, chemicals or allied products, and food or kindred products. Most products

were delivered from the Kentucky portion of the Evansville (Indiana) BEA, Non-Census Metropolitan

Area (Non-CMA) British Columbia (Canada), Non-CMA Alberta (Canada), and St. Louis County

(Minnesota). (A “CMA” and a “Non-CMA” are geographic areas defined by the Canadian

government and used in IHS/Global Insight’s Transearch freight database. Please see the Glossary

for additional information.)

Outbound Freight

In 2011, most of the commodities that were shipped out of the study area were shipped by truck.

The remainder was sent by rail or water. Just over 11 million tons of freight originated in counties

within the study area.

Almost 10 million tons of goods were shipped from the study area by truck and were worth around

$6.5 billion. Some of the top commodities were nonmetallic minerals, farm products, lumber or wood

products, and food or kindred products. These products were transported to other counties in

Wisconsin, and to Minnesota and Michigan.

Just over 1 million tons of commodities were shipped from the study area by rail, valued at just over

$412 million. Top commodities shipped by rail included pulp or paper products, lumber or wood

products, and clay/concrete/glass/stone. Major destinations for these shipments were other

Wisconsin counties, Indiana, and Minnesota.


County Freight Profiles

Appendix 2 of this report provides economic and freight activity analyses for each county in the

Northwoods Rail Transit Commission study area. Each county profile contains information about

major industry and employment activity, freight flow, and lists of major shippers and receivers of

freight. The data describes the county’s freight activity in relation to other counties or regions in and

out of the study area and includes information about major commodities, major state trading partners

and the type of transportation that was used.

Data was collected from a number of sources, all of which are described below. The data provided

in the county freight profiles is derived from IHS/Global Insight’s Transearch 2011 database,

FreightFinder database, the United States Census Bureau and the Wisconsin Department of

Workforce Development.

The Transearch database is a comprehensive, proprietary database of commodity movement from

one county or region to another. Without revealing individual business names, the database

provides information about the type, tonnage, value, direction and transportation mode of

commodities. Data is used to analyze commodity movement at the county, region and state level.

The Freight Finder database is a spreadsheet and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) file that

displays businesses in Wisconsin, their location, and the type and tonnage amount of a commodity

being shipped to and from these businesses, but it does not indicate which mode is being used.

The United States Census Bureau provides county-level information about major industries, the

number of working adults who reside in the county and the number of non-farm businesses

operating in the county.

The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development provides information about the employed

population and in what industry they’re employed. The Department also provides counts of business

establishments by industry type.

Information about each county in the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission study area was collected

by Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) staff in order to create a comprehensive

overview of each county’s economic activity and freight movements. These county freight profiles

are intended to inform the reader of the county’s freight activity and existing infrastructure conditions.

It also covers major companies in the region.


In addition to the freight profiles, supplemental county profiles were also created. They provide a

summary of the freight and commodity data shown in Appendix 2 and also additional information

about each county in the study area. See Appendix 3 for this overview.


Identifying Rail Freight Stations

“Freight station” is a term used by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) to describe a

location where commodities are transferred from one mode of transportation to another (usually

from rail to truck or truck to rail). The most comprehensive public database on freight stations

can be found on the FRA’s web site: http://fragis.frasafety.net/GISFRASafety/. The information

appears as a layer on its web-based railroad map, which is available to the general public. The

freight station information can be accessed using a Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

software mapping product known as ESRI ArcMap.

Freight stations include the various types of freight handling configurations such as rail spurs,

yards, sidings, terminals and intermodal (container) facilities. These freight stations were

established on or near the rail corridor in order to provide rail service for area businesses.

Knowing the locations and freight handling capabilities of the freight stations in the study area

could potentially provide opportunities for improving or restoring rail service along segments of

the railroad line.

WisDOT was able to locate 42 freight stations identified in the federal database that were within

or adjacent to the study area. Using the latitude and longitude coordinates from the locations of

the freight stations, WisDOT transferred the coordinates to the Department’s mapping system.

This enabled WisDOT to use aerial photos (orthophotos) to help verify the locations of the

freight stations. Aside from a physical onsite inspection, aerial photos are the only way to

confirm whether an object plotted on a map actually exists on the ground.

Findings

Forty-two freight stations were listed by the FRA in or near the study area. An aerial photo

inspection performed in July of 2013 revealed the following:

Twenty-eight freight stations are currently not in service. Eight of them are visible rail

spurs located on an out-of-service mainline.

Seven freight stations are potentially active. They are visible in the photos but appear to

be in poor condition.

Seven freight stations are active (five for pulp wood use and two for industrial use).

http://fragis.frasafety.net/GISFRASafety/


Limitations

Using the FRA freight station database has limitations, and the federal agency does not provide

any warranty regarding its fitness for use. The FRA web site provides no information regarding

the currency, accuracy or completeness of this layer. There is little available data on the

documentation of source information, compilation dates or maintenance dates. There is no

indication that the freight station layer is currently maintained. WisDOT has been unsuccessful

in its attempts to get clarification regarding the contents of the freight stations from the FRA.

Although the freight station layer has limited utility, it does provide us with some indication of the

conditions of the rail facilities in northern Wisconsin. WisDOT identified at least seven active

freight stations and seven potentially active freight stations. The biggest limitation of this layer is

an apparent lack of maintenance. The layer does not correlate with actual conditions on the

ground, and there may be a substantial number of undocumented new freight stations.

However, this can only be confirmed by onsite inspections. A possible source for rail freight

handling facilities may be available from the operating railroads in the study area.

See Appendix 4 for a guide on how to use the freight station mapping tool.


Chapter 6: Surveying Northwoods Businesses

June 2011 marked the beginning of concerted efforts to form a new rail coalition in northern

Wisconsin. Erhard Huettl, the County Board Chair for Forest County at that time, requested a

group meeting with county board members from Barron, Forest, Florence, Marinette, Oneida,

Price, Rusk and Vilas counties. His goal was to establish a region-wide committee to actively

address rail freight transportation issues, because of reports of dissatisfaction in his county

(particularly from loggers) with inadequate service.

The meeting attendees included county board supervisors, county economic development

managers, and members of the North Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission. The

county representatives all expressed concern over insufficient rail service and the possibility of

losing service altogether as well as support for actions that would preserve and improve it for

the future.

The group formed the Northwoods Rail Coalition and began the formal process of becoming the

organization now known as the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission (NRTC).

Shortly thereafter, in November of 2011, Wisconsin held its first annual Governor’s Freight

Industry Summit. The event brought together freight stakeholders from across the state to

discuss the challenges they faced with the freight transportation system. In response to the

participants’ comments, WisDOT developed the Freight Mobility Action Agenda which

committed it to specific goals aimed at increasing the efficiency of freight movement in

Wisconsin.

The manufacturers and freight carriers at the event cited inadequacies in the state’s rail network

as one of their concerns. WisDOT identified multiple ways it would address the issue, one of

them being to conduct a market study that would examine freight rail use and potential in

northern Wisconsin. The study would concentrate on 10 counties located along the US 8

highway corridor, as this region has more out-of-service rail segments than most others in the

state.

The NRTC members welcomed the market study. WisDOT presented its draft outline during the

commission’s May meeting in 2012. The study’s primary components would consist of:


An analysis of the commodities moving into and out of the area and how they’re shipped,

as extracted from commercial databases

A snapshot of each county, profiling its industries and economy

A question-and-answer survey offered to companies that currently use, or have the

potential to use, rail to ship or receive freight

A complete report of the survey results, including the commodities moving into and out

of the area and how they’re shipped, as reported by the survey respondents

Recommendations for retaining and improving freight rail service in the region

Over the next few months, WisDOT compiled a list of businesses that appeared to have the

potential to use rail, based on the types of commodities they handled (regardless of whether

they currently had access to rail). A draft set of survey questions was also created.

WisDOT staff presented their preliminary freight profiles and survey questions at an NRTC

meeting that fall. They also travelled to each of the 10 counties to meet with economic

development staff and county supervisors to discuss the draft list of businesses that would be

mailed a survey. Each county had the opportunity to revise and expand the mailing list. As a

result, many logging businesses were added, as were several companies from the four counties

in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula adjacent to the Wisconsin border.

That November, WisDOT sent surveys to 1,094 businesses.50 The recipients were located

primarily in the 10-county study area, but also in a few locations nearby and in the previously-

mentioned Michigan counties. The mailing included two surveys: one for companies that

currently used freight rail and one for companies that didn’t. The respondents were asked to

select the survey that applied to them, and either return it by mail or complete it online.

Local officials from many of the counties in the study area took steps to introduce and promote

the survey to the public, and encouraged community participation. Prior to and during the time

the survey was active, county economic development offices sent letters and published press

releases to support the survey and express why they felt it was important to the economic future

of the region.

A total of 190 surveys were submitted to WisDOT, representing a response rate of 17 percent.51


Northwoods Rail Transit Commission Membership

The Northwoods Rail Transit Commission (NRTC) was officially recognized by the State of

Wisconsin in May of 2012. As of the spring of 2013, the NRTC consisted of 10 northern

Wisconsin counties that had banded together “to sustain and enhance safe, reliable and

efficient rail service critical to the businesses, communities and economies in northern

Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.” Membership in the NRTC is increasing. The

purpose of the Commission is to work with the operating railroad and area businesses to build

and maintain quality rail service.

The NRTC is comprised of two representatives from each member county; they serve staggered

two-year terms. The commission has an elected Chair, Vice-chair and Secretary/Treasurer that

serve one-year terms. The current representatives are:

Ashland County

Dale Kupczyk, Ashland Area Development Corporation

Bob Blaszkowski, County Board

Florence County

Wendy Gehlhoff, NRTC Chair, Florence County Economic Development

Ed Wenger, County Board

Forest County

Mike Albrecht, County Board

Jim Landru, Jr., County Board

Langlade County

Ron Nye, County Board

Dave Solin, County Board Chair

Lincoln County

Bob Lussow, NRTC Vice-chair, County Board Chair

Don Nelson, County Board

Marinette County

Mike Cassidy, County Board

Shirley Kaufman, County Board

Oneida County

Dave Hintz, County Board Chair

Denny Thompson, County Board


Price County

Bob Kopisch, County Board Chair

Carol McLaughlin, County Board

Rusk County

Andy Albarado, Rusk County Economic Development

Randy Tatur, NRTC Secretary/Treasurer, County Board Chair

Vilas County

Ed Bluthardt, County Board

Ralph Sitzberger, County Board


Survey Methodology: Development of the Mailing List

The goal during the creation of the survey’s mailing list was to identify businesses that could

ship or receive freight by rail. The survey was offered in two versions, separately targeting rail

users and non-rail users. The following methodology was used to create the mailing list.

The first step was to use IHS/Global Insight’s freight database, known as Transearch, to identify

all the commodity types that were shipped by rail to, from, through and within Wisconsin. This

database uses Standard Transportation Commodity Codes (STCCs) to classify commodities.

Rail companies use these codes to identify and charge for the kinds of commodities transported

on the rail cars.

Next, equivalent codes from the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) were

identified because the database WisDOT uses to gather business information (ReferenceUSA),

only uses NAICS codes. A list of all businesses in the study area associated with these NAICS

codes was generated, using minimum thresholds of five employees and $1 million in sales

volume.

A third resource, FreightLocater, was then cross-referenced to ensure that no large generators

or receivers of freight were omitted from the mailing list. FreightLocater is a supplement to the

Transearch freight database that identifies manufacturing facilities and distribution centers.

Finally, local economic development officials were consulted to add or delete companies based

on their knowledge of the local economy.

Confidentiality

WisDOT will keep the responses to the study’s survey strictly confidential and share them only

among WisDOT staff and members of the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission. Only

aggregated survey results and anonymous comments are published in this report.


Summary of Survey Results

The results of the survey have been summarized into two groups:

Businesses that currently use rail service (39)

Businesses that currently do not use rail service (151)

Figure 5 shows the locations of businesses that responded to the survey. Due to the

geographic proximity for some of the businesses in the region, there are some overlaps in

coverage of the 190 survey respondents. Following the map is a summary of the survey results;

see Appendix 5 and Appendix 6 for the full analysis.

Figure 5: Locations of Businesses That Responded to the Survey


BUSINESSES THAT USE RAIL

Of the 190 businesses that responded to the survey, 39 of them indicated that they currently

use rail service to ship and/or receive freight.

Commodities

The major commodity type, both shipped and received, was lumber/wood products, followed by

pulp/paper products.

Shipping modes

Although the businesses utilize rail service, they all rely on truck shipments as well. All but

three receive more freight by truck than by rail. In addition, more than half receive at least 90

percent of their freight by truck. Four businesses also receive some freight by water, and two

receive some by air.

These same shipping patterns are seen in the businesses’ outbound freight. More than three-

fourths of the businesses ship out at least 90 percent of their freight by truck. Only two ship

more freight by rail than by truck. In addition, five businesses use water, and three use air as

part of their outbound shipping mix.

Origins and destinations

The businesses that utilize rail ship and receive freight all over the United States and Canada.

While Wisconsin is the most common origin and destination, Michigan, Minnesota and Illinois

are major trading partners. Ontario and Quebec are the most common trading partners in

Canada.

Why do they use rail?

When given a series of possible answers for why they ship by rail, the respondents indicated the

main reason was that rail is cheaper than other modes. The other two most common answers

were that rail is more efficient and that rail is more convenient.

Potential use of out-of-service rail lines

The businesses were asked if they would take advantage of rail lines that are currently out of

service, if they were put back into service. Sixteen businesses said they would be interested,

and 17 said that they were not sure. Figure 6 gives additional details. The businesses were


also asked what types of improvements they may need if lines that are currently not served

went back into service. The most common responses regarded the replacement or

improvement of sidings or spurs.

Figure 6: Potential Use of Reactivated Rail Lines by Current Rail Users

Potential increases in rail shipments with improved service

Of the 39 businesses that utilize rail, 16 of them indicated that they would ship or receive

additional volume if there were improvements in rail service. These improvements include

access, timing, reliability and the number of rail cars.

Impact of losing rail service

The businesses were asked about the potential impact on them if existing rail lines were no

longer served by a railroad. The most common response was that shipping costs would

increase. Other potential impacts included less revenue, less volume shipped or received, and

changes to their packaging. Nine businesses indicated that losing rail would not have a

significant effect.

Interest in a transload or intermodal facility

Businesses were asked if they would be interested in a transload or intermodal facility to

increase the efficiency of truck-rail commodity transfers. Fourteen businesses indicated they

would like a transload facility, and 12 businesses said they would be interested in an intermodal


facility. Suggested locations varied from areas near their businesses, to larger transportation

hubs such as Wausau, Superior, Milwaukee and Chicago.

BUSINESSES THAT DO NOT USE RAIL

Of the 190 businesses that responded to the survey, 151 of them indicated that they do not

currently use rail service to ship and/or receive freight.

Commodities

The major inbound commodity type was lumber/wood products, followed by primary metal

products, and then machinery. The major outbound commodity type was also lumber/wood

products, followed by machinery, and then transportation equipment.

Shipping modes

All but 23 of the respondents ship or receive freight entirely by truck. Of the 23 businesses that

do not ship exclusively by truck, eight also ship or receive by water and 15 by air.

Origins and destinations

The trading partners of the businesses that do not ship by rail are very similar to those who do.

Other than shipments that start or finish in Wisconsin, the major trading partners are the border

states of Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois. Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec are the most

common origins or destinations in Canada.

Why do they NOT use rail?

When given a series of possible answers for why they do not ship by rail, the respondents

indicated the main reason was that service is not offered. The other most common answers

were that their freight is not typically shipped by rail, that rail is less convenient, and that they do

not have enough volume.

Potential use of out-of-service rail lines

The businesses were asked if they would take advantage of rail lines that are currently out of

service, if they were put back into service. Of the 141 businesses that responded to this

question, 43 of them said that they would use rail if it were available. Figure 7 gives additional

details, and Figure 8 shows the location of the interested businesses.


The businesses were also asked what types of improvements they may need if lines that are

currently not served went back into service. The most common responses regarded the

replacement or improvement of sidings or spurs.

Figure 7: Potential Use of Reactivated Rail Lines by Businesses Not Currently Using Rail


Figure 8: Location of Potential New Rail Users, If Lines Were Reactivated


Potential rail shipments from interested businesses

In an attempt to quantify potential freight that could be shipped by rail rather than truck, WisDOT

analyzed the commodities shipped and received by the 43 businesses that stated they would be

interested in using rail. Potentially, an additional 2,300 carloads could be shipped by rail to the

study area annually, and another 4,800 carloads could be shipped out of the study area each

year. These estimates are based on the amount of rail-related commodities that were shipped

or received in 2011. Almost all of this potential rail freight is logs, pulpwood and lumber.

Impact of having rail service become available

The businesses were asked what the effects would be if they could ship by rail. Although the

most common response was that there would not be a significant effect, many businesses

indicated that gaining rail service would decrease their shipping costs, and that the volume of

freight shipped would increase.

Interest in a transload or intermodal facility

Businesses were asked if they would be interested in a transload or intermodal facility to

increase the efficiency of truck-rail commodity transfers. Thirty-seven businesses indicated they

would like a transload facility, and 33 businesses said they would be interested in an intermodal

facility. Suggested locations varied throughout northern Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula of

Michigan. The most common suggestions for the location of a transload facility were Rice Lake

and Crandon.

Limitations of Survey Results

The total freight volumes are approximate.

The freight volumes assigned to each commodity category are approximate, as

some of the commodities could have fit into more than one category.

Some of the total freight volumes reported by a company consisted of multiple,

unrelated commodities, which affected the volumes assigned to each category.

A few of the respondents left a few of the questions unanswered.


Chapter 7: Recommendations and Suggested Next Steps

The WisDOT research team received a request to add freight profiles and commodity flow

analyses for Ashland and Iron counties to this report. WisDOT will continue to develop profiles

for these two counties. A separate report will be developed which will include information on the

volume, value and types of freight being transported in Ashland and Iron counties.

Due to the high interest in exploring the possibilities for an open-pit metallic mineral mine in Iron

County (Penokee/Gogebic Deposit), WisDOT will evaluate the transportation impacts

associated with the extraction and transportation of minerals from the mining area. Research

has determined the ownership of the former rail line that could serve the iron ore mine.

The team will also continue to investigate ways to better utilize and access the Federal Railroad

Administration’s freight facilities database. This could prove to be an important analytical tool to

help identify and determine the feasibility of utilizing the existing rail spurs, transload facilities

and rail yards for future economic development projects.

To help illustrate the economic importance of the rail system, WisDOT can provide an analysis

of the economic impact of businesses currently using rail service in northern Wisconsin. This

type of study was conducted for the Wisconsin and Southern Railroad, now under controlling

ownership of WATCO Companies, LLC, Pittsburg, Kansas. The study’s economic analysis

included the multiplier effects of employment, wages and output on the economy by the

businesses using rail service. If representatives of the Northwoods Rail Transit Commission or

another group could provide employment numbers, wages of the employees, and sales volumes

from the businesses in northern Wisconsin using rail service, WisDOT’s research team could

use the agency’s economic models to calculate the effect of these businesses in the regional

economy.

WisDOT recommends an investigation of the study area’s freight facilities to determine their

operational capacity and current ownership, and whether they could serve as points for the

consolidation of freight for area businesses.

Finally, outreach efforts to businesses identified in the study as potential rail users should be

continued, to determine the volume and types of commodities that could be transported by rail.


Outreach efforts should include contact with operating railroads in the region to help identify

opportunities for transporting commodities on rail cars. In addition, continue to monitor and

provide information to railroad companies interested in acquiring and/or providing rail service in

the Northwoods area.


Related Web Sites

BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY

American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association http://www.aslrra.org/about_aslrra/FAQs/

Association of American Railroads https://www.aar.org/Pages/Home.aspx

Canadian National Railway http://www.cn.ca/

Escanaba and Lake Superior Railroad http://www.elsrr.com/

Progressive Rail http://www.progressiverail.com/

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Federal Railroad Administration http://www.fra.dot.gov/

STATE GOVERNMENT

Wisconsin Department of Transportation http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/

Doing Business http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/business/index.htm

Economic Development http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/business/econdev/index.htm

Travel Modes – Rail http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/modes/rail.htm

Wisconsin Rail Commissioner http://ocr.wi.gov/

http://www.aslrra.org/about_aslrra/FAQs/

https://www.aar.org/Pages/Home.aspx

http://www.cn.ca/

http://www.elsrr.com/

http://www.progressiverail.com/

http://www.fra.dot.gov/

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/business/index.htm

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/business/econdev/index.htm

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/modes/rail.htm

http://ocr.wi.gov/


Glossary

BEA

Business Economic Area (BEA): Used by the U. S. Census Bureau, a BEA is a geographically delineated area with concentrated economic activity that is not contained by a city, county, state or other political boundary. For example, the Minneapolis BEA includes the city of Minneapolis; its surrounding suburbs; and portions of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Therefore, the Minnesota Portion of the Minneapolis BEA represents just the counties and municipalities in the state of Minnesota that are part of the Minneapolis BEA.

CMA

Census Metropolitan Area (CMA): CMAs are geographically delineated areas used by Canada in order to conduct their census every five years. A CMA represents a grouping of large urban areas and those surrounding the urban area. To be considered a CMA, the area must contain an urban core population of at least 100,000 in the previous census. (Statistics Canada)

FRA

Federal Railroad Administration

Haz-mat ton-miles

A statistical unit of freight transportation equivalent to one ton of hazardous materials moved one mile.

Intermodal facility

A place where commodities may be transferred from one type of carrier (truck, train or ship) to another (truck, train or ship). A direct intermodal transfer occurs when a truck trailer or an International Standards Organization (ISO) shipping container is loaded directly on to (or unloaded from) a truck, train or ship. The contents of the truck trailer or shipping container are not unloaded during the transfer. An intermediate intermodal transfer – also called a “transload” – occurs when the contents of a truck trailer, rail car or ship are unloaded from one type of carrier and then reloaded on another. The unloaded cargo may be stored at the site before being picked up by the other carrier.

NAICS

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS): This is a 6-digit code that can be collapsed into 4- and 2-digit codes. It is the standard used by Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments for the purpose of collecting, analyzing and publishing statistical data related to the United States economy (US Census).


Non-Census CMA

Non-census Census Metropolitan Area (Non-census CMA): Non-census CMAs are geographic areas used by Canada in order to conduct their census every five years. A Non-census CMA is the whole area outside of the metropolitan area.(Statistics Canada)

Non-CMA Non-Census Metropolitan Area (Non-CMA): Non-CMAs are geographic areas used by Canada in order to conduct their census every five years. The Non-CMA area of a Canadian province is comprised of smaller urban areas with a population of less than 100,000. (Statistics Canada)

Originating freight

Outbound freight

Overhead freight

Freight that only passes through a specific point or area; it does not originate from that area and is not delivered to that area

Secondary traffic

Commodities moving to and from warehouses and distribution centers

STCC

Standard Transportation Commodity Code (STCC): This is the standard classification system used to categorize raw and finished commodities that are transported by rail, truck, air or water. The coding structure for STCC codes is seven digits but is collapsible down to 4- and 2-digit codes. This system is used to analyze data related to origin/destination of products, tonnage of products that are shipped and value of products that are shipped. STCC 2 codes are more general and not specific, whereas STCC 4 codes are a specific product. For example, the STCC 2 code for Farm Products is 01 and the STCC 4 code within 1 is 01 52 for Poultry Eggs.

Terminating freight

Inbound freight

Ton-mile

A statistical unit of freight transportation equivalent to one ton of freight moved one mile.

Transload facility

A place where the contents of a truck trailer, rail car, or ship are unloaded from one type of carrier and then reloaded on another. The unloaded cargo may be stored at the transfer site before being picked up by the other carrier. A transload site is considered an "intermediate" type of intermodal facility.


Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Study Page A1-1

Appendix 1: History of Rail in Northern Wisconsin

The history of rail service across northern Wisconsin has included operations that serve

customers within the state, as well as overhead transportation (serving customers with both

origins and destinations outside of the state). Virtually all of the development and construction

of the rail corridors currently in existence occurred in the 45-year period from the end of the Civil

War (1865) through 1910. Most of the corridors into the region were south-north, including the

current dominant corridor for overhead traffic – the Canadian National route between

Duluth/Superior and Chicago. The region also saw development of briefly-lived logging

railroads and branch lines into the vast timber tracts that once covered northern Wisconsin.

While timber and ore shipments were critical for the north-south lines, the region’s development

was catalyzed and sustained for several decades by a west-east overhead corridor – the initial

Soo Line corridor between Minneapolis/St. Paul and Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan/Ontario. Of

note, Canadian rail companies (Canadian Pacific and Canadian National) have played major

roles in the development and use of rail lines across northern Wisconsin.

The following summaries cover the development and retrenchment of the three dominant rail

companies across the study area during the late Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. This

section also identifies and discusses several short-line operators in the region.

The Soo Line

The most extensive and important historic rail system across northern Wisconsin was the Soo

Line – which, in operational structure, was an affiliation of two rail companies that were brought

together (along with a third company) by merger in 1961. The dominant of the two primary

companies was the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Sault Ste. Marie (MStP&SSM). The impetus

behind creation of the MStP&SSM was strong demand for grain and flour on the Eastern

Seaboard of North America. Flour mills in the Twin Cities area were constrained in supply and

distribution, with shipping held captive to a near-monopoly by James J. Hill, founder of the Great

Northern Railway and owner of steamship lines based in Duluth-Superior. Several

businessmen pooled capital to found the ancestor company of MStP&SSM in 1883. Their goal

was to build east from Minneapolis to Sault Ste. Marie – bypassing both Chicago and

Duluth/Superior. Other affiliated rail companies were created to build west from Minneapolis to

the Dakotas, as well as within Minnesota, in order to secure wheat supplies along corridors not

controlled by Hill.


The initial corridor across northern Wisconsin to Sault Ste. Marie was completed in early 1888;

construction of this line left the company short of capital for operations and further expansion.

Later that year, these affiliated companies were consolidated into the MStP&SSM. As part of

that process, the Canadian Pacific Railway (CP) took controlling interest of what, at that time,

comprised a 781-mile network. For the next two decades, the company focused on building

north and west, adding connections with CP at the border towns of Portal, ND and Noyes, MN.

A line from Minneapolis to Duluth was completed in 1911; just three years after the MStP&SSM

took control of the Wisconsin Central (WC) and established the core Soo Line system in place

for much of the Twentieth Century52.

One noteworthy feature of the MStP&SSM’s west-east corridor across Wisconsin was the

number of crossing/interchange points with north-south lines. In 1948, this line featured a

branch to Superior at Dresser; a branch to Appleton and Neenah via Shawano at Wisconsin

Junction (north of Crandon); and intersections as follows: with WC in Ladysmith and Prentice;

with the Chicago & Northwestern in Turtle Lake, Cameron, Rhinelander, Starks (Gagen), and

Cavour; and with the Milwaukee Road at Prentice, Heafford Junction, and Pembine53.

The MStP&SSM survived

bankruptcy and reorganization

during and following the Great

Depression. Prior to the 1961

merger, the MStP&SSM system

consisted of a grain-gathering

sub-system west of

Minneapolis, while the eastern

sub-system was more industrial

– concentrated in forest and

paper industry products.

According to a summary by the

Minnesota Historical Society, in

1958 the line’s revenue

consisted of products of

Crossings and Spur Lines along the MStP&SSM Corridor

From its entry point into Wisconsin near Osceola to its exit into the Upper Peninsula of Michigan east of Pembine, the historic Soo Line rail corridor encountered numerous crossings and interchanges with other carriers, as well branch lines and crossings of its own corridors. Here is a list of fifteen crossing points, circa 1923, along with the other railroads involved (or the destination of the spur, if Soo Line): Dresser (Soo): Split of Main Line to Superior Amery (Omaha): Hudson to Spooner and Superior or Ashland Barron (Soo): 16-Mile Branch to Ridgeland Cameron (Omaha): Chippewa Falls to Spooner Cameron (Soo): Branch to Rice Lake, Birchwood, and Reserve Ladysmith (Soo/WC): Main Line from Stevens Point to Superior Prentice (Soo/WC): Spencer to Mellen and Ashland Tomahawk Junction (MT&W): Spur line servicing Tomahawk Heafford Junction (Milw. Road): Wisconsin Rapids to Woodruff Rhinelander (C&NW): Monico to Hurley and Ashland Gagen (C&NW): Oshkosh to Watersmeet, MI Wisconsin Junction /Argonne (Soo/WC): Branch from Appleton Laona Junction (Laona & Northern): Spur to Laona Laona Junction (C&NW): Green Bay to Iron River, MI Pembine (Milw. Road): Green Bay to Iron Mountain, MI Source: 1923 Railroad Map of Wisconsin, Railroad Commission of Wisconsin, from “Trains of Wisconsin,” Malcolm Rosholt.


agriculture (37 percent); animals and animal products (2 percent); products of mines (11

percent); products of forests (19 percent); and manufactures and miscellaneous commodities

(31 percent)54.

In 1961, management decided to formalize the WC connection through merger. CP’s other

affiliated rail company in the region, the Duluth, South Shore, and Atlantic (DSS&A), was also

brought into the fold at that time, creating the Soo Line Railroad Company.

The second company in the Soo Line trilogy, the historic Wisconsin Central (WC), is not to be

confused by its later namesake – which was created through a spinoff and asset sale in the

1980s. Wisconsin Central’s origins date to its 1871 incorporation as a consolidation of three

predecessor companies55. One of these companies was conferred the land grant for a line from

Portage to Superior via Stevens Point in 1864; eventually, this grant amounted to 85,000

acres56.

Through assembly of previous corridor deeds and the federal land grant, WC was able to

complete a line that year from the Menasha to Stevens Point. By 1877, the line reached

Ashland. Using a series of smaller incorporations, WC made corridor extensions that included

lines to St. Paul in 1884 and Chicago in 188657. Major yards and shops were established at

Stevens Point and Waukesha, and later in North Fond du Lac and Abbotsford58. By the early

Twentieth Century, forest products (lumber, logs, timber, and pulp wood), mined products (iron

ores), coal, and passengers provided the bulk of revenues for the company59.

From 1889 through 1893, WC was briefly held under lease by Northern Pacific. After re-

emerging as an independent company, it further extended lines over the next 15 years,

culminating with corridors to Ladysmith by 1906 and Superior by 1908. In that year, Northern

Pacific again tried to take control of WC – unsuccessfully. Instead, the MStP&SSM was able to

lease the line, and as such WC fell under the Soo Line and Canadian Pacific operational

umbrellas60. WC operated under semi-autonomy from MStP&SSM, but entered receivership in

1932 and bankruptcy in 1944. The company was reorganized by 1954, to last only through full

merger in 196161.

The earliest retrenchment of MStP&SSM lines included the “Blueberry Line” (formerly, the Rice

Lake, Dallas, and Menomonie) that once operated from Ridgeland through Barron, Rice Lake,


Birchwood, and Reserve. The Birchwood-Reserve segment was abandoned in 1931; the Rice

Lake – Birchwood segment followed in 1936; and the Ridgeland – Barron portion was

abandoned in 196262.

The pre-merger revenues for WC indicated its larger exposure to Wisconsin’s manufacturing

base. The 1958 revenue statistics included products of agriculture (13 percent); animals and

animal products (5 percent); products of mines (12 percent); products of forests (14 percent);

and manufactures and miscellaneous commodities (55 percent)63.

The third, and smallest of the three companies eventually brought into the Soo Line was the

Duluth, South Shore, and Atlantic (DSS&A). Its presence in Wisconsin was limited. The

company was organized in 1886 from several smaller lines serving the copper and iron mines in

the Upper Peninsula of Michigan64. By 1888, the company had built into Wisconsin at Iron

River; that same year, Canadian Pacific obtained control. This arrangement provided the

capital to build west to Duluth by 1894. From the 1890s through the 1910s, DSS&A’s ore

cargos were supplemented by the cutting and shipping of huge swaths of timber65.

Figure 1: Soo Line System, 1940s, also showing Canadian Pacific connections in inset.

After the lands were stripped of timber and a major copper ore contract was lost66, the company

floundered; it abandoned its line west of Marengo Junction in 1935 and instead relied on

trackage use arrangements with Wisconsin Central and Northern Pacific to reach the Twin


Ports. The company’s bankruptcy in 1937 and reorganization in the late 1940s, coupled with a

small customer base, lower-cost freight hauling by vessels on Lake Superior67, and the

Canadian Pacific’s preference for the more active MStP&SSM corridor, led the DSS&A on a

downward cycle until its absorption into the larger Soo in 196168.

Pre-merger revenues for the DSS&A demonstrate its strong ties to mining, manufacturing, and

forestry. The 1958 revenue statistics included products of agriculture (5 percent); animals and

animal products (1 percent); products of mines (19 percent); products of forests (28 percent);

and manufactures and miscellaneous commodities (47 percent)69.

At the end of 1970, the Soo Line system was comprised of 4,693 miles of territory along 6,104

miles of track70. At that point, the Soo Line had three operating divisions: Western, Central,

and Eastern. All Western Division lines were west of Minneapolis. The Central Division, based

in Minneapolis, included lines in northwestern Wisconsin. The Eastern Division covered the

track east of Weyerhaeuser and Chippewa Falls, including lines to Chicago and in the Upper

Peninsula of Michigan. Its offices were in Stevens Point71.

While grain and overhead traffic from Canadian Pacific provided Soo with business in the 1960s

and 1970s, service changes took force – especially after passage of the Staggers Act in 1980.

Unlike other companies that pared back systems, the Soo remade itself through purchases,

sales, and abandonments72. The end of car ferry service across Lake Michigan in 1982 led to

Soo removing its yard and some service from Manitowoc73.

In 1985, Soo Line acquired several former Milwaukee Road assets, including the corridor

between Chicago and the Twin Cities. The Interstate Commerce Commission approved the

Soo acquisition based on public interest in preserving competition, even though the C&NW

offered higher bid. The ICC also cited national security as a factor, since more lines would be

retained as operational74. However, the purchase burdened the Soo with significant debt, and

compelled the Soo to cut costs and raise capital.

After the purchase of the Milwaukee, Soo created the Lake States Transportation Division

(LSTD) as an attempt to establish a lower-cost operating unit. The LSTD was comprised of the

historic Soo Line / Wisconsin Central corridors and yards, plus some of the Milwaukee’s old

light-density lines. Soo then offered the LSTD for sale. In April 1987, a sale was announced to


a group of former railroad executives, creating a new company, Wisconsin Central, Limited

(WCL). The sale included almost 2,000 miles of rail (along with trackage rights and several

abandoned corridors) in Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, and Illinois. The sale also included

locomotives and a pool of freight cars. After a near-catastrophic 30-day delay, the ICC granted

approval for the sale and WCL operation75.

By 1990, the Soo Line system consisted of a 3,450-mile core system and 2,350 miles of feeder

lines. In 1992, CP purchased the remaining outstanding shares of Soo Line stock, and dropped

the ‘Soo Line’ identity in favor of “CP Rail System.” With the growth of intermodal freight traffic

between the Pacific Coast and Chicago, CP’s Wisconsin presence turned more to overhead

operation along the Chicago-Milwaukee-La Crosse-Twin Cities corridor76.

One line of note was the branch line from Mellen to Hurley, then to Bessemer, Michigan. This

line was completed by two WC subsidiaries in 1887; more than 200,000 tons of ore was shipped

across this line to the newly-completed Ashland dock in that first year77. The line was operated

through 1987; the Soo was granted permission to abandon it that year. WCL acquired the line

but never operated over it. Instead, a short line, the Wisconsin and Michigan (WIMI), obtained a

lease and permission to operate. The operation was in place from June 1992 through May

1995, when WIMI was granted permission to terminate service. Subsequent court rulings held

that WCL had no role in any of the operations of the corridor, and therefore had no need to seek

authority to remove trackage after WIMI ceased operations78.

The 1987 sale of the Soo Line Lake States Transportation Division formed WCL’s 2,000-mile

regional core rail system. In using the old moniker, WCL was able to build on regional identity

and local management decisions on service. Regional traffic included timber, pulp, and paper;

chemicals; iron and copper ores; taconite; grain; stone/gravel; and mixed cargos. The top three

commodities listed in 1987 were pulp & paper products (30 percent), lumber & wood products

(21 percent), and clay/glass/stone (9 percent)79. A 1991 study noted 60 percent of WCL car

loadings were related to the paper industry; at that time it served 25 of the state’s 52 pulp and

paper mills80.

WCL expanded in 1993 with the acquisition of the Green Bay & Western (GB&W) and the Fox

River Valley (FRV) Railroad. The GB&W once served as part of a transcontinental corridor,

shipping wheat and flour from Omaha to New York in as few as five days. GB&W’s origins


dated to 1853; it served as an east-west bridge line across Wisconsin, from Lake Michigan (at

Kewaunee) through Green Bay, New London, Amherst, Wisconsin Rapids, Merrillan, to the

Mississippi River at Winona, MN. The use of steamships to haul rail cars across Lake Michigan

sustained this line through the early- and mid-Twentieth Century. GB&W’s cargos ranged from

paper and pulp to coal and agricultural products. Overhead carloads rose to nearly 40,000 in

1950, and by the 1960s, 40 percent of traffic was overhead, with agricultural products and

timber headed eastbound and automobiles and auto parts headed westbound.

GB&W was noted for cooperation with Burlington Northern, with BN delivering lumber for GB&W

sending paper back to BN through the 1970s. In the late 1980s, BN and GB&W signed an

agreement for intermodal exchange. The company’s decline was tied to competition from

highways and large mergers of eastern railroads. Elimination of through rates on long-haul

traffic under the Staggers Act and the demise of Lake Michigan ferry operations effectively

ended GB&W’s overhead role81. The critical ferry connection, Ann Arbor Railroad’s ferry

between Kewaunee, WI and Elberta, MI, ceased operation in 198282. In 1988, the company

stated revenues between $10 million and $20 million on almost 29,000 carloads across its 250-

mile system. The top commodities for GB&W were pulp and paper products (40 percent), food

and kindred products (15 percent), and coal (10 percent)83.

The briefly-lived FRV was formed in 1988 when Itel Corporation purchased both the GB&W and

a former C&NW line between Granville (on Milwaukee’s northwest side) and Green Bay, via

Fond du Lac. FRV depended on paper for more than one third of its traffic, although Anheuser-

Busch in Manitowoc was its largest customer. FRV also expressed interest in use of double-

stack container cars for outbound shipping, but backed away due to high initial investment costs

and lack of direct Chicago interchange access84. Management of both Itel holdings was

consolidated in 1991; in 1993, both were sold to WCL and operated as Fox Valley & Western

(FV&W)85.

While the Ashley Furniture operation in Arcadia provided a stable volume of freight for the

western portion of the former GB&W system, the eastern portion of the network lacked volume;

most lines east of Plover were removed and rights-of-way abandoned or sold by WCL to the

Wisconsin DNR between 1994 and 2001. A 24-mile segment of the former C&NW line south of

Eden through West Bend was placed in rails-to-trails status in 200386.


Even with abandonments through the 1990s, WCL and its subsidiaries grew to comprise a

nearly 2,900-mile system across the Upper Midwest. This included the 1997 acquisition (under

its Sault Ste. Marie Bridge Company subsidiary) from Union Pacific of 220 miles of former

C&NW track between Green Bay, WI and Ishpeming, MI, via Marinette, WI and Escanaba, MI87.

Meanwhile, Canadian National (CN) became increasingly reliant on WCL as a bridge line from

western Canada to Chicago, via Superior, under a 1996 partnership between CN, WCL, and

CSX for a transcontinental intermodal shipping corridor88. This link became even more crucial

in 1998, when CN acquired Illinois Central, providing CN with direct access to ports along the

Gulf of Mexico89. In 2001, WCL was acquired by CN for $800 million, plus assumption of $400

million in WCL debt90.

Even as the pre-sale WCL had pared back its system (especially in the Shawano – White Lake

area), the post-sale reductions accelerated the process. The largest pieces to go through

formal STB abandonment were from Shawano to Crandon (in 2004) and the Shawano / White

Lake areas (in 2008). Many other lines also were placed in rails-to-trails status, including these

in or near the study area:

Dresser to Amery (2003; 15.25 miles)

Near Crandon to White Lake (2003; 26.00 miles)

White Lake to Menomonee County Line (2002, 7.00 miles)

Crandon – end of line (2009; 4.62 miles)

Shawano – Stockbridge-Munsee (pending; 3.40 miles)

Furthermore, WCL/CN also embargoed service from Prentice west to Ladysmith (40.6 miles;

prior to 2008), and from Rhinelander east to Goodman (60 miles; between 2008 and 2012)91. A

40-mile segment that had been embargoed between Ladysmith and Barron was returned to

service in 2012 as the explosive growth of frac sand mining generated sufficient revenue to

rebuild the track (at a cost of $35 million) and restore service92 93.

One noteworthy short line operating adjacent to the Soo’s historic west-east line is the

Marinette, Tomahawk, & Western (MT&W). Its historic customer base was the paper and

lumber industry, including multiple facilities in the Tomahawk area. The company’s roots trace

to 1894; it was reorganized in 1912 and at that time comprised 44 miles of track extending along

five branches out of Tomahawk94. The various branch lines went through partial sales and


leases, before two timber line extensions were discontinued in the 1920s and early 1930s95.

This pared the line to less than 25 miles in 193296. In a 1956 article, the line listed it hauled

3,000 carloads in 1955, with 13.9 miles of operations97.

By 1988, the system was repositioned as a higher-volume switching line, operating along 10

miles of rail with just shy of 11,000 carloads carried. Pulp and paper products (71 percent),

waste and scrap (10 percent), and coal (10 percent) were listed as the primary commodities98.

The company was sold to a new entity, the Tomahawk Railway (TR), in December 1991; at that

time, it comprised 11.4 miles.99 In 1997, the WCL petitioned for and was granted approval to

acquire the Tomahawk – Bradley segment of the TR, allowing WCL to cease operating along

the parallel Tomahawk – Heafford Junction formerly operated by the Milwaukee Road100. The

shortened TR was subsequently acquired by the Genesee & Wyoming in 2005, and currently

serves the PCA Containerboard Mill (formerly the Wausau Paper Kraft Mill), interchanging with

the Canadian National (which acquired WCL). Commodities transported along its current six-

mile system include chemicals, coal, and forest products101.

Chicago & North Western

Most of the other rail companies serving northern Wisconsin operated in a south/north direction

– connecting ores and timber loads with markets in Milwaukee and Chicago. One of the earliest

with a presence in the region was the Chicago & North Western (C&NW). The company’s roots

trace to the 1836 charter of the Galena & Chicago Union. Following its initial train operation in

1848, the G&CU continued to build westward across Illinois. By 1859, the C&NW received its

charter (from legislatures in both Illinois and Wisconsin). Other predecessor lines were being

built in Iowa. In 1864, the G&CU was merged into C&NW. C&NW also acquired the Peninsula

Railroad in Michigan that year, signaling corporate interest for looking northward. An ore dock

was constructed at Escanaba to bring the ore to smelters around the Great Lakes. In 1866,

C&NW added the Chicago and Milwaukee (providing the company a direct route to

Milwaukee)102.

In the 1856 Northeast Land Grant, 546,000 acres were reserved for a route to be constructed

from Fond du Lac to Marinette. The State Legislature awarded this grant to the Wisconsin

Superior Railroad, which was soon consolidated into the C&NW. Construction began in 1858,

with completion in 1871.103


From then on, much of the C&NW’s system was developed through two companies later

formally folded into C&NW. Each covered a separate part of the state. Across the Fox Valley

and northeastern Wisconsin, the Milwaukee, Lake Shore, & Western (MLS&W) was building a

system through construction and acquisition of smaller lines. Following reorganization in 1875,

the MLS&W established a large presence in Kaukauna and Appleton. The line that would

eventually reach Ashland had been built to Eland by 1880, Antigo by 1881, then to Monico –

where one line continued north to Eagle River and Watersmeet, MI (and then west to Ironwood,

MI and Hurley), while another branched to Rhinelander and northwest104. By 1884, the MLS&W

was shipping tons of ores to Milwaukee by rail; then to Erie, PA by barge105. The MLS&W also

built west from Eland to Wausau by 1880, reaching Marshfield in 1890. Other spurs and

branches across the region built the MLS&W to an almost 800-mile network in 1890. In the

early 1890s, the owners of both C&NW and MLS&N saw value in combining their companies

(MLS&N already used C&NW tracks to reach Milwaukee). In 1893, C&NW purchased the

MLS&N, consolidating the system that would service northeastern Wisconsin for the next 75

years106.

The C&NW/MLS&N consolidation was abetted by a C&NW line that extended from Oconto

(along the Green Bay - Menominee line) west to Gillett, then southwest to Shawano, meeting

the MLS&N at Clintonville. This line was built between 1882 and 1884107 108. The availability of

timber in northeastern Wisconsin also compelled the C&NW to build a parallel south-north line

east of the MLS&W corridor. Using a briefly-existing company, the Wisconsin Northern Railway

(not to be confused with other lines of similar naming) was organized in 1896 to build a line from

Gillett north to the Upper Peninsula. By 1897, the line reached Wabeno and was merged into

the C&NW. By 1899, the line extended to north of Laona, pausing for several years until it was

legally granted the right to cross the MStP&SSM’s main line at-grade in 1905. By that time, a

small short line, the Laona & Northern, had also established itself to link a major mill with a

connection to the MStP&SSM, just west of the C&NW corridor109.

C&NW also looked to improve connections and efficiency through building a line from

Manitowoc to Green Bay to Pulaski and Gillett, then from Pulaski to Eland. These lines,

completed between 1906 and 1907110 111, provided a southern east-west connection of all three

north-south C&NW corridors (its Ashland and Peninsula Divisions) across northeastern

Wisconsin. Once the Laona Line reached Saunders, MI (later Scott Lake, just southeast of Iron

River, MI), these lines also had a northern connection that skirted along the Michigan-Wisconsin


border from Menominee, MI to Ashland, WI. Log trains – especially in the winter – dominated

the freight traffic of the Laona Line, particularly during the winter months when most harvesting

was done. Several lumber mills along the line handled much of the region’s timber output;

additional logs were typically sent to Oconto.

A brief growth in traffic in the 1920s was soon followed by the combination of the Great

Depression and a drop in timber availability. Through the 1930s and into the 1940s, sidings and

coal/oil facilities were pared back along the Laona Line112. To the south, the connection west of

Gillett to Shawano and Embarrass was removed between 1937 and 1943113; the stub from

Clintonville to Embarrass was off maps by 1948114.

Starting in the early 1950s, the Laona Line’s top commodity shifted to pulpwood, as the poplar

trees that sprouted in the wake of deforestation were recognized by the paper industry for their

quick growth rates and close proximity to mills115.

Meanwhile, across the Gogebic Range (in MI and WI combined), 3 million to 4 million tons of

ore (iron and copper) were shipped each year between 1890 and 1910. After WW I, high-grade

ores were less common; larger volumes of lower-grade ore were needed to produce equivalent

amounts of steel. Michigan shipped over 18 tons of ore in 1920 – however, volumes fluctuated;

the Great Depression reduced ore shipments by more than half.

After WWII, open pit mines and use of low grade ores became more standard practice. A new

process, agglomeration, employed a process that first separated ore and rock, then roasted the

particles until they formed pellets that could be cost-effectively shipped116.

In western and northwestern Wisconsin, the C&NW banner was carried by a sister operating

company, the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, & Omaha (CStPM&O, or the Omaha Road). The

Omaha was formed through assembly of several predecessor lines in the late 1870s and 1880s,

including the North Wisconsin and West Wisconsin117. These predecessor lines were noted for

use of land grants in assembling their corridors, including an 1856 grant for a line from Madison

to the St. Croix, then to Lake Superior. This grant had originally been given to a Milwaukee

Road predecessor, but subsequent investigation found the legislators who conferred the grant

were improperly rewarded, and the grants were re-issued118.


The C&NW took control of the Omaha in 1882, but management remained semi-independent,

with the company headquartered in St. Paul. The primary corridor for the Omaha Road in

Wisconsin was Elroy – St. Paul via Eau Claire (completed in 1872 by the predecessor West

Wisconsin); this link at Elroy gave C&NW access to the Twin Cities (and later to Superior), while

the Omaha was able to advertise a direct Chicago connection.

Over the next two decades, other key corridors were added, mostly through acquisition of short

lines. By 1883, the “Great Omaha ‘X’” was established, with two lines crossing at Spooner and

Trego to give the visual effect of an ‘X’ on maps. These lines were:

St. Paul to Bayfield via Turtle Lake, Spooner, Hayward, and Washburn (a spur into

Ashland was finished in 1885)

Eau Claire to Superior via Chippewa Falls, Cameron, Rice Lake, Spooner, and Trego119

The headquarters, shops, and large yard of the Omaha’s northern division was situated at

Spooner. The corridor to Ashland became known as the ‘Lumber Line120,’ sending lumber west

by rail (to emerging communities across Iowa, Minnesota, and the Dakotas)121 and north to

Ashland, where the lumber would be shipped to Great Lakes ports such as Chicago.

Eventually, the Omaha’s spur lines included Merrilan to Marshfield (completed in 1890),

Fairchild to Mondovi, Hudson to Ellsworth, Chippewa Falls to Cornell and Hughey, Woodville to

Comfort, and Tuscobia (just north of Rice Lake) to Park Falls (completed in 1914)122. The

C&NW and Omaha ‘interchange’ points in Wisconsin were at Elroy, Wyeville, Marshfield, and

Ashland123 124.

The Omaha system was noted for having a good commodity base. Lumber and other wood

products were typically shipped outbound (to Chicago125 or the Prairie States126). Northern

Wisconsin also sent fish and dairy products to interchange with the C&NW for Chicago; coal

and industrial products came north in return127. Crops such as potatoes and barley were also

typical loads in the early- to mid-Twentieth Century128.

The Omaha was noted for commitment to both service and safety; it completed installation of

automatic block signals between Elroy and St. Paul in 1913129. Meanwhile, the C&NW had also

expedited travel and transportation over its segment between Chicago and the Twin Cities with


the 1911 completion of the ‘Adams Cutoff.’ This route channeled trains through Milwaukee

(instead of Janesville and Madison), then across open country in central Wisconsin, transferring

to the Omaha just east of Tomah at Wyeville. However, the growth in auto and truck use,

coupled with labor and materials costs, ushered in the era of system retrenchment in the 1920s

and 1930s.

The Omaha’s operations were semi-autonomous from the C&NW through 1956; in 1957 C&NW

leased the Omaha to end the operational separation; corporate unity was achieved in 1972 with

a formal merger130. The merger with the Omaha marked the beginning of C&NW’s large-scale

freight service consolidation in Wisconsin, as in 1958 C&NW filed to close 102 one-man stations

in Wisconsin131.

Into the 1970s, however, C&NW’s north-south lines served pulpwood shippers. These included

the Trego-Bayfield, Land O’ Lakes-Antigo-New London-Appleton, and Tipler-Pulaski-Green Bay.

These corridors fed pulpwood to mills in the Fox Valley and Rhinelander. In the area south of

US 8, other commodities moved inbound included feed, fertilizer, agricultural or cement lime, tin

cans (for canning factories), gas, oil, and coal. Outbound products included canned goods,

paper products, cheese, and dried milk. Overhead traffic from Michigan included wood pulp

(destined for the Fox River Valley) and metal ores (for Chicago/Gary and other destinations).132

Additional woes befell C&NW’s branches across central and northern Wisconsin, leading to

further retrenchment. The Park Falls to Tuscobia branch was abandoned in 1965133. Heavy

rains in 1972 led to washouts and the end of the Wisconsin Rapids – Ripon – Fond du Lac line,

which had been used for finished paper shipments to Chicago. When a rail detection car was

run over the C&NW between Marshfield and Wausau, it found the entire 13-mile segment

between Marshfield and Stratford in need of rebuilding; it was embargoed and eventually

abandoned134. Abandonment of lines between Washburn and Bayfield was approved in 1977.

Tracks from Hayward to Ashland were removed in 1979; the line from Spooner to Hudson was

abandoned in 1982135.

Meanwhile, on the state’s eastern side, the 80-mile Gillett – Tipler “Laona Line” was targeted for

abandonment by C&NW in 1979. After local opposition failed to stop the process, a consortium,

the Forest Transit Commission (FTC), was formed by Forest County and two communities in

adjacent counties under the state’s 1978 Freight Rail Preservation Program. The Commission


formed the Nicolet Badger Northern Railroad (NBNR) and rehabilitated the nearly-40-mile

section from Wabeno to Tipler136. NBNR began operation in 1984137, as the Laona & Northern

abandoned operation138 and became a seasonal tourist operation139. NBNR exclusively hauled

lumber and wood products140 and was operated by the FTC until 1989, when Nicolet Badger

Northern, Inc. (NBNI) was established and contracted by FTC to operate along the corridor. By

December 1994, NBNI notified its customers that it would cease operations due to financial

issues and lack of freight. Rail assets of NBNI were surrendered to the FTC in 1995;

abandonment was initiated in 1998141.

C&NW sold its remaining lines north of Cleveland, WI (including inland track from Green Bay

through Fond du Lac to Milwaukee) to the Fox River Valley in 1987; these eventually were

folded into Wisconsin Central142 and Canadian National before segments were abandoned.

When C&NW was purchased by Union Pacific (UP) in April 1995 for $1.1 billion, the 5,600-mile

C&NW143 was a far smaller system than the 11,600-mile network that had existed a quarter-

century earlier144.

By 1997, the Wisconsin Great Northern (WGN) Railroad began to use the former

C&NW/Omaha line between Spooner and Trego for historic excursion trains. In 1998, the

Washburn County Transit Commission was formed to acquire (from Union Pacific) the 19-mile

corridor connecting Spooner, Trego, and Hayward Junction, near Stanberry (the rail interchange

with WCL, later CN)145 146. Acquisition was completed in 1999, with the WGN tasked with

reconstruction. Notice to operate was given to the Surface Transportation Board in October,

2000147. This line remains in operation.

Further south, the segment of the former UP/C&NW line from Chippewa Falls to Cameron has

been leased by Progressive Rail Incorporated (PGR), a Minnesota-based rail holding/operating

company. Recent activity started when Barron and Chippewa County governments formed the

West Wisconsin Rail Transit Authority (WWRTA) in November 2001148, as service and track

conditions owner/operators UP and CN deteriorated. WWRTA was able to contract with PGR to

lease and operate 38.3 miles of UP (ex-C&NW/Omaha) track from the Norma Junction with UP

(in Chippewa Falls) to Cameron. PGR operates the segment as Wisconsin Northern (WN).

PGR also had lease arrangements for a segment of former CN/Soo Line track from Cameron to

Barron, and Cameron to Rice Lake. At that point, CN had filed to abandon the line from

Ladysmith to Almena and the Cameron – Rice Lake branch149.


WWRTA was also able to leverage the WisDOT freight rail programs for funding track

improvements with a $2.45 million federal grant for Barron County providing the local match150.

In 2009, agreements were in place for CN to sell its segments in the Barron area to PGR, which

would have in turn sold them to WisDOT, making them program-eligible151. A January, 2010

resolution affirmed Chippewa County’s commitment to support the WWRTA purchase of the

Union Pacific segment from Chippewa Falls to Cameron152.

However, the Surface Transportation Board rejected the purchase and operation plan for the

CN segment, while UP opted to retain its ownership of the tracks from Cameron to Chippewa

Falls153. Further, the rapid development of frac sand business compelled several sudden

changes. First, the UP negotiated with PGR on a new 30-year lease for the Cameron –

Chippewa Falls (Norma) line; that lease agreement included incentives based on the

percentage of loaded cars interchanged with the UP at Chippewa Falls154. Spurred on by

demands from frac sand producers, PGR paid for the improvements to the line. With freight

service secured, the WWRTA no longer proved necessary, and its dissolution began with

Chippewa County voting to leave the pact in July of 2012155.

Meanwhile, CN (under its WCL holding) collaborated with PGR in July 2012, petitioning the STB

for an effective transfer of service, with CN resuming operations from Ladysmith west to Barron

and Almena, and north from Cameron to Rice Lake156. Once the STB decision was in place, CN

announced it was investing $35 million to rebuild 40 miles of track west of Ladysmith157.

Both of these investments were driven by the explosive growth of the frac sand industry in the

region. Carloads rose from 2,000 per year to 3,000 per month along the PGR line north of

Chippewa Falls158. In light of the success of that sector, the Barron County Board voted to

dissolve the WWRTA in 2011, transferring the $2.45 million grant to CN in order to secure

upgrades and service along the Cameron to Rice Lake segment159.

At present, the only former C&NW lines currently owned and operated by Union Pacific are the

parallel lines between Chicago and Milwaukee; the main line from Milwaukee to the Twin Cities

via Adams, Wyeville, and Eau Claire; a line from Chicago to Janesville and Evansville via

Crystal Lake and Harvard; a stubbed former main from Milwaukee to Sheboygan; a spur

through Watertown, Johnson Creek, and Jefferson to Ft. Atkinson; a spur from Eau Claire to


Chippewa Falls, and small industrial spurs around Milwaukee. UP also has trackage rights on

CN from Necedah through Wisconsin Rapids and Junction City to Duluth; and on CP from

Tunnel City to La Crosse160.

The Milwaukee Road

The other major north-south railroad company across northern Wisconsin was the Chicago,

Milwaukee, St. Paul, & Pacific (CMStP&P), better known as The Milwaukee Road. The

Milwaukee’s two corridors to the north included Green Bay – Iron Mountain, MI (with a branch to

Marinette) and New Lisbon – Woodruff via Wisconsin Rapids, Wausau, Merrill, and

Rhinelander.

The company’s roots trace to 1847 as the Milwaukee & Waukesha; it was renamed the

Milwaukee & Mississippi and construction began in 1850, building westward from Milwaukee.

Waukesha was reached in 1851; Madison, in 1854; and Prairie du Chien in 1857. Meanwhile,

another company, the La Crosse & Milwaukee, received its charter in 1852. Two years later, it

consolidated with a third company, the Milwaukee, Fond du Lac & Green Bay Railroad. By

1855, this company reached Horicon; Portage was reached a year later. The financial panic of

1857-58 brought both companies to bankruptcy, reorganization, and re-naming: as the

Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien and the Milwaukee & St. Paul Railways. After the Civil War,

these companies (along with many others in the central and western parts of the state, plus an

Iowa line) were consolidated into the Milwaukee & St. Paul161.

The La Crosse and Milwaukee had originally been granted large tracts for route construction

along a Madison – Portage – Tomah – Hudson – Superior – Bayfield corridor in the 1856

Northwest Land Grant. However, investigations discovered that the LC&M had improperly

rewarded legislators for their vote to confer it the grant. Legal battles lasted until 1863, when

the grant that would eventually tally 2.27 million acres was split up amongst several other

companies, most of which would eventually be part of the C&NW162.

A combination of construction and acquisition expanded the Milwaukee & St. Paul – with a

second line to St. Paul and a line from Milwaukee to Chicago, both achieved in 1872. The

company changed its name to the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul (CM&StP) in 1874163; at that

point it took on the “Milwaukee Road” identity it and its successors would carry for more than a

century164. At that point, the company made one of its first ventures into northern Wisconsin; a


forked spur line off of the Chicago – Twin Cities main line to Menomonie and Eau

Claire/Chippewa Falls was completed in 1882.

The 1880s marked the acquisition of two key extensions into Northern Wisconsin. In central

Wisconsin, the Wisconsin River Valley Line was a trunk line that was initially built out from

Tomah to Babcock and Wisconsin Rapids in 1873; it reached Wausau in 1874; and Merrill in

1879. After the CM&StP acquired the line in 1880, it continued the northern extension to

Tomahawk in 1887, then to Woodruff and Star Lake by 1895. This line’s northernmost

extension barely crossed into the Upper Peninsula, north of Boulder Junction to Blue Bill by

1908. Within two decades, the lines north of Woodruff into Michigan were pared back165. By

1948, the Star Lake spur was also removed from service166. Other spurs off this trunk line that

were still in service in 1926 included Babcock to Dexterville and Pittsville (1883) Nekoosa

(1896); from Otis east to Gleason, then splitting north and south (1904); and Merrill to the

northwest (1914). Several extensions and branches off of these lines were already out of

service by 1926.

To better incorporate this trunk line into its system, the CM&StP extended an 1878 spur from

New Lisbon to Necedah, connecting Necedah with Babcock by 1891. This connection

bypassed Tomah and gave the CM&StP a shorter connection to Milwaukee and Chicago; the

Tomah to Babcock segment (along with spurs into what are now the Necedah National Wildlife

Refuge and the Central Wisconsin Conservation Area) were removed from service prior to

1926167.

The segments north of Green Bay were also connected in the 1880s and early 1890s, mostly

under predecessor company Milwaukee & Northern (M&N). That company formed in 1870; by

1873, it has completed a trunk line from Milwaukee to Green Bay, with a spur to Menasha,

Neenah, and Appleton. That year, the M&N was leased by Wisconsin Central, which kept it

until 1880. Through the 1880s, the M&N went through a series of legal reorganizations and

consolidations under the control of the CM&StP168, even as construction was underway. Stiles

was reached in 1881; Crivitz in 1883; Menominee and Pembine in 1884; and Iron Mountain, MI

in 1886. The next few years linked the Milwaukee to previous mining lines in the Upper

Peninsula (Channing and Champion). Finally, in 1891, the M&N was sold to the CM&StP. By

1893, the line was complete to the Lake Superior port of Ontonagon, MI. A handful of short,


briefly-used spurs followed169. Of note, nearly 90 years later, what had been the M&N system

would be sold to the Escanaba & Lake Superior.

The CM&StP management still sought to match Great Northern and Northern Pacific for access

to the Pacific Northwest, and spent the first decade of the Twentieth Century financing and

constructing what would become the last transcontinental rail line; it was completed (at great

cost) in 1909. This outlay, plus the wear of service under nationalization during World War I,

moved the CM&StP into bankruptcy by 1925. Two years later, under new management, and a

new name (the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific), the Milwaukee Road came into fruition.

With a visually-stunning and swift streamlined series of passenger trains (The Hiawathas),

coupled with the increased passenger and freight traffic during World War II, the Milwaukee was

able to survive the Great Depression, then stabilize and emerge from bankruptcy in 1945170. As

steam transitioned into diesel, the far-flung Milwaukee Road system was dragged down

economically by low-volume rural branch lines across the Midwest and Great Plains, by the

growth of trucking and the Interstate Highway System, by regulatory constraints, and by

deferred maintenance. Questionable management presided over asset sales and minimal

abandonments of low-volume lines, failing to bring solvency. In 1977, the Milwaukee went into

reorganization under bankruptcy laws, and over the next several years portions of its southern

Wisconsin lines were abandoned or sold to small operators171.

The former Milwaukee Road line southwest from Eau Claire was briefly operated as the

Chippewa River Road (CRR), extending along a 33-mile segment from Eau Claire to Durand. It

ceased operation in 1981 due to structural concerns for the bridge in Eau Claire over the

Chippewa River and due to one prospective customer, Northern States Power, not constructing

a power plant on the line172.

In March 1980, the Milwaukee Road’s former M&N trunk line north of Green Bay – to Channing

and Ontonagon, MI – was sold to the Escanaba & Lake Superior (E&LS)173. The Milwaukee

lingered until its remaining assets – including the Central Wisconsin trunk line – were sold to the

Soo Line in 1985174. Other than the mainline from Chicago to Milwaukee, Portage, Tomah, La

Crosse, and St. Paul, the Soo spun the rest of the lines off to Wisconsin Central, Limited175.

The former Milwaukee Road line from New Lisbon to Heafford Junction (north of Tomahawk)


remains in service under Canadian National ownership. The former mainline between Chicago

and Minneapolis is now operated as part of the Canadian Pacific Rail System176.

The E&LS was developed as a timber and logging rail company. Its first lines were built in

1897. Soon, it added ore as a primary cargo. As those two markets dwindled, the E&LS stayed

solvent as the originating line for industrial shipments out of manufacturing facilities in

Escanaba. By 1950, the company covered 95 miles of track, with about two-thirds of that main

line from Escanaba to Channing177.

The E&LS’s 1980 acquisition of the Milwaukee Road trackage from Green Bay to Channing,

Stiles to Oconto Falls, Channing to Ontonagon, and Channing to Republic, changed the

company significantly. First, it increased the operating mileage almost four-fold. Second, it

gave the line much greater access for interchange. Following a 1986 court case, the E&LS

gained the right to purchase the former Milwaukee Road corridor from Crivitz to Marinette178.

The purchase of these former Milwaukee lines also helped reinforce the company’s customer

base. Shipped loads included medium corrugated or pulpboard, scrap paper, woodpulp,

pulpwood logs, oriented strand board, lumber, wood bark, canned goods, steel, scrap metal,

aggregate, chemicals, and agricultural items such as corn, grains, feed, and fertilizers. In 1988,

the E&LS’s commodity base was dominated by pulp & paper products (80 percent), followed by

waste and scrap (13 percent)179.

In recent years, E&LS was able to get trackage rights on Canadian National’s old Soo Line main

line between Escanaba and Pembine. Although company maps still show service on the

original corridor (Wells – Channing) and to Ontonagon, other reports indicate these lines are no

longer in service180.



Appendix 2: County Freight Profiles

The following section contains economic and freight activity analyses for each county in the

Northwoods Rail Transit Commission study area.



Economy

Barron County’s main industries are manufacturing, retail trade, construction, agriculture and public services. Frac sand mining has grown in the last few years. Some prominent employers include:

Jenni-O Turkey Store, Inc.

St. Croix Casino Turtle Lake

Lakeview Medical Center

Rice Lake Weighing Systems, Inc.

Barron Medical Center

Rice Lake Public School District

Wal-Mart

County of Barron

Barron Area School District

Co-op Educational Service Agency (CESA) #11

Source: Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development 2012

Population growth 1970-2010

COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-2010

% Change

BARRON 33,955 45,870 35%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010

2007-2011 Median household

income, inflation adjusted

2011 dollars

Barron County: $44,086

Wisconsin: $52,374

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

Barron County in a snapshot

45,870 people

Approximately 1,323 non-farm

businesses

Approximately 91

manufacturing facilities

Interstate, state and county

highways used by thousands of

trucks every year

Most freight is transported by

truck and travels to other

counties in Wisconsin.

Canadian National Railway has

recently restored rail service in

Barron County to serve the frac

sand industry.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010,

Wisconsin Department of Workforce

Development 2012, IHS/Global Insight

Transearch database 2011

BARRON COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE

The rail site shown above, in Almena, is

part of a rail line that has been

rehabbed and returned to service as of

December 2012.

A Jennie-O facility in Barron


Employment

Approximately 20,282 people

work in about 1,328 businesses in

Barron County. Thirty percent of

the persons are employed in

freight-intensive industries such

as manufacturing, resource

extraction, construction,

wholesale trade, and agriculture,

forestry, fishing and hunting.

Industry

# Average Annual Establishments

Average Employees

Agriculture Forestry Fishing &

Hunting S S

Mining Quarrying & Oil & Gas

Extraction S S

Utilities 4 68

Construction 133 578

Manufacturing 91 5,148

Wholesale Trade 57 452

Retail Trade 209 2,878

Transportation &

Warehousing 68 597

Information 14 213

Finance & Insurance 64 514

Real Estate & Rental &

Leasing 38 101

Professional & Technical

Services 59 282

Management of Companies &

Enterprises 5 68

Administrative & Waste

Services 68 589

Educational Services 36 1,532

Health Care & Social

Assistance 112 2,555

Arts Entertainment &

Recreation 21 907

Accommodation & Food

Services 143 1,502

Other Services Except Public

Administration 104 456

Public Administration 58 1,408

Unclassified 0 0

S=Suppressed

Source: Wisconsin Department of

Workforce Development 2012


Major Trading Partners, Terminating - Truck, 2011

State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 724,047

Minnesota 454,846

Texas 48,286

Illinois 33,650

Iowa 21,168

Florida 15,211

Louisiana 14,270

California 9,220

Massachusetts 4,697

Michigan 5,632

North Carolina 7,635

Indiana 5,462

South Carolina 7,727

Major Trading Partners, Originating - Truck, 2011

State Truck Tons

Minnesota 689,288

Wisconsin 561,727

Iowa 31,837

Illinois 27,658

Texas 18,489

Florida 12,382

Massachusetts 10,868

Michigan 9,323

California 7,849

Indiana 6,140



Louisiana 3,213

Major Trading Partners, Terminating - Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons

Minnesota 19,360

Saskatchewan, Canada 4,080

British Columbia, Canada 3,800

Oregon 3,640

Missouri 2,976

Major Trading Partners, Originating - Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons

Texas 21,963

Illinois 920

The majority of products shipped to and from

Barron County were transported by truck, and

just two percent was transported by rail.

Major truck trading partners included other

Wisconsin counties, Minnesota, Iowa, Illinois and

Texas.

Barron County’s major rail trading partners were

Texas, Minnesota, Canada, Oregon and Missouri.

98%

2%

Truck Rail

Source: IHS/Global Insight Transearch

database 2011


FREIGHT MOVEMENT AND MODES

Almost six million tons of products were shipped to, from and within Barron County in 2011 using

local and state roads as well as rail infrastructure.

Barron County is in the North Country Corridor of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s long-

range plan, Connections 2030. Truck traffic along the corridor is low and is projected to be low to

medium by 2030.

Source: Connections 2030 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, IHS/Global Insight Transearch

database 2011

Definitions:

Terminating Tonnage: Goods

shipped into the county from other

Wisconsin counties and other

states.

Originating Tonnage: Commodities

shipped out of the county to other


states.

Internal Tonnage: Goods that are

shipped from one destination in

the county to another destination

within the county.

*Tonnage amounts do not include

“overhead tonnage”, products that pass

through the county and are not picked up or

dropped off in the county.

1,418,379 1,500,351

199,883

33,856 22,883 0

Terminating Originating Internal

Tonnage and Direction, 2011

Truck Rail

Source: IHS/Global Insight Transearch database 2011

Terminating

Originating

Internal


Commodity Terminating Truck Tons

Farm Products 389,873

Nonmetallic Minerals 362,699

Food or Kindred Products 166,954

Secondary Traffic 154,492

Lumber or Wood Products 78,364

Chemicals or Allied Products 59,782

Clay, concrete, glass or Stone 43,465

Petroleum or Coal Products 37,641

Waste or Scrap Materials 31,785

Primary Metal Products 23,767

Commodity Originating Truck Tons




Clay, concrete, glass or Stone 48,394

Fabricated Metal Products 40,358

Machinery 22,497

Rubber or Misc. Plastics 20,657

Printed Matter 8,643

Mail or Contract Traffic 4,080

Misc Manufacturing Products 3,327

Major commodities shipped by truck

to and from Barron County in 2011

were farm products, lumber or wood

products, and nonmetallic minerals.

Farm products, mostly grain, dairy

products and field crops, were

shipped to Rochester (MN), Marathon

County (WI), St. Louis County (MN)

and several other Minnesota counties.

Lumber or wood products were

shipped to eastern Wisconsin counties

and western Minnesota counties.

Major recipients of primary forest

materials were Price County (WI), Eau

Claire County (WI) and Trempealeau

County (WI). Plywood or veneer was

shipped to the Minnesota (MN) region

and Des Moines (IA).

Barron County did not ship out

nonmetallic minerals in 2011.

Farm products shipped to Barron

County included grain, livestock and

live poultry from the Minneapolis

(MN) region, grain from Marathon

County (WI) and live poultry from

Trempealeau County (WI).

Barron County received most of its

primary forest materials from the

Minneapolis (MN) and Duluth (MN)

regions as well as smaller shipments

from western Wisconsin counties.

Barron County is a major recipient of

nonmetallic minerals. Polk County

(WI) ships gravel or sand and broken

stone to the county while small

amounts are also shipped from

western Wisconsin counties and the

Rochester (MN) region.

MAJOR COMMODITIES BARRON COUNTY - TRUCK



Commodity Terminating Rail Tons

Food or Kindred Products

19,360

Lumber or Wood Products

7,440

Chemicals or Allied Products

4,080

Transportation Equipment

2,976

Commodity Originating Rail Tons

Nonmetallic Minerals

21,963

Transportation Equipment

920

Major commodities shipped to and

from Barron County by rail in 2011

were nonmetallic minerals,

transportation equipment, food or

kindred products, and lumber or

wood products.

Barron County shipped gravel or

sand to San Antonio (TX) and

railroad cars to Cook County (IL).

Barron County received soybean

oil or by-product from Minneapolis

(MN) region and lumber dimension

stock and primary forest materials

from British Columbia (Canada)

and the Portland (OR) region.

MAJOR COMMODITIES BARRON COUNTY - RAIL



Largest Freight Generators

Business Location Primary Industry Primary Originating

Commodities

Employees

Country Comfort LLC Almena Petroleum Products, Nec Warehouse & Distribution Center

30

Todd's Redi-Mix CONCRETE LLC Rice Lake Brick, Stone and Related Material

Gravel or Sand 20

Cemstone Ready Mix Turtle Lake

Ready-mixed Concrete Gravel or Sand Ready-mix Concrete, Wet

70

Tri-State Lumber & Land Rice Lake Logging Primary Forest Materials

25

Lake Country Dairy Turtle Lake

Dairy Farm Dairy Farm Products

100

Largest Freight Receivers

Business Location Primary Industry Primary Terminating

Commodities

Employees

Country Comfort LLC Almena Petroleum Products, Nec Petroleum Refining Products

30

Cemstone Ready Mix Turtle Lake

Ready-mixed Concrete Broken Stone or Riprap Gravel or Sand

70

American Excelsior Co. Rice Lake Special Product Sawmills, Nec

Primary Forest Materials Paper

140

Todd's Redi-Mix CONCRETE LLC Rice Lake Brick, Stone and Related Material

Gravel or Sand 20

Todd's Redi Mix Concrete LLC Rice Lake Ready-mixed Concrete Broken Stone or Riprap Gravel or Sand

20

The tables below contain lists of Barron County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.

Source: Freight Finder database 2010


Economy

Florence County rests at Michigan’s border. The

leisure and hospitality industry sector accounts

for the largest share of the county’s workforce,

but dairies, logging companies and sawmills play a

significant role in the economy. Prominent

employers in the county include:

Florence Public School District

County of Florence

Beverly Health & Rehabilitation

Pride Manufacturing

Florence Hardwoods LLC

Aurora Liquors

Aurora Casting Services

Bartoletti’s

State Bank of Florence

El Capitan, Inc.

Source: Wisconsin Department of Workforce

Development 2012


COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-

2010 %

Change

FLORENCE 3,298 4,423 34%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%



income, inflation adjusted 2011

dollars

Florence County: $43,000

Wisconsin: $52,374


Florence County in a snapshot

4,423 people

Approximately 106 non-farm

businesses

Approximately 13


State and county highways

used by thousands of trucks

every year




The county’s rail line, on its

west side, has been converted

to a trail.





FLORENCE COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE


Employment

Florence County’s workforce

consists of approximately

964 people in about 169

businesses. About 20

percent of the persons are

employed in freight-

intensive industries such as

manufacturing, construction,

wholesale trade, and

agriculture, forestry, fishing

and hunting.

Industry


Average Employees


Hunting S S


Extraction 0 0

Utilities 0 0

Construction 14 23

Manufacturing 13 167

Wholesale Trade 4 6

Retail Trade 11 62

Transportation &

Warehousing 6 17

Information S S



Leasing S S


Services S S


Enterprises 0 0


Services 8 31

Educational Services 3 108


Assistance 8 69


Recreation S S


Services S S



Public Administration 16 165

Unclassified 0 0

S= Suppressed



Major Trading Partners, Originating – Truck, 2011

State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 95,675

Michigan 17,463

Florida 5,141

Texas 4,609

New York 4,542

California 4,054

Massachusetts 2,048

Nevada 1,420

New Jersey 954

Colorado 844

Major Trading Partners, Terminating – Truck, 2011

State Truck Tons

Michigan 40,663

Wisconsin 32,143

Minnesota 3,460

Louisiana 1,407

Illinois 1,186

Texas 962

Florida 748

Arizona 729

California 609

Mississippi 380

Over 230,000 tons of commodities and

products were transported to, from and

within Florence County in 2011.

All products were moved by truck. No

goods were transported by rail.

Major trading partners were Michigan,

other Wisconsin counties, Minnesota and

Florida.




In 2011, more than 87,000 tons of products moved to, from and within Florence County. All products

were shipped by truck.


database 2011

85,204

147,440

345 0 0 0



Truck Rail

Definitions:

Terminating Tonnage: Goods shipped

into the county from other Wisconsin

counties and other states.



Wisconsin counties and other states.


shipped from one destination in the

county to another destination within

the county.

*Tonnage amounts do not include “overhead

tonnage”, products that pass through the

county and are not picked up or dropped off in

the county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal


Commodity

Originating Truck Tons



Fabricated Metal Products 704

Misc. Manufacturing Products 360

Printed Matter 267

Furniture or Fixtures 117

Secondary Traffic 20

Textile Mill Products 10

Apparel or Related Products 7







Clay, Concrete, Glass or Stone 1,975



Forest Products 789

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN FLORENCE COUNTY - TRUCK

Major commodities that were moved

to, from and within Florence County

were lumber or wood products, farm

products, fabricated metal products

and nonmetallic minerals.

The major recipients for primary

forest materials were Brown County

(WI), the Michigan portion of the

Green Bay (WI) region, and Marathon

County (WI). Major shippers of

primary forest products to Florence

County were Gogebic County (MI),

the Michigan portion of Green Bay

(WI) region, and Houghton County

(MI).

Major recipients of farm products,

such as grain and field crops, were

Calumet County (WI), Outagamie

County (WI) and Manitowoc County

(WI). Major shippers of grain and

field crops to Florence County were

Ashland County (WI), Marathon

County (WI) and Brown County (WI).

The major recipients of Florence

County’s metal products were Cook

County (IL), Hennepin County (MN)

and the Minneapolis (MN) region.

These counties were also the highest

shippers of fabricated metal products

to Florence County.

Florence County didn’t ship any

nonmetallic minerals out in 2011.

Major shippers of gravel or sand to

the county were Iron County (MI),

Keweenaw County (MI) and Langlade

County (WI).

No rail usage according to IHS/Global Insight.




Business Location Primary Industry Primary Originating Commodities

Employees

G & G Lumber Florence Sawmills and Planing Mills

Lumber or Dimension Stock Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill

11


Business Location Primary Industry Primary Terminating Commodities

Employees

G & G Lumber Florence Sawmills and Planing Mills

Primary Forest Materials 11

Riverside Liquor Spa/Pool

Florence Liquor Store Warehouse & Distribution Center

20

The tables below contain lists of Florence County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.



Economy

Forest County is a predominantly rural county with an economy driven by forestry, tourism and recreation that fluctuates with seasonal weather. Major local employers include:

Forest County Potawatomi Community

Potawatomi Carter Casino Hotel

School District of Crandon

Grand Royale & Regency Resort

County of Forest

School District of Wabeno Area

J Schaefer Enterprises, Inc.

AGI Healthcare of Crandon

Mole Lake Band of Lake Superior Chippewa

Forest Service - Management Data Service Center



COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-

2010 %

Change

FOREST 7,691 9,304 21%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%


4,419,791 5,688,996 29%



dollars

Forest County: $38,176

Wisconsin: $52,374


Forest County in a snapshot

9,304 people

More than 230 non-farm

businesses

Approximately 17


State and county highways

used by thousands of

trucks every year

On Forest County’s east

side is a Rails-to-Trails trail

converted from a former

rail line.

Most freight is transported

by truck and travels to

other counties in

Wisconsin.


2010, Wisconsin Department

of Workforce Development

2012, IHS/Global Insight


Mural in Laona

FOREST COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE


Employment

Around 3,119 people are

employed in over 300

businesses in Forest County.

About 10 percent are

employed in freight-intensive

industries such as

manufacturing, resource




and hunting.

Industry


Average Employees


Hunting S S


Extraction S S

Utilities S S

Construction 27 70


Wholesale Trade S S

Retail Trade 31 279

Transportation &

Warehousing 43 134

Information S S



Leasing 6 11


Services 7 87


Enterprises 0 0


Services 4 9



Assistance 26 239


Recreation 6 385


Services 29 202


Administration S S


Unclassified 0 0

S=Suppressed

Source: Wisconsin

Department of Workforce

Development 2012



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 95,720

Michigan 49,005

Minnesota 8,474

Illinois 3,367

Louisiana 3,206

Indiana 2,639

Texas 2,548

Iowa 1,866

Arizona 1,582

Florida 1,512


State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 431,746

Michigan 55,645

Minnesota 16,401

Illinois 2,821

California 2,237

Texas 988

Ontario, Canada 912

Iowa 911

Florida 595

North Dakota 581


In 2011, all of Forest County freight was

shipped by truck. Almost 700,000 tons of

commodities were shipped to, from and

within the county.

Major trading partners were other Wisconsin

counties, Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois,

Louisiana and California.



The primary highway in Forest County, USH 8, is located near a rail line that was formerly in service. All

rail stations in the county are currently closed.

Truck volume along all segments of US 8 is low and is projected to be low to medium by 2030.


database 2011

177,820

516,049

2,715 0 0 0



Truck Rail

Definitions:

Terminating Tonnage: Goods shipped

into the county from other Wisconsin






shipped from one destination in the

county to another destination within

the county.


tonnage”, products that pass through the

county and are not picked up or dropped off in

the county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal










Forest Products 2,000

Transportation Equipment 1,441










Food or Kindred Products 860

Mail or Contract Traffic 773

Rubber or Misc. Plastics 501

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN FOREST COUNTY


database 2011


Major commodities shipped to and from Forest

County in 2011 included lumber or wood products,

nonmetallic minerals, and farm products.

Forest County shipped mostly primary forest

materials, sawmill or planing materials, and

millwork or cabinetwork to Brown County (WI),

Marathon County (WI), the Michigan Portion of

the Green Bay region, and Outagamie County (WI).

Major forest products shipped to the county were

primary forest materials, sawmill or planing

materials, and treated wood products. These

products originated in Gogebic County (MI), the

Michigan Portion of the Green Bay region,

Ontonagon County (MI) and St. Louis County (MN).

Nonmetallic minerals shipped from Forest County

to other counties consisted of broken stone,

miscellaneous nonmetallic minerals, and chemical

or fertilizer minerals that ended up in Oneida

County (WI), Langlade County (WI), Ontario

(Canada) and Toronto (Canada).

Gravel or sand made up the highest tonnage of

nonmetallic minerals shipped to Forest County;

the heaviest shipments arrived from Langlade

County (WI).

Major farm products shipped from Forest County

were grain, field crops, and dairy farm products.

They were shipped to Calumet County (WI),

Manitowoc County (WI) and Outagamie County

(WI).

Field crops and grains made up the majority of

farms products that were shipped to Forest

County. The heaviest shipments came from Clark

County (WI), Ashland County (WI) and Portage

County (WI).




Employees

Yaeger Oil Co. Laona Petroleum Products, Nec

Warehouse & Distribution Center

17

Ken Mihalko & Sons Inc. Crandon Logging Primary Forest Materials

10

Charles Mihalko & Sons Crandon Logging

Primary Forest Materials Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill

12

Nicolet Hardwoods Corp. Laona Sawmills and Planing Mills

Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill Warehouse & Distribution Center

65

Mel Flannery Trucking Co. Crandon Excavation Work Ready-mix Concrete, Wet Gravel or Sand

26



Employees

Yaeger Oil Co. Laona Petroleum Products

Petroleum Refining Products

17

Nicolet Hardwoods Corp. Laona Sawmills and Planing Mills


65

Mel Flannery Trucking Co. Crandon Excavation Work Gravel or Sand Warehouse & Distribution Center

26

Charles Mihalko & Sons Crandon Logging Primary Forest Materials

12

Ken Mihalko & Sons Inc. Crandon Logging Primary Forest Materials

10

The tables below contain lists of Forest County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.



Economy

Langlade County is a predominantly rural county,

offering abundant recreational opportunities with

over 800 lakes, 225 streams, 200 spring ponds and

the Wolf River. Major commodities being shipped

to and from the county include gravel/sand,

primary forest materials, and

warehouse/distribution products. Major

employers include:

Langlade Memorial Hospital

Unified School District of Antigo

Amron Corporation

Wal-mart

County of Langlade

Eastview Medical & Rehabilitation Center

Plaspack U.S.A., Inc.

Covantage Credit Union

Fleet Wholesale Supply Company

City of Antigo Source: Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development 2012


COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-

2010 %

Change

LANGLADE 19,220 19,977 4%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%




dollars

Langlade County: $42,045

Wisconsin: $52,374


Langlade County in a snapshot

19,977 people


businesses

Approximately 45 manufacturing

facilities

US, state and county highways

transport a low volume of trucks

every year.




The north-south CN rail line has

been converted to a Rails-to-

Trails trail.



Development 2012, IHS/Global

Insight Transearch database 2011

LANGLADE COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE


Source: Wisconsin Department

Employment


are employed in Langlade

County, in about 614

businesses. About 26 percent

are employed in freight-






and hunting.

Industry


Average Employees


Hunting S S


Extraction S S

Utilities 4 32

Construction 57 188




Transportation &

Warehousing 45 371

Information 8 67



Leasing 12 21


Services 20 111


Enterprises 3 24


Services 20 95



Assistance 53 970


Recreation 9 46


Services 57 727

Other Services Excluding



Unclassified 0 0

S=Suppressed



2012



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 461,489

Michigan 34,244

Texas 32,898

Minnesota 29,212

Illinois 16,847

Louisiana 8,473

Iowa 5,621

Indiana 5,248

Ontario, Canada 4,278



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 3,416,169

Michigan 69,102

Minnesota 27,317

Indiana 13,702

Illinois 9,773

Texas 9,418


Iowa 7,888

Massachusetts 5,599

Ohio 5,025

Most of Langlade County’s freight was

shipped by truck in 2011, while none was

moved by rail.

Major trade partners included other

Wisconsin counties, Michigan, Minnesota,

Indiana and Texas.




In 2011, Langlade County businesses shipped all of their freight by truck, utilizing state and local road

infrastructure.

Langlade County is part of the Northwoods Connector and Wisconsin Heartland Corridors in WisDOT’s

long-range transportation plan, Connections 2030. The Northwoods Connector links east central

Wisconsin to northern Wisconsin. It serves the tourism and agricultural industries, particularly

Langlade County’s potato companies. Current truck capacity is low and is projected to be medium by

2030. The Wisconsin Heartland Corridor connects Green Bay, Wausau, and Eau Claire to the Twin

Cities in Minnesota. This provides a critical link to tourism, agricultural and manufacturing

destinations. The truck volumes are medium and are projected to be medium to high by 2030.


database 2011

633,049

3,625,323

115,449 0 0 0



Truck Rail

Definitions:


shipped into the county from

other Wisconsin counties and

other states.




states.




within the county.



through the county and are not picked up

or dropped off in the county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal














Nonmetallic Minerals 3,046,646



Machinery 20,285






Ordnance or Accessories 1,957

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN LANGLADE COUNTY - TRUCK



Langlade County’s major freight

shipments in 2011 consisted of

nonmetallic minerals, farm

products, and lumber or wood

products.

Langlade County shipped

nonmetallic mineral products,

mostly gravel or sand, to Wood

County (WI), Marathon County

(WI) and Oneida County (WI). The

county received broken stone or

riprap, and gravel or sand, from

Langlade County (WI), Marinette

County (WI) and Winnebago

County (WI).

Langlade County shipped farm

products, such as grain, field

crops, and dairy farm products to

Dodge County (WI), Outagamie

County (WI) and Sheboygan

County (WI). Langlade County

was a major recipient of field

crops, grain and livestock shipped

from Chippewa County (WI), Eau

Claire County (WI) and Rusk

County (WI).

Langlade County shipped sawmill

or planing materials, cabinetwork

and primary forest products to

Brown County (WI), Outagamie

County (WI) and Winnebago

County (WI). Langlade County

mostly received primary forest

materials from Ontonagon

County (MI), Forest County (WI)

and St. Louis County (MN).




Employees

Duffek Sand & Gravel Antigo Single-family Housing Construction

Gravel or Sand 100

Meverden Trucking-Meverden Antigo Excavation Work Gravel or Sand 15

Waste Management Inc. Antigo Scrap and Waste Materials


60

Servco FS Antigo Lime Lime or Lime Plaster Nonmetallic Minerals

50

Edelman Meats Inc. Antigo Meats and Meat Products

Warehouse & Distribution Center Meat, Fresh Frozen

16



Commodities

Employees

Duffek Sand & Gravel Antigo Single-family Housing Construction

Gravel or Sand Warehouse & Distribution

100

Kretz Lumber Co. Inc. Antigo Sawmills and Planing Mills, General


170

Meverden Trucking-Meverden Antigo Excavation Work Gravel or Sand Broken Stone or Riprap

15

Robbins Inc. White Lake

Hardwood Dimension and Flooring Mills

Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill Primary Forest Materials

80

Waste Management Inc. Antigo Scrap and Waste Materials

Paper Waste or Scrap Metal Scrap or Tailings

60


The tables below contain lists of Langlade County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.


0

Economy

Lincoln County’s economy is predominated by

manufacturing, retail trade and government services.

Major freight-related industries include industrial

paper, petroleum products and lumber. Some

prominent employers are:

Church Mutual Insurance Company

Merrill Public School District

Packaging Corporation of America

County of Lincoln

Department of Corrections

Harley-Davidson Motor Company

School District of Tomahawk

Semling Menke Company, Inc.

Wienbrenner Shoe-Merrill

Lincoln Wood Products, Inc.


Development 2012


COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-2010 %

Change

LINCOLN 23,499 28,743 22%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%




dollars

Lincoln County: $47,426

Wisconsin: $52,374


Lincoln County in a snapshot

28,743 people


businesses

Approximately 48



highways used by thousands

of trucks every year

The Canadian National rail line

south of Heafford Junction is

active.








LINCOLN COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE

Log truck in Lincoln County


Employment

About 10,173 people are

employed in approximately

718 businesses in Lincoln

County. About 31 percent

are employed in freight-






and hunting.

Industry


Average Employees


Hunting S S


Extraction S S

Utilities 7 41

Construction 78 351




Transportation &

Warehousing 42 462

Information S S



Leasing 13 39


Services S S


Enterprises S S


Services 27 143



Assistance 61 942


Recreation 9 105


Services 87 734




Unclassified S S

S=Suppressed



2012



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 386,372

Minnesota 149,759

Illinois 45,556

Texas 20,030

Michigan 12,517

New York 11,450

Iowa 11,063

Florida 7,430

New Jersey 6,162

Indiana 5,976


State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 600,671

Michigan 72,839

Minnesota 66,704

Illinois 26,312

Texas 24,578

Iowa 13,600

Louisiana 12,856

Indiana 6,206

Florida 5,130

California 5,046

Major Trading Partners, Terminating – Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons

Kentucky 119,664

Alberta, Canada 16,520

Virginia 11,680

Minnesota 7,800

Saskatchewan, Canada 7,760


Wyoming 3,920

Louisiana 3,800

Manitoba, Canada 2,560

Illinois 2,200

Major Trading Partners, Originating - Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons

Wisconsin 45,880

Missouri 43,040

Illinois 38,800

Minnesota 26,320

Nebraska 23,800

Texas 23,240

Indiana 17,440

Utah 17,240

Ohio 16,240

Virginia 14,640

Lincoln County freight was shipped by

truck and rail in 2011. Around 75 percent

of freight shipments used truck while

over 25 percent used rail.

Major destinations included other

Wisconsin counties, Minnesota, Illinois

and Missouri.

75%

25%

Truck Rail


database 2011



Lincoln County includes US 8 in the northern part of the county and US 51 that runs north/south. The

east/west and north/south portions of the Canadian National Railway are still active in the county.

Lincoln County is part of Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s North Country Corridor in

Connections 2030, the state’s long-range plan for Wisconsin’s transportation needs. Truck volume

along this corridor is low and is projected to be low to medium by 2030.


database 2011

874,408

716,602

4,595

183,384

350,520

0



Truck Rail

Definitions:




other states.

Originating Tonnage:

Commodities shipped out of the

county to other Wisconsin





within the county.



through the county and are not picked up

or dropped off in the county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal
















Pulp, Paper or Allied Products 123,594






Machinery 7,534


MAJOR COMMODITIES IN LINCOLN COUNTY - TRUCK

Major commodities shipped by truck to, from

and within Lincoln County by truck in 2011

were nonmetallic minerals, lumber or wood

products, farm products, and pulp or paper

products.

Lincoln County does not ship out nonmetallic

mineral products but ships in thousands of tons

of broken stone or riprap and gravel or sand.

Major shippers were Marathon County (WI),

Langlade County (WI) and Brown County (WI).

Lincoln County shipped primary forest

materials, wood products, and wood or box

parts to Brown County (WI), Winnebago County

(WI) and Outagamie County (WI). The major

lumber or wood products that were shipped

into the county were primary forest materials,

sawmill or planing materials. Most of the

products came from Gogebic County (MI), St.

Louis County (MN) and Ashland County (WI).

Lincoln County shipped grain, field crops, and

dairy products to Calumet County (WI),

Outagamie County (WI) and Fond du Lac

County (WI) in 2011. Major products that were

shipped to the county were field crops, grain,

and livestock, and major senders were Barron

County (WI), Dunn County (WI) and


Major paper or pulp products that were

shipped from Lincoln County included fiber or

pulpboard and containers or boxes. Some

major recipients were the Minnesota Portion of

the Minneapolis (MN) region, Hennepin County

(MN) and Ramsey County (MN). Lincoln County

received few paper or pulp products, but the

major commodities were fiber or pulpboard,

boxes, and paper. Major shippers included

Ramsey County (MN), the Minnesota Portion of

the Minneapolis (MN) region, and Milwaukee

County (WI).



Commodity Terminating

Rail Tons

Coal 119,664





Commodity Originating

Rail Tons



Major commodities that were

shipped to and from Lincoln County

by rail in 2011 were coal, pulp or

paper products, and lumber or

wood products.

All of the coal shipped to Lincoln

County came from the Kentucky

Portion of Evansville (IN) region.

Lincoln County shipped fiber or

pulpboard by rail in 2011. Some of

the major recipients were the

Missouri Portion of St. Louis (MO)

region, Cook County (IL) and

Nebraska Portion of Omaha (NE)

region. Lincoln County received pulp

or pulp mill products by rail from

the Alberta (Canada) and British

Columbia (Canada) regions.


MAJOR COMMODITIES IN LINCOLN COUNTY - RAIL




Employees

Packaging Corp. of America Tomahawk Industrial and Personal Service Paper

Fiber, Paper or Pulpboard Warehouse & Distribution Center

500

Hilgy's LP Gas Tomahawk Petroleum Products


35

Northern Wire LLC Merrill Miscellaneous Fabricated Wire Products

Misc Fabricated Wire Products Warehouse & Distribution Center

105

Merrill Distributing Inc. Merrill Groceries and Related Products, Nec


74

Midstate Pallet & Skid Mfg. Inc.

Merrill Lumber, Plywood and Millwork


19



Employees

Packaging Corp. of America Tomahawk Industrial and Personal Service Paper

Primary Forest Materials Paper

500

Hilgy's LP Gas Tomahawk Petroleum Products

Petroleum Refining Products Warehouse & Distribution Center

35

Merrill Gravel & Construction

Merrill Ready-mixed Concrete

Gravel or Sand Broken Stone or Riprap

40

John J. Schoone Construction

Tomahawk Lawn and Garden Services

Gravel or Sand Petroleum Refining Products

22

Agra Industries Inc. Merrill Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills

Bituminous Coal Primary Iron or Steel Products

120


The tables below contain lists of Lincoln County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.


Economy

Marinette County is located on the shorelines of Lake

Michigan and Green Bay, providing visitors with

outstanding outdoor recreation, cultural attractions

and shopping opportunities. Northern Marinette

County shares a border with Michigan’s Menominee

regional economy. Prominent Marinette County

employers include:

Marinette Marine Corporation

Karl Schmidt Unisia, Inc.

Waupaca Foundry

Bay Area Medical Center, Inc.

Tyco Fire Products, LP

Silvan Industries & Northland Stain

County of Marinette

Northland Mission, Inc.

Wal-Mart

Marinette Public School District


Development 2012



dollars

Marinette County: $41,574

Wisconsin: $52,374

U.S. Census Bureau

Marinette County in a snapshot

41,749 people

Approximately 1,290 non-

farm businesses

Approximately 79


Two railroads serve the

county. The Canadian

National Railway, active

between Goodman and

Pembine, generally

follows USH 8. The

Escanaba & Lake Superior

Railroad is active and runs

north-south and eastward

to the state border with

Michigan.

Most freight is

transported by truck and

travels to other counties

in Wisconsin.


Wisconsin Department of

Workforce Development 2012,

IHS/Global Insight Transearch

database 2011


COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-

2010 %

Change

MARINETTE 35,810 41,749 17%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%

U.S. Census Bureau 2010

MARINETTE COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE

Goodman Veneer and Lumber, Goodman


Employment


are employed in around 1,307

businesses in Marinette

County. About 40 percent are


industries such as





and hunting.

Industry


Average Employees


Hunting 39 261


Extraction 3 127

Utilities 7 46





Transportation &

Warehousing 63 707

Information 14 160



Leasing 22 70


Services 51 226


Enterprises 6 168


Services 42 295





Recreation 24 204


Services 147 1,415




Unclassified 0 0

S=Suppressed for privacy


Workforce Development, 2012



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 516,257

Michigan 158,062

Texas 146,902

Louisiana 65,294

Illinois 57,706

Minnesota 42,516

Indiana 21,153

Ontario 20,905

Iowa 10,443

California 8,505


State Rail Tons

Michigan 30,320

Alberta 20,000

Saskatchewan 19,280

Ontario 17,040

Minnesota 11,588

Nova Scotia 11,280

Georgia 7,720

Illinois 7,240

Washington 4,800

Arizona 3,040

Major Trading Partners, Originating – Truck 2011

State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 1,055,995

Michigan 371,630

Illinois 91,907

Minnesota 73,148

Oklahoma 41,754

Ontario 35,086

Texas 33,609

Pennsylvania 27,331

Indiana 25,992

California 14,878

Major Trading Partners, Originating – Rail 2011

State Rail Tons

Indiana 114,160

Kansas 79,720

Michigan 65,600

Minnesota 54,240

Wisconsin 51,480

Alabama 12,000

Georgia 7,960

Illinois 6,000

Ontario 920

Major Trading Partners, Terminating – Water 2011

State Water Tons

Illinois 61,765

Ontario 50,800

Quebec 47,238

Indiana 5,334

Major Trading Partners, Originating – Water 2011

State Water Tons

Illinois 5,857

Most commodities shipped to and from

Marinette County were transported by truck.

The rest was shipped by rail or ship.

Major trading partners in 2011 were other

Wisconsin counties, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana

and Texas.


database 2011

82%

14%

4%

Truck Rail Water



Definitions:

Terminating Tonnage: Goods shipped into

the county from other Wisconsin counties

and other states.




Internal Tonnage: Goods that are shipped

from one destination in the county to

another destination within the county.


tonnage”, products that pass through the county

and are not picked up or dropped off in the county.

Marinette County includes US 8 in the northern part of the county, US 141 that runs from north to

south and US 41 that goes from the southern portion of the county to the city of Marinette. The

Wisconsin state highways include WIS 64 that travels east to west and WIS 180 that connects to USH

141 and travels east, then south. The east/west portion of the Canadian National Railway is still active

in the county as is the north/south portion of the Escanaba & Lake Superior Railroad line. The

Marinette Harbor is located in the eastern part of the county on Green Bay.

Marinette County is part of Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s North Country Corridor in

Connections 2030, the state’s long-range plan for Wisconsin’s transportation needs. Truck volume

along this corridor is low and is projected to be low to medium by 2030.


database 2011


1,115,570

1,954,272

23,713 136,905 392,080

0 165,138

5,857 0


Tonnage and Direction, 2011 Truck Rail Water

Terminating

Originating

Internal





















Machinery 38,308



Major products that were shipped by truck to and from

Marinette County were chemicals, lumber or wood

products, nonmetallic minerals, and farm products.

Marinette County did not ship out chemicals to other

counties, but they were a major product shipped in to the

county. The highest tonnage shipments of chemicals

included industrial organic chemicals, cyclic intermediates

or dyes, fertilizers, and plastic or synthetic fibers. Major

shippers of chemicals to Marinette County were the

Houston (TX) region, the New Orleans (LA) region, the

Baton Rouge (LA) region and the Beaumont (TX) region.

Most of the lumber or wood products that were shipped

from Marinette County were millwork or cabinetwork,

primary forest materials, and lumber or dimension stock.

Major recipients of these products were Brown County

(WI), Outagamie County (WI) and Winnebago County (WI).

Major lumber products shipped to Marinette County were

primary forest materials, wood products, and sawmill or

planing mill materials. Major shippers of wood products

were the Michigan Portion of the Green Bay (WI) region,

Forest County (WI) and Ontario (Canada).

Major nonmetallic minerals shipped from Marinette

County were broken stone or riprap, gravel or sand, and

chemical or fertilizer minerals. The top recipients were

Oneida County (WI), the Michigan Portion of the Green

Bay (WI) region, and Langlade County (WI). Marinette

County received a substantial amount of gravel or sand,

chemical or fertilizer minerals, and dimension stone in

2011. Most of these products came from Oconto County

(WI), Door County (WI) and Marinette County (WI).

The majority of farm products that were shipped from

Marinette County were grain, dairy farm products, and

field crops. Major recipients of these products included the

Northern Michigan region, Calumet County (WI), Portage

County (WI) and Dodge County (WI). Major farm products

shipped to Marinette County were field crops, grain, and

oil kernels. Major product origins were Portage County

(WI), Taylor County (WI) and Marathon County (WI).

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN MARINETTE COUNTY - TRUCK


database 2011



Rail Tons











Major products that were shipped to and

from Marinette County by rail in 2011

included pulp or paper products, chemicals,

lumber or wood products, and clay or stone

products.

No pulp or paper products were shipped

out of Marinette County in 2011, but they

were a major product shipped in to the

county. Pulp or paper mill products were

shipped from Alberta (Canada), the

Michigan Portion of the Green Bay (WI)

region and Nova Scotia.

The majority of chemicals that were

shipped to Marinette County were

potassium or sodium compound and

inorganic chemicals. Some major shippers

were Ramsey County (MN), Saskatoon

(Canada) and Cook County (IL). Marinette

County did not ship out any chemical

products.

The only lumber or wood product shipped

from Marinette County by rail was primary

forest materials, and it was shipped to

Dickinson County (MI), Wood County (WI)

and Outagamie County (WI). Primary forest

materials were also the only wood products

shipped to Marinette County from the

Northern Michigan region, Baraga County

(MI), Ontario (Canada) and Rusk County

(WI).

The only major clay or stone product

shipped from Marinette County was

processed nonmetal minerals that were

shipped to the Indiana Portion of the

Chicago (IL) region, the Wichita (KS) region

and Hennepin County (MN). Nonmetal

minerals were shipped to Marinette County

from Macon (GA).

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN MARINETTE COUNTY - RAIL


database 2011


Commodity Terminating Water Tons



Commodity Originating Water Tons


Marinette County shipped primary metal

products and nonmetallic minerals by

water in 2011.

The only primary metal product shipped

from Marinette County was blast furnace

or coke that was sent to Cook County (IL).

Blast furnace or coke was also the only

metal product shipped to Marinette

County from Cook County (IL), Quebec

(Canada) and the Indiana Portion of the

Chicago (IL) region.

Chemicals or fertilizer minerals were the

only nonmetallic minerals shipped by

water to Marinette County in 2011. These

products came from the Ontario (Canada)

region.

Source: IHS/Global Insight Transearch database

2011

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN MARINETTE COUNTY - WATER




Employees

Stora Enso North America

Niagara Paper Mills Gravel or Sand Primary Forest Materials

325

SPECIALTY Granules Pembine Minerals, Ground or Treated

Broken Stone or Riprap Gravel or Sand

120

Delaet Enterprises Ltd.

Wausaukee Logging Gravel or Sand Primary Forest Materials

20

Marinette Concrete Products

Marinette Ready-mixed Concrete Gravel or Sand Broken Stone or Riprap

20

Kimberly-Clark Marinette Sanitary Paper Products Pulp or Pulp Mill Products Gravel or Sand

250



Employees

Aacer Flooring LLC Peshtigo Home furnishings

Warehouse & Distribution Center Lumber or Dimension Stock

200

SPECIALTY Granules Pembine Minerals, Ground or Treated

Nonmetal Minerals, Processed

120

Stora Enso North America

Niagara Paper Mills Paper Pressed or Molded Pulp Goods

325

Winsert Inc. Marinette Durable Goods, Nec Warehouse & Distribution Center

150

Kimberly-Clark Marinette Sanitary Paper Products Paper Wallpaper

250


The tables below contain lists of Marinette County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.


ONEIDA COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE

ECONOMY

Oneida County is a predominantly rural county. Rhinelander, the county seat, serves as a commercial and retail center for the entire Northwoods. Located in the county’s northwest is Minocqua, an immensely popular year-round tourist haven and “Nature’s Original Waterpark.” Prominent employers in the county include:

Foster & Smith, Inc.

WAL-MART

Sacred Heart-St. Mary’s Hospital

Wausau Paper Mills LLC

Trig’s/Tula’s Signature Salon

Howard Young Medical Group

County of Oneida

School District of Rhinelander

Ministry Medical Group, Inc.

Nicolet Area Technical College



COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-

2010 %

Change

ONEIDA 24,427 35,998 47%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%




dollars

Oneida County: $45,184

Wisconsin: $52,374


Oneida County in a snapshot

35,998 people

Approximately 1,498 non-farm

businesses

Approximately 52


The Canadian National Railway

generally follows USH 8 and is

active east of Rhinelander.








database 2011

Rail yard in Rhinelander


Employment

Over 16,450 people are

employed in over 1,500

businesses in Oneida County.

Eighteen percent are


industries such as





and hunting.

Rail yard in Rhinelander

Industry


Average Employees

Agriculture Forestry Fishing

& Hunting 24 221

Mining Quarrying & Oil &

Gas Extraction 0 0

Utilities 13 84





Transportation &

Warehousing 54 450

Information 19 265



Leasing 58 193


Services 75 360

Management of Companies

& Enterprises 4 258


Services 69 476





Recreation 26 267


Services 191 1,804

Other Services Except



Unclassified 0 0


Source: Wisconsin

Department of Workforce

Development 2012



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 1,294,323

Michigan 56,392

Minnesota 45,208

Texas 33,687

Illinois 23,270

Iowa 10,602

Louisiana 5,600

Indiana 5,515

California 4,783



State Rail Tons


Illinois 15,468

Georgia 11,680

Tennessee 7,360


Major Trading Partners, Originating – Truck 2011

State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 165,877

Minnesota 58,910

Michigan 35,264


Illinois 11,376

California 9,151


Texas 7,635

Iowa 5,229

Florida 3,783

Major Trading Partners, Originating – Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons


Maryland 3,280

In 2011, almost two million tons of

commodities were shipped to, from and

within Oneida County. The majority of

products were shipped by truck. Even

though a small percentage of products

were shipped using rail, important products

that are vital to the county and region’s

economy use rail facilities.

95%

5%

Truck Rail


database 2011



The primary highway in Oneida County is US 8, located near a rail line that is partially served by the

Canadian National Railway Company. The Rhinelander-Oneida County airport is in the city of

Rhinelander and serves the region.

Truck volume along all segments of US 8 is low and is projected to be low to medium by 2030.


database 2011

1,532,345

345,999

3,934 75,588 27,640 0

Inbound Outbound Internal


Truck Rail

Definitions:




other states.


Commodities shipped out of

the county to other Wisconsin


Internal Tonnage: Goods that

are shipped from one

destination in the county to

another destination within the

county.



through the county and are not picked

up or dropped off in the county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal



Nonmetallic Minerals 1,031,056
















Rubber or Misc Plastics 19,690




Machinery 4,356

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN ONEIDA COUNTY - TRUCK

The highest tonnage products that were shipped to and

from Oneida County by truck in 2011 were nonmetallic

minerals, secondary traffic, lumber or wood products, and

clay or stone products.

Nonmetallic minerals were not shipped out of Oneida

County in 2011, but they were among the top products

shipped into the county by truck. Of these products,

broken stone or rip rap and gravel or sand were the top

commodities shipped to Oneida County from Langlade

County (WI), Marinette County (WI) and Forest County

(WI).

Major secondary traffic that was shipped from Oneida

County was warehouse and distribution products. Major

recipients included Ramsey County (MN), the Missouri

Portion of the Kansas City (MO) region and the Georgia

Portion of the Atlanta (GA) region. Other secondary traffic

products included warehousing and distribution products.

Heaviest shipments came from Outagamie County (WI),

Milwaukee County (WI) and Brown County (WI).

Major lumber or wood products shipped from Oneida

County were primary forest materials, miscellaneous

wood products, and wooden ware or flatware. Most

shipments were sent to Marathon County (WI), Portage

County (WI) and Shawano County (WI). Most lumber or

wood products shipped to Oneida County consisted of

primary forest materials, sawmill or planing materials, and

miscellaneous wood products. Major origins were

Gogebic County (MI), Houghton County (MI) and the

Minnesota Portion of the Duluth (MN) region.

Major clay or stone products shipped from Oneida County

were concrete products, ready-mix concrete,

miscellaneous glassware, and clay brick or tile. Most

shipments were sent to Dickinson County (MI), Marathon

County (WI) and Houghton County (MI). Major clay or

stone products shipped to Oneida County were ready-mix

concrete, concrete products, and cut stone or stone

products. Major shippers were Marathon County (WI),

Wood County (WI) and Vilas County (WI).


database 2011





Rail Tons


Coal 15,468




Major products that were shipped to

and from Oneida County by rail in 2011

were pulp or paper products, coal, and

clay or stone products.

Oneida County shipped paper products

by rail to Asheville (NC) and the

Maryland Portion of the Washington

(DC) region in 2011. Oneida County

received pulp or pulp mill products

from British Columbia (Canada) and

Alberta (Canada).

Oneida County received shipments of

coal from the Illinois Portion of the St.

Louis (MO) region.

Oneida County received processed

nonmetal minerals, such as perlite and

sand, from Macon (GA). Source: IHS/Global Insight Transearch database 2011

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN ONEIDA COUNTY - RAIL





Employees

Superior Diesel Rhinelander Petroleum Products Petroleum Refining Products

40

A-1 Fuel Oil Minocqua Petroleum Products Warehouse & Distribution Center

30

Wausau Paper Corp. Rhinelander Paper Mills Paper Wallpaper

521

Veolia Environmental Svc. Minocqua Scrap and Waste Materials


20

ETS-LINDGREN Minocqua Wood Products, Nec

Misc. Wood Products Wooden Ware or Flatware

55



Commodities

Employees

Superior Diesel Rhinelander Petroleum Products Petroleum Refining Products

40

A-1 Fuel Oil Minocqua Petroleum Products Petroleum Refining Products

30

Wausau Paper Corp. Rhinelander Paper Mills Gravel or Sand Primary Forest Materials

521

Musson Brothers Inc. Rhinelander Ready-mixed Concrete Gravel or Sand Broken Stone or Riprap

150

Gasco Three Lakes Commercial Physical Research

Petroleum Refining Products Warehouse & Distribution Center

15

The tables below contain lists of Oneida County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.


Economy

Price County is a predominantly rural county. Manufacturing is the county’s largest employment sector (with the machinery and wood product manufacturing as main subsectors). Prominent employers include:

Marquip LLC

Flambeau River Papers LLC

Flambeau Hospital Inc.

Phillips Plastics Corporation

School District of Phillips

Park Manor

County of Price

Caterpillar Forest Products, Inc.

Saint Croix of Park Falls, Ltd.

Weather Shield, Inc.



Price County in a snapshot

14,159 people


businesses

Approximately 45



highways used by thousands of

trucks every year

The Canadian National rail

lines east and north of Prentice

are active.








database 2011


COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-2010

% Change

PRICE 14,520 14,159 -2%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%


2007-2011 Median

household income, inflation

adjusted 2011 dollars

Price County: $41,458

Wisconsin: $52,374


PRICE COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE


Employment

About 5,655 people are

employed in approximately 510

businesses in Price County.

About 41 percent are employed

in freight-intensive industries

such as manufacturing, resource



agriculture, forestry, fishing and

hunting.

Industry


Average Employees

Agriculture Forestry

Fishing & Hunting S S


Gas Extraction S S

Utilities 3 34

Construction 27 73



Retail Trade 68 534

Transportation &

Warehousing 32 117

Information 8 55



Leasing 13 30


Services 24 172

Management of

Companies & Enterprises S S


Services S S



Assistance 39 797


Recreation 8 49


Services 40 305




Unclassified 0 0

S=Suppressed

Log crane trucks, Price County


Workforce Development, 2012



State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 267,865

Michigan 66,292

Minnesota 65,780

Texas 16,533

Illinois 8,306

Louisiana 7,643

Iowa 4,050

Arizona 3,265

California 3,044

Missouri 2,434


State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 264,186

Minnesota 32,097

Texas 20,124


Michigan 13,756

New York 11,767

Illinois 11,411


Florida 7,630

Iowa 7,169


State Rail Tons

Minnesota 20,440

Iowa 17,160

Wisconsin 16,480

Alabama 3,640

Mississippi 3,200

Kentucky 2,000

Major Trading Partners, Originating – Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons

Wisconsin 123,200

Illinois 26,840


Minnesota 5,800

Kentucky 2,880


Michigan 2,400

79% 21%

Truck Rail Over one million tons of products were

shipped to, from and within Price

County in 2011. Nearly 80 percent of

that freight was shipped by truck and 20

percent by rail.

Major trading partners included other

Wisconsin counties, Michigan,

Minnesota, Iowa, Texas and Illinois.



469,361 457,186

7,115

69,290

174,760

0



Truck Rail

Definitions:




other states.



the county to other


states.




another destination within

the county.


“overhead tonnage”, products that

pass through the county and are not

picked up or dropped off in the

county.



Price County is part of the North Country Corridor in the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s

long-range plan. Major roadways in the county include US 8, WIS 13 and WIS 111. The north/south

Canadian National Railway line is active as is the line that goes east from Prentice.

The truck volume is low and is projected to be low to medium by 2030.


database 2011

Terminating

Originating Internal



















Machinery 12,159





MAJOR COMMODITIES IN PRICE COUNTY – TRUCK

Major products that were shipped to and

from Price County by truck in 2011

included lumber or wood products, farm

products, and nonmetallic minerals.

Major lumber or wood products shipped

from Price County were sawmill or planing

mill materials, miscellaneous wood

products, and lumber or dimension stock

shipped to Marathon County (WI), Wood

County (WI) and Ontario (Canada). Major

lumber or wood products shipped to Price

County included primary forest materials,

sawmill or planing mill materials, and

miscellaneous wood products from

Gogebic County (MI), the Minnesota

Portion of the Duluth (MN) region and St.

Louis County (MN).

Major farm products shipped from Price

County included field crops, dairy farm

products, and grain shipped to Portage

County (WI), St. Croix County (WI) and

Monroe County (WI). Farm products

shipped to Price County included grain,

field crops, and nut or seed oils from the

Minnesota Portion of the Minneapolis

(MN) region, St. Croix County (WI) and


Major nonmetallic minerals shipped from

Price County in 2011 were broken stone or

riprap shipped to Vilas County (WI),

Washburn County (WI) and Sawyer County

(WI). Major nonmetallic minerals shipped

to Price County in 2011 were gravel or

sand and broken stone or riprap.


2011



Rail Tons




Commodity Originating Rail

Tons



Major products shipped to and from Price

County by rail in 2011 were lumber or

wood products, food or kindred products,

and pulp or paper products.


from Price County were primary forest

materials and lumber or dimension stock

that was shipped to Wood County (WI),

Outagamie County (WI), Ontario (Canada)

and the Michigan Portion of the Green Bay

(WI) region. Major lumber or wood

products shipped to Price County were

primary forest materials and lumber or

dimension stock from St. Louis County

(MN), Sawyer County (WI) and the

Birmingham (AL) region.

The only pulp or paper products shipped

out of Price County by rail were pulp or

pulp mill products and paper. Major

recipients of these products were the

Illinois Portion of the Chicago (IL) region,

the Massachusetts Portion of the Boston

(MA) region, and Dakota County (MN). No

pulp or paper products were shipped to

Price County in 2011.

The only food product shipped to Price

County by rail was wet corn milling or milo

from the Cedar Rapids (IA) region. No food

or kindred products were shipped from

Price County.


2011

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN PRICE COUNTY – RAIL




Employees

Flambeau River Papers LLC Park Falls Paper Mills Paper Wallpaper

350

Georgia-Pacific Corp. Phillips Sawmills and Planing Mills, General

Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill Misc. Wood Products

90

John A. Biewer Co. of Wisconsin Inc.

Prentice Sawmills and Planing Mills, General

Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill Lumber or Dimension Stock

100

United Pride Dairy Phillips Dairy Farms Dairy Farm Products 35

Park Falls Hardwoods Park Falls Sawmills and Planing Mills, General

Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill Lumber or Dimension Stock

68



Employees

Flambeau River Papers LLC Park Falls Paper Mills Gravel or Sand Primary Forest Materials

350

John A. Biewer Co. of Wisconsin Inc.

Prentice Sawmills and Planing Mills


100

Georgia-Pacific Corp. Phillips Sawmills and Planing Mills


90

Park Falls Hardwoods Park Falls Sawmills and Planing Mills


68

Marquip Ward United Phillips Converted Paper Products

Pulp or Pulp Mill Products Paper

700


The tables below contain lists of Price County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.


Economy

Rusk County’s economy is predominated by

manufacturing, with the wood products subsector

accounting for over half of the county’s

manufacturing employment. Prominent employers

in the county include:

County of Rusk

Weather Shield Manufacturing

Jeld-Wen Windows & Doors

Rockwell Automation, Inc.

School District of Ladysmith

Walmart

Indianhead Community Action Agency

School District of Flambeau

5-R Processors, Ltd.

Artisans, Inc.


Development 2012


COUNTY CENSUS 1970

CENSUS 2010

1970-2010 % Change

RUSK 14,238 14,755 4%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%




dollars

Rusk County: $38,821

Wisconsin: $52,374


Rusk County in a snapshot

14,755 people

Approximately 328 non-

farm businesses

Approximately 27


Interstate, state and

county highways used by

thousands of trucks every

year

As of July 2013, part of

the east-west rail line has

been reactivated.

Most freight is



in Wisconsin.




2012, IHS/Global Insight


RUSK COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE


Employment

More than 4,820 people are

employed in approximately 339

businesses in Rusk County.

Thirty percent are employed in

freight-intensive industries

such as manufacturing,

resource extraction,

construction, wholesale trade,

and agriculture, forestry,

fishing and hunting.

Industry


Average Employees

Agriculture Forestry Fishing

& Hunting S S


Gas Extraction S S

Utilities S S

Construction 30 59


Wholesale Trade S S

Retail Trade 44 601

Transportation &

Warehousing 28 248

Information 7 68



Leasing 5 14


Services S S

Management of Companies

& Enterprises S S


Services 12 148



Assistance 23 312


Recreation 3 21


Services 30 249




Unclassified 0 0

S=Information is suppressed





State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 262,315

Minnesota 93,487

Illinois 7,884

Michigan 6,350

Iowa 6,023

Indiana 4,371

Texas 2,447

Louisiana 2,263


Arizona 2,167


State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 243,108

Minnesota 167,495

Texas 42,318

New York 26,144

Florida 13,610

New Jersey 13,319

Louisiana 11,152


Pennsylvania 6,511

Illinois 4,774

Major Trading Partner, Originating – Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons

Wisconsin 45,800

Major Trading Partner, Terminating – Rail, 2011

State Rail Tons


95%

5%

Truck Rail Over one million tons of goods were

shipped to, from and within Rusk

County in 2011. Most products were

shipped by truck, and around five

percent was shipped by rail.

Rusk County’s major trading partners

were other Wisconsin counties,

Minnesota, Texas and New York.


database 2011



The primary highway in Rusk County is US 8. The county has been served by freight rail in the past,

but some rail stations are currently out of service.

Rusk County is in the North Country Corridor of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s

long- range plan, Connections 2030. Truck volume along all segments of US 8 is low and is projected

to be low to medium by 2030.


database

414,040

599,328

5,216 2,640 45,800

0



Truck Rail

Definitions:




other states.



the county to other


states.





the county.





county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal




















Electrical Equipment 1,706


Food or Kindred Products 948

Furniture or Fixtures 941

MAJOR COMMODITIES IN RUSK COUNTY - TRUCK

The main commodities that were shipped

to and from Rusk County by truck in 2011

included farm products, nonmetallic

minerals, and lumber or wood products.

Major farm products shipped from Rusk

County included dairy farm products,

field crops, and grains to Hennepin

County (MN), the Minnesota Portion of

the Minneapolis (MN) region and the

Minnesota Portion of the Rochester (MN)

region. Farm products shipped to Rusk

County were mostly made up of grain,

field crops, and nut or seed oils from the

Minnesota Portion of the Minneapolis

(MN) region, the Minnesota Portion of

Rochester (MN) region, and Polk County

(WI).

Nonmetallic minerals were not shipped

from Rusk County in 2011. Major

nonmetallic minerals shipped to Rusk

County were gravel or sand, broken

stone or riprap, and chemical or fertilizer

minerals from Sawyer County (WI),

Marathon County (WI) and Pierce County

(WI).


from Rusk County were wood products,

primary forest materials, and lumber or

dimension stock to the New York (NY)

region, the Houston (TX) region and

Marathon County (WI). Major lumber or

wood products shipped to Rusk County

were from the Minnesota Portion of the

Minneapolis (MN) region, the Minnesota

Portion of the Duluth (MN) region, and

Burnett County (WI).


2011



Rail Tons




Rusk County received rail

shipments of petroleum or coal

products from Alberta (Canada) in

2011.

Rusk County shipped primary forest

materials by rail to Wood County

(WI) and Marinette County (WI).


MAJOR COMMODITIES IN RUSK COUNTY - RAIL




Employees

Sheldon Co-Op Svc. Sheldon Petroleum Products, Nec

Warehouse & Distribution Center Petroleum Refining Products

30

Besse Lumber Co. Ladysmith Sawmills and Planing Mills, General

Lumber or Dimension Stock Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill

20

Clearwater Paper Corp. Ladysmith Paper Mills Paper Wallpaper

80

Hi Acres Dairy Farm Bruce Dairy Farms Dairy Farm Products 13

Joe or Mary Thorgerson Sheldon Dairy Farms Dairy Farm Products 13



Employees

Sheldon Co-Op Svc. Sheldon Petroleum Products

Petroleum Refining Products Liquefied Gases, Coal or Petroleum

30

Rands Trucking Ladysmith Trucking, Except Local

Gravel or Sand Petroleum Refining Products

70

Weather Shield Mfg. Ladysmith Metal Doors, Sash and Trim

Primary Iron or Steel Products Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill

900

JELD-WEN Windows & Doors

Hawkins Millwork Misc. Sawmill or Planing Mill Primary Forest Materials

386

Besse Lumber Co. Ladysmith Sawmills and Planing Mills, General


20


The tables below contain lists of Rusk County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.


Economy

Vilas County has a tourism- and recreation-based

economy, with more lakes, rivers and streams

than any other Wisconsin county. The county’s

natural resources make it a highly popular visitor

and retirement destination. Natural resource-

based businesses, such as timber producers, are

important economic drivers in Vilas County. Major

employers include:

Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior

Chippewa

Lake of the Torches Casino

Northland Pines School District

County of Vilas

Trig’s/Tulas’s Signature Salon

Lac de Flambeau Memorial Hospital, Inc.

Eagle River Memorial Hospital, Inc.

Pukall Lumber Company, Inc.

JT #1 Woodruff Arbor Vitae School

Lillian Kerr Healthcare Center


Development 2012


COUNTY CENSUS

1970

CENSUS

2010

1970-

2010 %

Change

VILAS 10,958 21,430 96%

STATE TOTAL 4,419,791 5,688,996 29%

U.S. Census Bureau 2010



dollars

Vilas County: $41,195

Wisconsin: $52,374

U.S. Census Bureau

Vilas County in a snapshot

21,430 people

Approximately 985 non-

farm businesses

Approximately 30


Interstate, state and

county highways used by

thousands of trucks every

year

Most freight is



in Wisconsin.




2012, IHS/ Global Insight


VILAS COUNTY FREIGHT PROFILE


Employment

Over 7,270 people are

employed in about 992

businesses in Vilas County.

About 15 percent are employed

in freight-intensive industries

such as manufacturing, resource



agriculture, forestry, fishing and

hunting.

Industry


Average Employees

Agriculture Forestry

Fishing & Hunting S S


Gas Extraction S S

Utilities 11 41




Retail Trade 127 975

Trans & Warehousing 30 148

Information 13 85



Leasing 21 79


Services S S

Management of

Companies & Enterprises S S


Services 44 190



Assistance 58 477


Recreation 32 605


Services 192 1,434




Unclassified 0 0






State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 308,284

Michigan 179,941

Minnesota 22,117

Illinois 5,531

Texas 4,006

California 3,817

Iowa 3,703

Massachusetts 3,628

Indiana 2,367

Idaho 2,199


State Truck Tons

Wisconsin 79,028

Michigan 34,970

Minnesota 11,300

New York 4,622

Florida 3,971

Texas 2,902

California 1,887

Massachusetts 1,320

Nevada 1,130

Connecticut 708

All freight that was shipped to, from and

within Vilas County went by truck. Even

though companies don’t use rail directly, the

county’s economic and business activity is still

impacted when other counties lose rail

service.

Major trading partners with Vilas County

were other Wisconsin counties, Michigan and

Minnesota.




Major highways in Vilas County include US 51 and WIS 17. There are no rail lines in the county.

Vilas County is in the Wisconsin River Corridor of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation’s long-

range transportation plan, Connections 2030. Truck traffic in this part of the corridor is low and is

expected to remain low by 2030.


database

560,625

147,838

3,202 0 0 0


Tonnage and Direction, 2011 Truck Rail

Definitions:




other states.



the county to other


states.





the county.





county.


Terminating

Originating

Internal






















Chemicals or Allied Products 902


MAJOR COMMODITIES IN VILAS COUNTY - TRUCK

Major products that were shipped to and from

Vilas County by truck in 2011 were nonmetallic

minerals, lumber or wood products, secondary

traffic, and clay, concrete, glass or stone

products.

No nonmetallic minerals were shipped from

Vilas County in 2011. Major nonmetallic minerals

shipped to Vilas County were gravel or sand and

broken stone or riprap from Iron County (WI),

Baraga County (MI) and Keweenaw County (MI).

Major lumber or wood products shipped from

Vilas County were sawmill or planing mill

products, primary forest materials and lumber or

dimension stock to Marathon County (WI),

Lincoln County (WI) and the New York (NY)

region. Lumber or wood products shipped to

Vilas County were primary forest materials,

sawmill or planing mill materials, and wood or

box shooks from Houghton County (MI), Gogebic

County (MI) and the Minnesota Portion of the

Duluth (MN) region.

A small amount of secondary traffic, such as

warehouse products, was shipped from Vilas

County to Roanoke (VA) region, Austin (TX) and

New York (NY). Warehouse products were

shipped to Vilas County from Outagamie County

(WI), Ramsey County (MN) and the Minnesota

Portion of the Fargo (SD) region.

Major clay or stone products shipped from Vilas

County were ready-mix concrete and cut stone

or stone products that were sent to Dickinson

County (MI), Houghton County (MI) and

Marathon County (WI). Major clay or stone

products shipped to Vilas County were ready-mix

concrete, concrete products, and Portland

cement shipped from Marathon County (WI),

Vilas County (WI) and Baraga County (MI).


database 2011





Employees

Ritchie Propane Minocqua Petroleum

Products, Nec Warehouse &

Distribution Center 30

Northern Lakes Concrete Inc. Eagle River Lumber and Other Building Materials

Ready-mix Concrete, Wet

Gravel or Sand 20

Miller Beer of the Northwoods Eagle River Beer and Ale Warehouse &

Distribution Center 25

Leica Biosystems Eagle River Professional

Equipment, Nec

Warehouse & Distribution Center Engineering, Lab or

Scientific Equipment

20

Simpson Electric Co. Lac Du

Flambeau

Surgical and Medical

Instruments

Warehouse & Distribution Center Electric Measuring

Instruments

140



Employees

Ritchie Propane Minocqua Petroleum Products

Petroleum Refining Products

30

Northern Lakes Concrete Inc. Eagle River Lumber and Other Building Materials

Gravel or Sand Broken Stone or Riprap

20

Alpha Coal Sales Co. Lac Du Flambeau

Bituminous Coal and Lignite-surface Mining

Broken Stone or Riprap Gravel or Sand

32

Eagle Technologies Co. Eagle River Aircraft Parts and Equipment

Gravel or Sand Warehouse & Distribution Center

19

Phelps Cast Phelps Steel Foundries Gravel or Sand Bituminous Coal

22


The tables below are lists of Vilas County’s largest freight generators and receivers in 2010.



Appendix 3: County Profiles

Please see the end of this appendix for definitions of terms.

BARRON COUNTY

Barron County is located in northwestern Wisconsin and is served by the West Central

Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (http://wcwrpc.org/). The city of Barron is the county

seat. Other municipalities are the cities of Chetek, Cumberland and Rice Lake, and the village

of Cameron.

Population

In 2010, 45,870 people lived in Barron County.

Employment

Approximately 20,282 people worked in Barron County in about 1,328 businesses in 2012.

Thirty percent of the employed population worked in freight-dependent industries such as

manufacturing, construction and wholesale trade. The largest employers were in

manufacturing, retail trade, construction, wholesale trade, professional and technical services,

and service industries such as public administration, food, arts, entertainment and health care.

Transportation

Barron County is served by several federal and state highways. US 53, US 63 and WIS

25 travel north and south. US 8 and WIS 48 travel east and west.

Two rail corridors, one running north/south through the county and the other, east/west,

intersect in Cameron. The corridors are segmented by operator status, active vs.

inactive status, and rail vs. trail status. Until late 2012, most of the rail lines in Barron

County were not in service.

Sources

Population: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010

Employment: Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, 2012

Commodity flow: IHS/Global Insight, Transearch freight database, 2011

http://wcwrpc.org/


Progressive Rail operates the rail line segment extending south from Cameron all the

way to Chippewa County; Canadian National Railway (CN) operates the remainder. A

portion of CN’s line was recently renovated in order to accommodate the shipment of

“frac sand” (industrial sand) to oil and natural gas drilling operations in North Dakota,

Texas and Pennsylvania. Those previously-inactive segments are located between

Ladysmith and Cameron, and between Barron and Poskin.

Status of the North/South Corridor

The segment beginning at the north county line and extending south to Rice Lake is a

Rails-to-Trails section. The entire segment of rail line extending from Rice Lake south,

through Cameron and beyond the south county line, is active.

Status of the East/West Corridor

The rail segment beginning at the east county line and extending west is active through

Cameron and onward to Poskin. The rail line between Poskin westerly to Almena is out

of service. The segment from Almena to the west county line is a Rails-to-Trails section.

Barron County has a municipal airport in each of the cities of Barron, Chetek and

Cumberland. There is also a regional airport in Rice Lake, and a seaplane base in

Cumberland.

Commodity Flow

In 2011, the majority of commodities shipped to and from Barron County businesses was

shipped by truck. Most of the rest of the freight was shipped by rail. The combined value of all

freight shipped in (just over 1.4 million tons) was nearly $1.2 billion. The total value of the

freight shipped out (1.5 million tons) was more than $1.5 billion.

Inbound Freight

The top three products (in terms of tonnage) shipped into Barron County by truck were

farm products, nonmetallic minerals, and food or kindred products. Top state origins

were other Wisconsin counties, Minnesota and Texas. Top local origins were Polk

County (WI), the Minnesota Portion of Minneapolis Business Economic Area (BEA) and

the Minnesota Portion of Rochester BEA.


Food or kindred products, lumber or wood products, and chemical or allied products

were top products shipped to Barron County by rail. Top state/province origins were

Minnesota, Saskatchewan (Canada) and British Columbia (Canada). Top local origins

were the Minnesota Portion of Minneapolis BEA, the Saskatoon, Saskatchewan

(Canada) Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) and Non-Census Metropolitan Area (Non-

CMA) British Columbia (Canada).

Outbound Freight

The top three commodities shipped from Barron County by truck were farm products,

food or kindred products, and lumber or wood products. Top state destinations were

Minnesota, other Wisconsin counties and Iowa, while top local destinations were the

Minnesota Portion of Minneapolis BEA, the Minnesota Portion of Rochester BEA and St.

Louis County (MN).

Barron County shipped nonmetallic minerals and transportation equipment by rail.

Major state destinations were Texas and Illinois, and major local destinations were the

San Antonio (TX) BEA and Cook County (IL).

FLORENCE COUNTY

Florence County is located in northeastern Wisconsin, separated from Michigan’s Upper

Peninsula by the Brule River. The town of Florence is the county seat. Other communities

include Aurora, Fence, Long Lake and Tipler. It is served by the Bay Lake Regional Planning

Commission (http://www.baylakerpc.org/).

Population

Florence County’s population in 2010 was 4,423 people.

Employment

In 2012, approximately 964 people were employed in Florence County in about 169 businesses.

Around 20 percent of workers were employed in freight-intensive industries such as

manufacturing, construction and wholesale trade. Major industries in Florence County were

public administration, leisure and hospitality, manufacturing, education, health, trade,

transportation and utilities.

http://www.baylakerpc.org/


Transportation

A number of highways serve residents and employees in Florence County. The routes

of US 2 and US 141 cut across and overlap in the northeast corner of the county, linking

the town of Florence with Iron Mountain, Michigan. WIS 70 runs east and west in the

northern part of the county, WIS 101 is a north/south route in the middle of the county,

and WIS 139 parallels the county’s western border.

Multiple rail lines are located a few miles south and east of Florence County. The

Escanaba and Lake Superior Railroad operates an active line to the east, and Canadian

National Railway operates both active and inactive segments to the south. The county

contains a section of a Rails-to-Trails corridor that extends through several counties,

from the state line in the north to the city of Gillett (Oconto County) in the south.

Florence County has access to a major airport close to its east county line in nearby Iron

Mountain, Michigan.

Commodity Flow

All commodities that were shipped to and from Florence County businesses in 2011 were sent

by truck. Over 85,000 tons of goods, worth $35,000,000, were shipped to Florence County,

while over 145,000 tons of goods, worth over $50,000,000, were shipped out of the county.

Inbound Freight

Major products shipped into Florence County were lumber or wood products, farm

products, and nonmetallic minerals. The major sources for the inbound freight were

other Wisconsin counties, the states of Michigan and Minnesota, and the Michigan

portion of Green Bay Business Economic Area (BEA).

Outbound Freight

Major commodities shipped from Florence County were lumber or wood products, farm

products, and fabricated metal products. Major state recipients were other Wisconsin

counties, and Michigan and Florida. Major local recipients were Brown County,

Outagamie County and Calumet County, all in Wisconsin.


FOREST COUNTY

Forest County is situated in northeastern Wisconsin, with its northern boundary lying on the

border of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. The city of Crandon is the county seat. Other

communities are Argonne, Armstrong Creek, Laona, Mole Lake and Wabeno. It is one of the

counties served by the North Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission

(http://www.ncwrpc.org/).

Population

As of 2010, Forest County was home to 9,304 people.

Employment

Approximately 3,339 people were employed in about 302 businesses in Forest County in 2012,

mostly in service, retail trade and manufacturing. Approximately 10 percent were employed in

freight-dependent industries such as construction or manufacturing.

Transportation

US 8 runs east and west through Forest County, as does WIS 70. WIS 32, WIS 52, WIS

55 and WIS 139 are north/south routes.

Canadian National Railway owns railroad track in an east/west corridor through the

county, along with a segment that connects the main rail line to Crandon, but does not

provide any service. Forest County also contains multiple segments of Rails-to-Trails

corridors. One trail extends from Crandon south through Langlade County. Another trail

begins in Florence County at the north state line and travels through Forest County on

its way to the city of Gillett (Oconto County) in the south.

Forest County has a municipal airport in Crandon and can access commercial airline

service in nearby Rhinelander (Oneida County), less than 30 miles from Forest County’s

west county line.

Commodity Flow

All of the freight that moved into and out of Forest County in 2011 was transported by truck.

http://www.ncwrpc.org/


Inbound Freight

Over 515,000 tons of products, worth around $124 million, were shipped into the county.

Major incoming commodities were lumber or wood products, nonmetallic minerals, and

secondary traffic (commodities moving to and from warehouses and distribution

centers). Major state origins were other Wisconsin counties, Michigan and Minnesota.

Major local origins were Langlade County (WI), Gogebic County (MI) and the Michigan

Portion of Green Bay Business Economic Area (BEA).

Outbound Freight

Over 177,000 tons of commodities, worth over $77 million, were shipped out of the

county. Major outgoing commodities were lumber or wood products, nonmetallic

minerals, and farm products. Major state recipients of Forest County freight were other

counties in Wisconsin, and Michigan and Minnesota. Major local destinations were the

Wisconsin counties of Oneida, Brown and Marathon.

LANGLADE COUNTY

Langlade County is located near the center of Wisconsin’s northeast quadrant. The city of

Antigo is the county seat. Other municipalities include Elcho, Langlade, Norwood and White

Lake. Langlade County lies within the service area of the North Central Wisconsin Regional

Planning Commission (http://www.ncwrpc.org/).

Population

The population of Langlade County was 19,977 people as of 2010.

Employment

Approximately 7,474 workers were employed in about 614 businesses in Langlade County in

2012. Most people were employed in public administration, health care, education,

manufacturing and retail trade. About 26 percent of workers were employed in freight-

dependent industries such as construction, manufacturing and wholesale trade.



Transportation

US 45 and WIS 47 overlap and travel north and south through the county. WIS 52 and

WIS 55 are north/south routes that travel in opposite diagonal directions, and WIS 64

runs east and west.

There are no rail lines in Langlade County, but there are active and inactive rail

segments in adjacent counties to the north and west. Langlade County is home to the

southern half of the Rails-to-Trails recreational corridor that begins in Crandon (Forest

County).

The Langlade County Airport is located just east of Antigo.

Commodity Flow

All products that were shipped into and out of Langlade County businesses in 2011 were

shipped by truck.

Inbound Freight

More than 630,000 tons of products were shipped to the county, valued at more than

$425 million. Major products shipped to Langlade County were nonmetallic minerals,

farm products, and lumber or wood products. Major state origins were other Wisconsin

counties, Michigan and Texas. Major local destinations included businesses in Langlade

County, Marinette County and Brown County, all in Wisconsin.

Outbound Freight

Over 3 million tons of goods were shipped from Langlade County, valued at $618 million.

Major commodities shipped from Langlade County were nonmetallic minerals, farm

products, and lumber or wood products. Major state destinations were other counties in

Wisconsin, and Michigan and Minnesota. Major local destinations were the Wisconsin

counties of Wood, Marathon and Oneida.


LINCOLN COUNTY

Lincoln County is located in the central part of northern Wisconsin, and is served by the North

Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (http://www.ncwrpc.org/). The city of Merrill

is the county seat. Other communities include the city of Tomahawk and the towns of Bradley,

Pine River, Rock Falls and Scott.

Population

The county’s population was 28,743 people in 2010.

Employment

In 2012, there were about 10,173 employed individuals in Lincoln County in about 718

businesses. Freight-dependent industries such as manufacturing, construction and wholesale

trade employed 31 percent of the workers in Lincoln County. The county’s major industries

were manufacturing, retail trade, public administration, health, education, and administrative

services.

Transportation

Two federal highways serve Lincoln County: US 8 travels along part of the county’s

northern border, and US 51 runs north and south, roughly bisecting the county. WIS 107

also travels north and south, nearly parallel to US 51. Other highways are WIS 17,

which runs northeast from Merrill, and the east/west routes of WIS 86 in the north and

WIS 64 in the south.

The county’s rail lines are active and have multiple routes in and through the county.

They are located near the highway corridors of US 8 and US 51 and are separately

operated by Canadian National Railway and Tomahawk Railway. There is also a short

Rails-to-Trails section near Tomahawk.

Lincoln County has a municipal airport in Merrill and a regional airport in Tomahawk. In

addition, the Central Wisconsin Airport is located about 40 miles south of the south

county line, in Mosinee (Marathon County).



Commodity Flow

In 2011, about 874,000 tons of freight were transported into Lincoln County by truck, and over

183,000 tons were transported by rail. Of the freight that was shipped out, nearly 717,000 tons

were shipped by truck, and over 350,000 tons were shipped by rail.

Inbound Freight

Of the products that were shipped to Lincoln County, almost 83 percent was shipped by

truck, and over 17 percent was shipped by rail. Truck products were valued at more

than $550 million, and rail products were valued at over $51 million.

Major commodities shipped to Lincoln County by truck included nonmetallic minerals,

lumber or wood products, and secondary traffic (commodities moving to and from

warehouses and distribution centers). Major state origins were other Wisconsin

counties, Michigan and Minnesota. Major local destinations were Marathon County (WI),

Langlade County (WI) and Gogebic County (MI).

Major commodities shipped to Lincoln County by rail included coal, chemicals or allied

products, and pulp or paper products. Major state/province origins were Kentucky,

Alberta (Canada) and Virginia while major local origins were the Kentucky Portion of

Evansville (IN) Business Economic Area (BEA), the Richmond (VA) BEA, and Non-

Census Metropolitan Area (Non-CMA) Alberta (Canada).

Outbound Freight

Of the commodities that were shipped from Lincoln County, over 67 percent was

shipped by truck, and almost 33 percent was shipped by rail. Truck products were

valued at almost $750 million while rail products were valued at almost $240 million.

Major commodities shipped from Lincoln County by truck were lumber or wood

products, farm products, and pulp or paper products. Major state destinations included

other Wisconsin counties, Minnesota and Illinois. Major local destinations were Brown

County (WI), the Minnesota Portion of Minneapolis BEA, and Ramsey County (MN).

Major commodities shipped by rail from county businesses were pulp or paper products

and lumber or wood products. Major state destinations were other Wisconsin counties,


Missouri and Illinois. Major local destinations were the Missouri Portion of St. Louis

BEA, Cook County (IL) and the Nebraska Portion of Omaha BEA.

MARINETTE COUNTY Marinette County is in northeastern Wisconsin, on the border of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.

Its southeastern corner is on the shoreline of Lake Michigan, on the west shore of Green Bay.

The city of Marinette, the county seat, sits directly across the Menominee River from

Menominee, Michigan. Other municipalities in Marinette County include Crivitz, Goodman,

Pembine, Peshtigo and Porterfield. The county is served by the Bay Lake Regional Planning

Commission (http://www.baylakerpc.org/).

Population

As of 2010, Marinette County was home to 41,749 people.

Employment

Around 18,877 people were employed in about 1,307 businesses in Marinette County in 2012.

Major employers were in manufacturing, retail trade, public administration, health and

education. Forty percent of the workers were employed in freight-dependent industries such as

agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, resource extraction, construction, manufacturing and

wholesale trade.

Transportation

Three U.S. highways and two state highways run through Marinette County. The

north/south routes are US 141 in the middle of the county and US 41 in the southeast

corner. The east/west routes are US 8 in the north and WIS 64 in the south. WIS 180 is

located entirely within Marinette County and links Wausaukee with the city of Marinette.

Canadian National Railway (CN) operates active lines in the northern and southern ends

of Marinette County. The Escanaba and Lake Superior Railroad also operates in the

county, along routes that connect with CN at points within and beyond Marinette County.

http://www.baylakerpc.org/


The county has a municipal airport in Crivitz, and the Menominee-Marinette Twin County

Airport is located in neighboring Menominee, Michigan. In addition, the Austin Straubel

International Airport, near the city of Green Bay (Brown County), is located about 60

miles southwest of the city of Marinette.

Commodity Flow

About 80 percent of the freight that was transported to and from Marinette County businesses in

2011 was carried by truck; most of the rest was shipped by rail. Of the freight tonnage that was

shipped into the county, about 1.1 million tons were sent by truck, nearly 137,000 by rail and

just over 165,000 by water. Of the outbound freight tonnage, nearly 2 million tons were sent by

truck, just over 392,000 by rail and nearly 5,900 by water.

Inbound Freight

Almost 80 percent of freight transported to Marinette County was shipped by truck,

valued at over $1 billion. Almost 10 percent was shipped by rail, valued at around $55

million, and almost 12 percent of freight was shipped by water, valued at a little more

than $101 million.

Major commodities shipped to Marinette County by truck included chemicals or allied

products, lumber or wood products, and secondary traffic (commodities moving to and

from warehouses and distribution centers). Major origin states were other Wisconsin

counties, Michigan and Texas. Major local origins were the Houston (TX) Business

Economic Area (BEA), the Michigan Portion of Green Bay BEA, and Oconto County

(WI).

Major commodities shipped to Marinette County by rail included pulp or paper products,

chemical or allied products, and lumber or wood products. Major state/province origins

were Michigan, Alberta (Canada) and Saskatchewan (Canada). Major local origins were

Non-Census Metropolitan Area (Non-CMA) Alberta (Canada), the Michigan Portion of

Green Bay BEA, and Non-CMA Ontario (Canada).

Primary metal products and nonmetallic minerals were the only commodities shipped to

Marinette County by water. State/province origins were Illinois, Ontario (Canada),


Quebec (Canada) and Indiana. Major local origins were Cook County (IL), Non-CMA

Quebec (Canada) and Non-CMA Ontario (Canada).

Outbound Freight

Over 80 percent of Marinette County’s outgoing freight was shipped by truck, valued at

over $2 billion, while almost 17 percent was shipped by rail, valued at almost $50 million.

Major commodities shipped from Marinette County by truck were nonmetallic minerals,

farm products, and lumber or wood products. Major states receiving freight from

Marinette County were other Wisconsin counties, Michigan and Illinois. Major local

recipients were Oneida County (WI), the Michigan Portion of Green Bay BEA, and

Langlade County (WI).

Commodities shipped from Marinette County by rail were clay/concrete/glass/stone,

lumber or wood products, and transportation equipment. Major state destinations were

Indiana, Kansas and Michigan; major local destinations were the Indiana Portion of

Chicago BEA, the Kansas Portion of Wichita BEA, and Dickinson County (MI).

The only commodity that was shipped by water from Marinette County was primary

metal products shipped to Cook County (IL).

ONEIDA COUNTY

Rhinelander is the county seat of this north-central Wisconsin county. Other cities and towns

include Minocqua, Newbold, Three Lakes, Woodboro and Woodruff. The county is served by

the North Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (http://www.ncwrpc.org/).

Population

As of 2010, Oneida County was home to 35,998 people.

Employment

Approximately 16,452 people in Oneida County were employed in about 1,509 establishments

in 2012. Major industries in the county included retail trade, manufacturing, public

administration, health and education. Eighteen percent of employees were working in freight-



intensive industries such as manufacturing, resource extraction, construction, wholesale trade,

and agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting.

Transportation

Several highways crisscross Oneida County. The north/south routes are US 45, US 51,

WIS 17, WIS 32 and WIS 47. The east/west routes are US 8 in the southern part of the

county and WIS 70 which dips in and out along the north county line.

Canadian National Railway (CN) operates an east/west rail line through the county. The

segment extending from the east county line to Rhinelander is out of service. The

segment extending west from Rhinelander through the west county line is active. Half of

this western stretch is located along or just south of Oneida County’s southern border, its

route weaving in and out of adjacent Lincoln County. In Lincoln County, a second active

CN line intersects with this route, providing rail service to the south.

The county’s two airports are the Rhinelander-Oneida County Airport and the Three

Lakes Municipal Airport. In addition, the Lakeland Linder Regional Airport in neighboring

Vilas County is located less than five miles north of Woodruff.

Commodity Flow

In 2011, the majority of Oneida County’s terminating and originating freight commodities was

shipped by truck. About 95 percent (over 1.5 million tons) of terminating freight into the county

was shipped by truck, and the rest was shipped by rail. The combined value of all inbound

freight was nearly $647 million. About 93 percent (346,000 tons) of originating freight from the

county was shipped by truck, and the rest was shipped by rail. The total value of all outbound

freight was over $532 million.

Inbound Freight

The major commodities that were shipped by truck to Oneida County businesses

included nonmetallic minerals, secondary traffic (commodities moving to and from

warehouses and distribution centers), and clay/concrete/glass/stone. Major state origins

were other Wisconsin counties, Michigan and Minnesota. Major local origins were the

Wisconsin counties of Langlade, Marinette and Forest.


Paper and pulp products, coal, and clay/concrete/glass/stone were major commodities

shipped to Oneida County businesses by rail. Major state/province origins were British

Columbia (Canada), Illinois and Georgia. Major local origins were Non-Census

Metropolitan Area (Non-CMA) British Columbia (Canada), and the Illinois Portion of St.

Louis (MO) Business Economic Area (BEA).

Outbound Freight

The commodities with the highest tonnage transported from Oneida County by truck

were lumber or wood products, pulp or paper products, and clay/concrete/glass/stone.

The county’s freight was shipped by truck to other Wisconsin counties, Minnesota and

Michigan, as well as some coastal states and Canada. The major local trading partners

were Marathon County (WI), Ramsey County (MN) and Portage County (WI).

Pulp and paper products were the only commodities shipped by rail from Oneida County

businesses, and they were shipped to the Asheville (NC) BEA and the Maryland Portion

of Washington (DC) BEA.

PRICE COUNTY

Price County is in the central part of northern Wisconsin. The city of Phillips is the county seat.

Other communities include the city of Park Falls, the villages of Catawba, Kennan, and Prentice,

and the town of Ogema. It is one of the counties served by the Northwest Regional Planning

Commission (http://www.nwrpc.com/).

Population

As of 2010, the population of Price County was 14,159.

Employment

In 2012, about 5,655 people were employed in approximately 510 businesses in Price County.

Of those, 41 percent were working in freight-intensive industries such as manufacturing,

construction and wholesale trade. Major industries, based on number of employees, were

manufacturing, public administration, health and education.

http://www.nwrpc.com/


Transportation

One U.S. highway and six state highways serve the residents and businesses of Price

County. Running east and west are US 8 and WIS 86 in the southern part of the county,

and WIS 70 and WIS 182 in the north. WIS 13, a north/south route, bisects the county.

WIS 102 also travels north and south. A short stretch of highway located entirely within

Price County, WIS 111, provides a connection between US 8 and WIS 13.

The two rail lines that run through Price County divide it into four parts and intersect in

Prentice. The lines running north and east from Prentice are active and are operated by

Canadian National Railway (CN). The line extending from Prentice to the west, also a

CN line, is out of service to Ladysmith in neighboring Rusk County. A Rails-to-Trails

segment connects Prentice to Medford, in adjacent Taylor County to the south.

Price County has a municipal airport in Park Falls and a county airport in Phillips. There

is also an airport in Prentice.

Commodity Flow

Price County businesses used a combination of truck and rail to ship their freight in 2011.

Slightly more than 87 percent (over 469,000 tons) of the freight shipped to Price County

businesses was shipped by truck, and almost 13 percent (over 69,000 tons) was shipped by rail.

Inbound freight had a total value of around $320 million.

Freight that was shipped from Price County was sent by truck more than 70 percent of the time

and by rail almost 30 percent of the time. Of the freight that was shipped out, just over 457,000

tons were shipped by truck, and nearly 175,000 tons were shipped by rail. Outbound freight

had a total value of almost $550 million.

Inbound Freight

Commodities that were shipped to Price County businesses by truck were lumber or

wood products, nonmetallic minerals, and farm products. Most commodities were

shipped from other Wisconsin counties, Michigan and Minnesota. Major local origins

were Gogebic County (MI), Taylor County (WI) and Marathon County (WI).


Three commodities were shipped into Price County by rail: lumber or wood products,

food or kindred products, and waste or scrap materials. Major state origins were

Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin, while major local origins were St. Louis County (MN),

the Cedar Rapids (IA) Business Economic Area (BEA) and Sawyer County (WI).

Outbound Freight

Major commodities shipped from Price County by truck included lumber or wood

products, farm products, and nonmetallic minerals. Major destination states were other

Wisconsin counties, and Minnesota and Texas. Major local destinations were the

Wisconsin counties of Marathon, Portage and Wood.

Commodities that were shipped from Price County by rail were lumber or wood

products, and pulp or paper products. Major state destinations were other Wisconsin

counties, and Illinois and Massachusetts. Major local destinations were Wood County

(WI), Outagamie County (WI) and the Illinois Portion of Chicago BEA.

RUSK COUNTY

Rusk County is located in northwestern Wisconsin. The city of Ladysmith is the county seat.

Other communities include the villages of Bruce, Hawkins, Sheldon and Weyerhaeuser. The

Northwest Regional Planning Commission (http://www.nwrpc.com/) serves the county.

Population

In 2010, 14,755 people lived in Rusk County.

Employment

About 4,826 people were employed in approximately 339 establishments in Rusk County in

2012, mostly in manufacturing, retail trade, public administration, health and education. Thirty

percent worked in freight-dependent industries such as construction and manufacturing. Major

industries included manufacturing, dairy and agriculture, and wood processing.

http://www.nwrpc.com/


Transportation

Rusk County is served by one U.S. highway and three state highways. US 8 travels

east and west through the middle of the county. Routes running north and south in or

through the county are WIS 40 in the west, WIS 27 in the middle and WIS 73 in the east.

Two rail corridors, intersecting in Ladysmith, divide Rusk County into four sections. The

north/south rail line through the county is active. Until recently, the entire length of the

line that ran east and west through the county was out of service, but in late 2012, the

segment extending west from Ladysmith was reactivated to accommodate the shipment

of “frac sand” (industrial sand). The line east of Ladysmith remains out of service. All

the rail lines are operated by Canadian National Railway.

The Rusk County Airport is located in Tony, a few miles east of Ladysmith.

Commodity Flow

A total of nearly 417,000 tons of freight, valued at over $201 million, was shipped into Rusk

County in 2011. Over 645,000 tons, valued at nearly $379 million, were shipped out. Most of

the inbound and outbound freight was transported by truck.

Inbound Freight

Major commodities shipped by truck to Rusk County businesses were nonmetallic

minerals, lumber or wood products, and farm products. Major state origins were other

counties in Wisconsin, and Minnesota and Illinois. Major local origins were Sawyer

County (WI), the Minnesota Portion of Minneapolis Business Economic Area (BEA), and

Marathon County (WI).

The only commodity shipped by rail into Rusk County was petroleum or coal products

from Edmonton (AB), Canada.

Outbound Freight

Major commodities shipped by truck from Rusk County businesses were farm products,

lumber or wood products, and clay/concrete/glass stone. Major state destinations were

other Wisconsin counties, Minnesota and Texas. Major local destinations were


Hennepin County (MN), Marathon County (WI) and the Minnesota Portion of

Minneapolis BEA.

The only commodity shipped by rail from Rusk County was lumber or wood products,

shipped to Wood County (WI) and Marinette County (WI).

VILAS COUNTY

Vilas County is one of the state’s northern-most counties and is bordered on the north by

Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. The city of Eagle River is the county seat. Towns in the county

include Arbor Vitae, Lac du Flambeau, Lincoln, Phelps and St. Germain. The North Central

Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (http://www.ncwrpc.org/) serves Vilas County.

Population

Vilas County’s population was 21,430 people in 2010.

Employment

About 7,276 people were employed in approximately 992 businesses in Vilas County in 2012.

About 15 percent of those workers were employed in the freight-intensive industries of

manufacturing, construction and wholesale trade. Major employers were in the public

administration, health, education, retail trade, construction and manufacturing sectors.

Transportation

Several federal and state highways run through Vilas County. US 45, US 51, WIS 17,

WIS 32 and WIS 47 travel north and south. WIS 70 travels east and west along Vilas

County’s southern border. WIS 155 is contained entirely within the county, connecting

the south-central communities of Sayner and St. Germain.

There are no rail lines in Vilas County, but there are active and inactive rail segments in

adjacent counties to the south and west.

Vilas County has a regional airport in Arbor Vitae, with additional airports in Boulder

Junction, Eagle River, Land O’ Lakes and Manitowish Waters. There is also a seaplane

base in Lac du Flambeau.



Commodity Flow

Vilas County’s incoming and outgoing freight tonnage was primarily shipped by truck in 2011.

The county received more than 560,000 tons of products valued at over $180 million, and

shipped out almost 150,000 tons of goods valued at more than $110 million.

Inbound Freight

Major commodities shipped by truck into Vilas County were nonmetallic minerals,

secondary traffic (commodities moving to and from warehouses and distribution

centers), and lumber or wood products. The major originating states were other

counties in Wisconsin, and Michigan and Minnesota. Top local originating counties were

Iron County (WI), Baraga County (MI) and Keweenaw County (MI).

Outbound Freight

Major commodities shipped by truck that originated in the county were lumber and wood

products, clay/concrete/glass/stone, and farm products. Top state destinations were

other counties in Wisconsin, and Michigan and Minnesota. Top local destinations for

Vilas County products were Marathon County (WI), Dickinson County (MI) and Houghton

County (MI).

Definitions

BEA

Business Economic Area (BEA): Used by the U. S. Census Bureau, a BEA is a geographically delineated area with concentrated economic activity that is not contained by a city, county, state or other political boundary. For example, the Minneapolis BEA includes the city of Minneapolis, its surrounding suburbs and portions of Minnesota and Wisconsin. Therefore, the Minnesota Portion of the Minneapolis BEA represents just the counties and municipalities in the state of Minnesota that are part of the Minneapolis BEA.

CMA

Census Metropolitan Area (CMA): CMAs are geographically delineated areas used by Canada in order to conduct their census every five years. A CMA represents a grouping of large urban areas and those surrounding the urban area. To be considered a CMA, the area must contain an urban core population of at least 100,000 in the previous census. (Statistics Canada)

Non-CMA

Non-Census Metropolitan Area (Non-CMA): Non-CMAs are geographic areas used by Canada in order to conduct their census every five years. The Non-CMA area of a Canadian province is comprised of smaller urban areas with a population of less than 100,000. (Statistics Canada)



Appendix 4: Instructions for Using the FRA’s Freight Station

Mapping Tool

Libraries/docs/FRA GIS RAIL MAP.docx

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION (FRA) ONLINE RAIL MAP

A web-based Federal Railroad Administration map is available at:

https://explore.data.gov/Transportation/FRA-GIS-Web-Mapping-Application/6ydw-bswf,

Click the link or search on “FRA RAIL GIS”. The name of the website is “FRA GIS Web Mapping

Application”.

Click the “MAP” button on the upper right of the page.

Click

Tom Frackleton

GIS Analyst

Wisconsin Department of Transportation

DTIM Bureau of Economic Development

[email protected]

608-264-7331

https://explore.data.gov/Transportation/FRA-GIS-Web-Mapping-Application/6ydw-bswf


The FRA GIS Rail Map opens.

The map includes Map Contents, a table of contents that lists all layers that can be plotted on the

map, and a Toolbar for manipulating the map.

This map only depicts rail infrastructure, some major cities, counties, and states. The map does not

include roads or orthophotos (aerial photos).

The Toolbar, located at the top of the map, is a collection of point-and-click icons used to navigate

the map.

Map Scale

If there is a number in the Map Scale box, drag the mouse cursor over it and hit delete on your

keyboard. The box contents go blank. Type 600000 in the Map Scale box, and click the Go button

to the right of the Map Scale box, or hit Enter on your keyboard. The Map Scale box now reads 1:

600,000, and the map instantly zooms to this scale. At this scale, one inch on the map equals

600,000 inches on the ground.

Zoom in – Zoom out

Click the Zoom In tool, and draw a small square on the map, keeping the left mouse button

depressed. The map zooms in to the square, and the map scale changes. Use this tool for detailed,

close-up views.

Click the Zoom Out tool, keeping the left mouse button depressed, and draw a square on the map.

The map zooms out, and the map scale changes again.

MAP CONTENTS TOOLBAR

ZOOM IN ZOOM OUT

MAP SCALE


Pan

Click the Pan tool, keeping the left mouse button depressed, and drag the Pan icon across the map

in any direction to navigate to a new location. The map scale remains the same, but the map

location changes.

Full Extent

Click the Full Extent tool, and the map expands to show the entire North American continent. The

map scale changes.

Back Extent

Click the Back Extent tool, and the map zooms to the previous map extent. Click this tool multiple

times to view a series of previous map extents.

Forward Extent

Click the Forward Extent tool after using the Back Extent tool to return to a previous map extent.

Click the tool multiple times to navigate through a series of map extents.

FULL EXTENT

BACK EXTENT

FORWARD EXTENT

PAN


Go To Location

Click the XY icon to navigate to a new location using latitude and longitude coordinates. A Go To

Location dialog box opens. Enter longitude (X) as a negative number and latitude (Y) as a

positive number. In North America longitude (X) is negative and latitude (Y) is positive. Enter

latitude and longitude as decimal degrees (not degrees-minutes-seconds). Click the Zoom To

button, and the map zooms to the location you entered. The accuracy of this tool depends on the

quality of your latitude and longitude coordinates.

Magnifier

Click the Magnifier tool to view a popup window that magnifies a small section of the map.

MAGNIFIER

1 – CLICK XY

2 – Enter latitude (X) and longitude (Y)

3 – Click Zoom To


Map Identify

Click the Map Identify tool, and click on a freight station, section of

rail, or any map feature to view information about that feature.

MAP IDENTIFY

3 - CLICK TRIANGLE 2 - CLICK GREEN SQUARE

1 - CLICK IDENTIFY TOOL

4 – ATTRIBUTE TABLE OPENS

This list of items that describe

the Allouez Ore Dock is called

the Attribute Table. This is a

standard feature of GIS map

software. A list of descriptors

is attached to each Freight

Station.


Definition of Terms in the Freight Station Attribute Table

This is the Railinc website:

https://www.railinc.com/rportal/web/guest/home

A glossary of Railinc terms is available at:

https://www.railinc.com/rportal/alf_docs/CSM/CSM_TapeLayout.rtf

Definition of Terms

These definitions were primarily compiled from a web search of Railinc documents.

This level of detail is not required to use the FRA GIS software. It is only included for

reference.

OBJECTID – A unique ID number assigned by a GIS editor to each Freight Station. This is a

required field for GIS data processing.

This is a copy of the Attribute Table for a Freight Station

located in Superior, Wisconsin. The Attribute Table is a

standard list of information attached to each Freight

Station by the GIS map software.

The top field (OBJECT ID) is a unique ID number added by

a GIS editor for map records management. The remaining

fields were assigned by Railinc, a rail freight logistics

consultant. Railinc is ultimately responsible for the

contents of the Freight Station Attribute Table.

We use only four fields from the attribute table to confirm

the name and location of each Freight Station. These are

the four yellow highlighted fields to the left. This is the

Superior Freight Station located in Superior, Douglas

County, Wisconsin.

The remaining fields are proprietary information used to

track freight.

SUPERIOR (FREIGHT STATIONS)

OBJECTID 39450

SCAC UP

FSAC 28530

EFFDATE 20110209

RULE260 SUPER

LOC_SPLC 323130000

LOC_TYPE OR

LOC_NAME SUPERIOR

LOC_COUNTY DOUGLAS

LOC_STATE WI

SPLC 323130

FSAC_TXT 28530

UNIQUEID UP28530323130

NEARNODE 203688

NAME SUPERIOR

STCNTYFIPS 55031

https://www.railinc.com/rportal/web/guest/home

https://www.railinc.com/rportal/alf_docs/CSM/CSM_TapeLayout.rtf


SCAC - Standard Carrier Alpha Code - A unique four-letter code used to identify transportation

companies developed by the National Motor Freight Traffic Association (NMFTA). These must be

currently valid codes listed in the MARK Industry Reference File.

FSAC - Freight Station Accounting Code – Railroad industry location code used for interline billing

and local settlement between carriers.

EFFDATE - Effective Date – The date that the info is effective in the format YYYYMMDD. (NOTE: In most GIS applications, the Effective Date is the date that the info was last checked and updated. For the Superior Freight Station, EFFDATE is 20110209 (Feb 9, 2011). This is fairly recent. If the Effective Date for a freight station is more than 10 years old, the information might be outdated. The freight station might no longer be in service.

RULE 260 - Junction Abbreviation – A five-letter abbreviation code that defines the junction point of two or more railroads. (Note - This might be the location where the freight station rail spur diverges from the main track.)

LOC_SPLC - Standard Point Location Code of the Rail Station, published by the Association of

American Railroads. Nine characters alpha/numeric. Used to check shortline mileage between rail

locations.

LOC_TYPE - Location Type – Allowable values are:

R Railroad Freight Tariff Location

O Railroad Operating Location

L International Location

H Haulage Location

J Junction Settlement Location (Only allowed when CSXT is the SCAC.)

W Switching Location

T AEI Reader Equipped Location

M Motor Freight Tariff Location (Substituted for truck-for-rail service and not to be used for

TOFC/COFC service.)

LOC_NAME – Freight Station name

LOC_COUNTY – County

LOC_STATE – State

SPLC - Standard Point Location Code– Text field but code is always numeric. Identical to

LOC_SPLC above. Used to check shortline mileage between rail locations.

FSAC_TXT – Freight Station Accounting Code - Rail Industry accounting code.

UNIQUEID - Concatenation of SCAC Railroad + FSAC + SPLC. Unique ID # assigned to the

freight station. This is a required field for software processing.


NEARNODE – Closest node to the freight station on the rail network. Nodes are points on the rail

network that mark the beginning and end of segments of rail (red dot below). Each node (red dot)

on the rail line (blue line) is assigned a unique number. This system documents the approximate

location of the freight station on the rail network.

NAME – Freight Station name. Should be identical to LOC_NAME above.

STCNTYFIPS – Federal Information Processing Standard state and county code.

________________________________________________________________________________

Using the FRA Map

When you open the map, Amtrak Stations, Freight Stations, Rail Mileposts, and Grade

Crossings are grayed out in the Map Contents section (red square below). These features only

plot on the map when you zoom in to a scale of about 1:400,000.

Click the Zoom in tool.

Draw a small square in a locality in Wisconsin where you want to view freight stations.

The map zooms in to the area you specified using the Zoom in tool.

Zoom in to view

Freight Stations

NODE


The map Scale Box is outlined in red below. An alternative way to zoom in to a specific map scale

is to type a scale value in the scale box. Use the mouse to select the current value in the scale box,

and hit the delete key. The value in the scale box is deleted. Type 400000 in the scale box and hit

enter. The scale box converts to 1: 400,000, and the map zooms to a scale of 1: 400,000. A

distance of one foot on the map equals 400,000 feet on the ground.

At a scale of 1 to 400,000, Major Cities, Amtrak Stations, Freight Stations, Rail Mileposts, and

Grade Crossings plot on the map. This causes visual clutter. We need to identify the map symbols

for features plotted on the map (Cities, Amtrak Stations, Freight Stations, etc.). In the Map

Contents to the left of the map, click the plus sign (+) in front of Major Cities, Amtrak Stations,

Freight Stations, Rail Mileposts, and Grade Crossings. The plus sign turns to a minus sign, and

a colored map symbol for each feature displays in the Map Contents box.

The map changes after using the Zoom In tool and the Scale Box.

SCALE BOX

SCALE = 1 : 400000


To eliminate visual clutter, turn off Major Cities, Amtrak Stations, Rail Mileposts, and Grade

Crossings. In the Table of Contents, use the mouse to click the check boxes to the left of these

features. Unchecking these layers does not delete them. They are turned off but retained in the

map software. They can be turned on (checked) or turned off (unchecked) at will. Leave Freight

Stations turned on (checked).

Freight Stations

checked = visible


Move around the map using the Pan Tool (hand symbol on the toolbar). Click the Info Tool (i

symbol on the toolbar), and click on the center of a Freight Station symbol (green square on the

map). A label box appears on the map showing the name of the Freight Station. Click on the small

triangle to the right side of the label box to view the Freight Station Attributes. Use the scrollbar to

the right of the Attribute Table to view the attributes.

Tip – You need to click the center of Freight Station symbol (green square) to see the Freight

Station Attributes. If you click the square off-center, you will get info about the railroad or

county.

1 - CLICK

INFO TOOL

2 - CLICK

FREIGHT

STATION

SYMBOL

3 - CLICK TRIANGLE

ATTRIBUTE TABLE

OPENS WHEN YOU

CLICK TRIANGLE

USE

SCROLLBAR

TO VIEW

ATTRIBUTES


Copy Freight Station Attributes into A Word-Processing Program

You may need a summary sheet of Freight Station attributes to take into the field. Zoom to a Freight

station, and click the Info Tool (i) on the toolbar. Click the Freight Station symbol on the map (green

square). Click the triangle icon at the top of the Attribute Table to expand the table. The Attribute

Table displays on the map. Click Add to Results at the bottom of the Attribute Table.

Clicking Add to Results converts the Freight Station info into a format that you can copy into a

word-processing program.

1 - CLICK

4 - CLICK

2 - CLICK

3 - CLICK


When you click Add to Results, the attributes post in the Results Box to the left of the map.

CLICK

HERE TO

EXPAND

LIST

LONGITUDE

AND

LATITUDE

The Attribute Table and the latitude

and longitude post in the Results Box

on the left side of the map, in a format

that can be copied to a word-processing

program (to produce a document for

use in the field).

Longitude = -92.025. (Note the minus

sign.)

Latitude = 46.695

In Wisconsin longitude is in the

negative 90s and latitude is in the plus

40s.


Use the latitude and longitude coordinates from the Add to Results tool to plot the Freight Station

on a street map.

Go to (ctrl click this link) http://www.mapquest.com/maps?form=maps&geocode=LATLNG

or search on mapquest. A mapquest tool opens.

In the “SEARCH FOR” box, type the latitude and longitude numbers separated by a comma and

space.

WARNING – The FRA GIS map reports coordinates as longitude, latitude (-92.025, 46.695).

Mapquest requires a reversed format: latitude first, followed by longitude (46.695, -92.025).

Do not forget the comma, space, and minus sign for longitude.

Click “GET MAP”. The map plots a marker for the Allouez Freight Station and displays it on a street

map.

1 - ENTER

LATITUDE &

LONGITUDE 2 - CLICK

ALLOUEZ ORE DOCK

FREIGHT STATION

http://www.mapquest.com/maps?form=maps&geocode=LATLNG


Mapquest also provides an option to plot the freight station on an orthophoto (aerial map).

Orthophotos provide some degree of fact-checking provided the photos are not outdated. To view

the freight station on an orthophoto, click the Satellite button on the upper right corner of the map.

The most reliable method for verification is onsite inspection. Some orthophotos might be five years

old or older.

Disclaimer

A documentation file, called metadata, is normally attached to published GIS files. Metadata

provides a description of the file contents, documentation of who created the information, how it was

created, when it was created, dates it was updated, its fitness for use, and a disclaimer of liability.

The Freight Stations file has no metadata attached, so we do not fully understand the meanings of

some of the descriptive fields, and we do not know if the information is current, accurate, or

complete. An orthophoto examination indicates that the majority of Freight Stations are abandoned.

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation was not involved in the creation or maintenance of the

Freight Station file and makes no guarantee regarding its fitness for use. This instruction manual is

a general interpretation of web-based content that appears to be outdated. The user assumes all

liability incurred by using the content of the Freight Station files.

CLICK

CLICK SATELLITE FOR

ORTHOPHOTO

ALLOUEZ ORE DOCK

FREIGHT STATION



Appendix 5: Complete Survey Results – Rail Users

Northern Wisconsin Rail Study

2012 Survey Results - Rail Users 39 out of 190 Respondents

1. What products or raw materials are shipped to your facility?

Each business that indicated inbound freight was assigned one major commodity type.

14 rail users receive lumber/wood products

3 rail users receive pulp/paper products

2 rail users receive primary metal products

Other inbound commodities include: chemicals, machinery, farm products, and food products.

14 rail users did not provide a response, or do not receive freight (mostly loggers)

2. In tons, or other industry standards (such as board feet), what was the approximate volume of products or raw materials shipped to your facility in calendar year 2011?

Responses have been aggregated for all 190 respondents. The ranges below represent the lowest amount received by any business, to the highest amount received by any business. Not all commodities are listed.

Commodity

Weight or Quantity Range

Total of all Businesses

Measurement

Construction Materials 3,500 200,000 275,500 Tons

Feed and Seed 190 25,000 51,390 Tons

Fertilizer 150

130,000 10,000

130,000 20,550

130,000 Tons Gallons

Food Products 125 4,625 5,600 Tons

Fuel 35,000 6.5 million 6.54 million Gallons

Logs/Pulpwood 1,600

60,000 769,796

16 million 1.2 million

45.5 million Tons Board feet

Lumber 60,000 30 million 55.1 million Board feet

Paper Products 30 20,000 20,030 Tons

Parts, Components, and/or Raw Materials for Manufacturing

1 1,000

40,000

740,000 1,000

40,000

886,015 1,000

40,000

Tons Board feet Cubic feet

Steel and Other Metals 10 20,000 51,766 Tons

Northwoods

Rail Transit

Commission


3. What shipping mode(s) do you use for inbound freight? Check all that apply.

29 businesses provided 63 answers.

4. Of your inbound freight’s total volume, what percentage is shipped by each mode?

29 businesses indicated their inbound modal split.

16 of the 29 receive at least 90% of inbound freight by truck.

3 rail users receive more freight by rail than by truck.

4 rail users receive freight by water.

2 rail users receive freight by air.


5. Where does your inbound freight come from?

27 rail users indicated the origins of their freight. States: Regions:

The major origins in Canada are: o Ontario (11) o British Columbia (4) o Quebec (4)

No rail users receive freight from Mexico.

One respondent indicated they import freight from outside North America.


6. For your inbound freight, who decides which shipping mode to use? Check all that apply.

30 businesses answered this question.

We do (21)

Our suppliers do (12)

Other (4)

7. What products or raw materials do you ship out of your facility?

Each business that indicated its outbound freight was assigned one major commodity type.

25 rail users ship lumber/wood products

3 rail users ship pulp/paper products

2 rail users ship transportation equipment

Other outbound commodities include: chemicals, machinery, farm products, and food products.

2 rail users did not provide an answer, or do not have outbound freight.

8. In tons, or other industry standards (such as board feet), what was the approximate

volume of products or raw materials you shipped out of your facility in calendar year 2011?


Commodity



Measurement

Beverages 720,000 4.7 million 5.42 million Cases or case equivalents


Fabricated Steel 416 20,000 27,466 Tons

Feed and Seed 7,000 24,750 49,750 Tons

Fertilizer 1,600 20,000 21,600 Tons

Food Products 1.5

1,650 14,500 1,650

26,077 1,650

Tons Truckloads

Logs/Pulpwood 300

50,000 500

308,300 16 million

30,000

360,666 21.48 million

66,900

Tons Board feet Cords

Lumber 60,000

250 million 18.6 million 250 million

84.36 million 250 million

Board feet Square feet


Wood Products 500

40,000 50,000

390 million 57,100

393 million Tons Board feet


9. What shipping mode(s) do you use for outbound freight?


10. Of your outbound freight’s total volume, what percentage is shipped by each mode?

38 of the 39 rail users indicated their outbound modal split.

o 30 of the 38 ship at least 90% of outbound freight by truck. o Only two rail users ship more freight by rail than by truck. o Five rail users ship freight by water.

One of those five sends out 100% of its freight by water o Three rail users ship freight by air.


11. Where do you ship your outbound freight?

37 rail users indicated the destinations of their freight.

States: Regions:

The major destinations in Canada include:

o Ontario (14) o Quebec (10) o Alberta (7) o British Columbia (6) o Manitoba (5)

Six rail users send freight to Mexico.

Six rail users indicated they export freight outside North America.


12. For your outbound freight, who decides which shipping mode to use? Check all that apply.


We do (30)

Our customers do (14)

Other (4)

13. In which county is your business located? If you have multiple facilities, please account

for each of them separately, even if they are in the same county. Also, indicate each site’s ability to handle freight.

County Number of Businesses County Number of Businesses

Barron 5

Price 4

Clark 1 Rusk 2

Florence 1 Vilas 1

Forest 2 Wood 1

Langlade 2 Delta, MI 1

Lincoln 4 Dickinson, MI 1

Marinette 6 Marquette, MI 1

Oneida 2 Menominee, MI 2

Outagamie 1 Unknown 1

8 rail users indicated that they have multiple facilities.

14. Why do you use rail? Check all that apply

Other reasons for using rail: o Distance from job site to mill is not practical to use trucks o Source of capacity, best for large volumes and long distance o For hauling over 150 miles if mills need wood and are willing to pay for it


15. If an inactive rail line in northern Wisconsin were put back into service, would you use it?

Yes (16)

No (7)

Not sure (17)

16. If an inactive rail line in northern Wisconsin were put back into service, what (if any) transportation infrastructure improvements – new roads, rail spurs, etc. – would you need in order to utilize it? Please describe where those improvements would be located.

Rail sidings (multiple responses)

Rail line into Antigo

Log yard in Barron to load cars

Rail spur access

Existing wood yard in Tony would be an ideal site.

Improvements in Pembine

Improved spur at Armstrong Creek

17. What (if any) transportation infrastructure improvements – new roads, rail spurs, etc. – do you need in order to utilize, or take greater advantage of, any of the active rail lines in northern Wisconsin? Please describe where those improvements would be located.

More open siding or landings to load wood on to rail – Oneida and Vilas Counties

A closer intermodal ramp

Replace a removed spur in Park Falls

More car storage and unloading spots in Tomahawk

We could use a spur to load pulpwood in Green Bay on the E&LS

Commercial depot in northern Wisconsin

Reopen sidings along main line north of Ladysmith – particularly Stone Lake

Use of the siding in Pembine owned by CN

More available log cars

Rail spurs in Wausaukee, Fifield, Butternut and Glidden.

18. What (if any) changes to your current rail service would need to occur for you to ship or receive more volume by rail? If those changes were made, how much additional volume would you consider shipping and/or receiving by rail?

More rail choices

More days per week and quicker turn around

More time to load cars

More reliable – better control of delivery times

Easier access to loading terminal

More pulpwood cars

More ties, higher speeds

16 rail users indicated that improvements in service would translate to additional volume.


19. What effect would losing rail as a shipping method have on your business?

The most common answers were:

Costs would increase (23)

Inbound freight would ship in a different container, or be packed differently (11)

Employees work schedules would change (10)

Outbound freight would ship in a different container, or be packed differently (9)

Volume of freight shipped out would decrease (9)

Sales would decrease (9)

No significant effect (9)

20. An “intermodal facility” is a place where goods may be transferred from one type of carrier to another, such as between a truck and a rail car. (This question will disregard shipping by water.) An intermodal transfer can be direct or intermediate. a) A direct intermodal transfer occurs when a truck trailer or an International Standards

Organization (ISO) shipping container is loaded directly on to (or unloaded from) a rail car. The contents of the truck trailer or shipping container are not unloaded during the transfer.

Would you use this type of facility, if one were built in an area convenient for you?

12 rail users indicated that they would use a direct intermodal facility.

Suggested locations: o Appleton, Kaukauna, or Green Bay o Bark River, Michigan o Delta County, Michigan o Within 50 miles of Goodman o Northern Oneida or southern Vilas County o Pembine o Stevens Point or Superior o Wausau

b) An intermediate intermodal transfer – also called a “transload” – occurs when the

contents of a truck trailer or rail car are unloaded from one type of carrier and then reloaded on another. The unloaded cargo may be stored at the site before being picked up by the other carrier.


14 rail users indicated that they would use a transload facility.

Suggested locations: o Bark River, Michigan o Barron or Somerset o Barron, Ladysmith, or Tony o Bruce Crossing, Michigan o Chicago or Milwaukee o Eau Claire o Fifield o Merrill or Wausau o Northwest Wisconsin o Wausau o Wisconsin Rapids


21. Please share your perspectives and opinions

a) Describe any favorable impressions you have about freight rail.

Efficient, economic

Service continues to be discussed.

When rates are favorable it is very effective.

Generally predictable vs. truck

Availability of cars has been good since 2008. Customer staff is very helpful, more through rates on the web site result in faster response to our customer requests.

Can be good for pricing when competition from other Class 1 rail is involved

It's cheaper and can haul a lot of product.

Convenient to haul logs

It is a good way to ship raw forest products.

Ability to ship higher volumes at lower rates

Cheaper

Could decrease costs for shippers, states, and country as a whole

It makes sense to ship natural resources longer distances by rail.

Can be very cost effective

Shorter hauls for my trucks. I will load rail cars more to get more wood shipped.

Very cost effective

Lower cost base, higher load ability

Normally, the current shipments by rail go smoothly.

Ability to receive from distant places (Canada)

Cuts down on truck traffic

Keeps truck driving time down

It has a low cost per ton-mile.

Clean, decreases trucks on highways, saves wear and tear on highways

Without it, we would be out of business.

Not sure other than if the rail was more dependable, I would use it more

Rail hauls most effectively on vast transit distances. I can overlook rail inconsistencies on long hauls because of the cost savings.

Can move a lot of wood fast if close

I cannot think of a more efficient way of moving forest products. I think we should be spending more money expanding our rail systems instead of abandoning them.

It is a more convenient way to ship.

None (3)

b) Describe any unfavorable impressions you have about freight rail.

Delays if a rail car needs repairs

Rail prices continue to increase, which is causing us to look at more trucking again. Service is usually poor and unreliable.

Service and response deteriorated continually the last 15 years.

CN hard to work with.

Rates in many locations are too high.

Subject to having available chassis to delivery containers from rail

Takes too long to get cars. Too short of time period to load cars, in some cases. And demurrage charges on cars.

Not dependable on the lignin side, cost is much higher, service is less since the CN took over from Wisconsin Central. Faulty cars and poor response to correct the problem. Ability to get in touch with regional account manager is very difficult with very slow response time.


Because of the lack of competition, rail service in our area has become very non customer friendly. Service is poor, train crews are undependable and arrogant. Very little emphasis is placed on customer service except by marketing.

Slow to deliver and our product needs to be delivered faster in the summer, but in winter it isn't a problem.

Seems as though CN is only interested in large companies with high volumes of shipments.

Hard to get cars at times. Other times they all come in at once and need to be loaded within 24 hours, making it difficult.

They treat their customers like they don't care. Have to beg them to take care of us. Gets better for awhile and then changes for the worst. Then start over. We need it 100% for our business.

Limited service times. Time to destination.

Delivery times

Canadian National seems to view loggers as a business they do not want.

Carriers have gotten too large to care about smaller volumes. Our service was better when we had Wisconsin Central or Milwaukee Road service.

Mainlines are expensive and are not easy to deal with. Short lines are unreliable.

Hard to work with - they do whatever they want without regard to customers' needs.

Very difficult access

Need faster service

Unreliable schedule and car placement. Not customer service oriented.

Longer transit times and high cost on diversions, shift rework, etc.

The rail in Wisconsin is a monopoly. It is their way, take it or leave it. I don't believe the rail is really interested in doing business with loggers.

Service

Not being able to get cars to load when you need them causes a small inconvenience.

Longer lead time for delivery of product in comparison to freight trucking

Unpredictable, cost continues to go up

Their pulpwood cars are currently not long enough to load them very easily.

Cars never show up on time and rail is always pushing for demurrage. I've had demurrage charges for cars not even delivered yet.

In our area it is at times difficult to get enough rail cars. No locked in delivery schedules. Seems we never know when we will be able to get rail cars for loading.

Rail cars lose wood, without reimbursement. Slow. No idea when rail cars will be delivered or picked up. It takes longer to get the freight to destination.

Slow (3)

c) In your opinion, how does your industry view freight rail?

Becoming less valuable as costs are increasing

Fair-poor

Not good

Many feel rail is the least expensive no matter where it ships. Inter rail charges are very high. It is also considered the most unreliable for delivery dates.

We view rail freight as a less expensive and necessary option.

Good

It's hard to plan at times, but we would be in a world of hurt if they would close.

We need it 100% for our business.

Dependent upon size of manufacturing operation (bigger=rail more important).

Awful

More difficult to utilize.

Our industry would not be able to compete without rail service. Movement of natural resources over long distances would be cost prohibitive without rail.


Need freight rail service

Very favorable, necessary and vital

We view its use as very important to our business.

Good, if we can get adequate service at a reasonable rate

Very important

Valuable

I like it.

Rail is a necessary type of freight to keep costs down in long haul grain movements.

Very important!

Love it

Necessary evil

Generally undesirable but effective

Slow

My industry sees freight rail as a growing necessity. Fuel is not getting any cheaper and you can move so much more tonnage by rail.

A BAD way to do business

Some would say it's a more efficient way to ship

Favorably (3)

Negatively (2)

d) In your opinion, how does your local community view freight rail?

Neutral (un-informed)

Not many people use it. So they don't think about it much at all. All they are concerned about are the extremely rough crossings at most roads around here.

It has always been around so most people are accustomed to it. We are on a less used rail line so it is not a big intrusion.

Obsolete

Good

Important to the community

I don't think they know much about it. City didn't do anything preserving spur that used to serve us. A walking trail is more important I guess.

Our community knows the reason we are in business is the rail road. Without the rail road we probably would not be here and without us the community would not have its largest employer.

Negative

Ambiguous

Need it

Well accepted

The local community supports our business and the freight rail.

As a good thing

Valuable asset

It is rarely used due to the distance to the nearest track.

I believe they understand how valuable it is for us to remain in business.

Some like to see it back but others do not.

Ambivalent

Positive

We have other businesses that ship solely by truck that would love to put their product on rail if we had a good spur.

Slow. Used to be a mess where rail cars were loaded; an eyesore.

Most people do not like waiting for trains but have gotten used to the times they go through town.

Favorably (3)


e) In your opinion, how do your neighbors at your business site view freight rail?

No problems

Neutral

Our neighbor views rail negatively. When we get switched our neighbors drive way can be blocked for up to an hour.

Negative

Ambiguous

Need it

Well accepted

Our neighbors seem to support both our business and the freight rail.

Good

Inconvenienced when they have to wait at road crossings

Asset

They have similar needs to move bulk agricultural products and supplies at competitive prices.

I believe they have no opinion because it doesn't affect or bother them.

Necessary evil

Positive

They know it is a necessity.

Favorably (3)

f) In your opinion, what factors will determine whether freight rail use will increase or decrease in northern Wisconsin?

Usage

Cost and service

CN's business plan

Rates and availability

If it saves time!

Their ability to provide more open sidings to logging use and be willing to work with us on loading time

Service and cost of using rail. Both are headed in the wrong direction to increase rail. I think this is the intent for non-mainline tracks.

Cost compared to other methods

The price of trucking

Volume shipped by rail

I think if the rail company would work with its customers and their needs, a lot more products would be shipped by rail.

The rail owners need to be more user friendly.

Manufacturing vitality. Export possibility. Loading/unloading access.

Paper industry

Until true cost of trucking is recognized and charged to users rail freight will not be utilized to best effect. I think shippers and public have to have a better idea of true cost of highway usage. I think smaller regional carriers would serve area better.

The amount of natural resources that are needed by our country will determine the use of rail. Mining and timber products are the only businesses that can support larger trains up here.

Shipping costs for trucking

Whether or not easy access to intermodal terminal is developed

How much it will be used

Commitment of current owners to maintain tracks off mainlines and to repair/replace aging car fleet

Cost and availability

The willingness of the CN to provide reasonable rates


The increase in the US economy

Service

Cost of using rail service for customers. Ability of railroad to operate and produce a profit.

Demand for low cost freight in and through northern Wisconsin

If a transloading system is situated in proximity to us, rail usage will increase.

$

Price and service

The amount of money it can save a business (with good accommodations)

Markets, rail car availability and convenience

If we ever have industry again

The condition of our manufacturing base. We need industry to be here to buy and sell their products. Don't know what Federal government is doing to do to create more manufacturing jobs.

Need a population increase in the area

Economy

Costs

22. Do you have any additional comments?

It only makes sense to put more wood on rail which cuts down on the miles my truck puts on each day delivering up to 100 tons/day each.

The service that CN currently provides is good at the locations they allow us to load logs. However, if there were additional siding in central Wisconsin (public tracks), then more wood could be moved to our facility by rail. Also, even if we could ship additional volume, they are not increasing the amount of log cars. They have told us the return on investment is not high enough.

I think we need good rail service. A smaller regional carrier would be more responsive and able to offer good short haul rates as well as long haul. Things seemed to be improving with Wisconsin Central, but the CN purchase reversed that.

I believe rail is not a cost-based business; it is whatever the market will bear. Unfortunately for a national service provider with such major implications of economic control the rail should be run on a cost plus margin like utilities to promote industrial and job growth.

I just wish they had competition in the industries. All other businesses have competition to keep them competitive. The CN just does what they want and gets away with it. Any other business treats people like they do and your customers go somewhere else.

We cannot have any further line abandonments; once they become recreational trails it will be very difficult to get them back.


Northwoods

Rail Transit

Commission

Appendix 6: Complete Survey Results – Businesses That Do

Not Use Rail

Northern Wisconsin Rail Study

2012 Survey Results – Businesses That Do Not Use Rail 151 out of 190 Respondents

1. What products or raw materials are shipped to your facility?

Each business that indicated its inbound freight was assigned one major commodity type. Not all commodities are listed.

29 businesses receive lumber/wood products.

20 businesses receive primary metal products.

10 businesses receive machinery.

9 businesses receive chemical products.

6 businesses receive food products.

45 businesses did not provide a response, or do not receive freight.

2. In tons, or other industry standards (such as board feet), what was the approximate volume of products or raw materials shipped to your facility in calendar year 2011?


Commodity



Measurement


Feed and Seed 190 25,000 51,390 Tons

Fertilizer 150

130,000 10,000

130,000 20,550

130,000 Tons Gallons

Food Products 125 4,625 5,600 Tons

Fuel 35,000 6.5 million 6.54 million Gallons

Logs/Pulpwood 1,600

60,000 769,796

16 million 1.2 million

45.5 million Tons Board feet

Lumber 60,000 30 million 55.1 million Board feet


Parts, Components, and/or Raw Materials for Manufacturing

1 1,000

40,000

740,000 1,000

40,000

886,015 1,000

40,000

Tons Board feet Cubic feet

Steel and Other Metals 10 20,000 51,766 Tons


3. What shipping mode(s) do you use for inbound freight? Check all that apply.


4. Of your inbound freight’s total volume, what percentage is shipped by each mode? 127 businesses indicated their inbound modal split.

o Trucking is by far the dominant mode for these northern Wisconsin businesses.

All but 23 businesses receive freight entirely by truck. Only 1 of the 8 businesses that indicated they receive freight by water is located

on water. The other 7 businesses were likely referring to freight that is shipped from a port or harbor as one leg of an intermodal shipment.

o Of the 15 businesses that receive freight by air, only 2 of them receive more than 10% of their total inbound volume by air.


5. Where does your inbound freight come from?

116 businesses indicated the origins of their freight. States: Regions:

The most common freight origins in Canada include:

o Ontario (14 businesses) o Quebec (7 businesses) o Alberta (7 businesses) o Manitoba (5 businesses) o Saskatchewan (4 businesses)

7 businesses receive freight from Mexico

14 businesses import freight from outside North America


6. For your inbound freight, who decides which shipping mode to use? Check all that apply.


We do (74)


Other (24)

7. What products or raw materials do you ship out of your facility?

Each business that indicated its outbound freight was assigned one major commodity type. Not all commodities are listed.

50 businesses ship lumber/wood products

17 businesses ship machinery

10 businesses ship transportation equipment

6 businesses ship food products

6 businesses ship farm products

31 businesses did not provide an answer, or do not ship freight.

8. In tons, or other industry standards (such as board feet), what was the approximate

volume of products or raw materials you shipped out of your facility in calendar year 2011?

Responses have been aggregated for all 190 respondents. The ranges below represent the lowest amount shipped by any business, to the highest amount shipped by any business. Not all commodities are listed.

Commodity



Measurement

Beverages 720,000 4.7 million 5.42 million Cases or case equivalents


Fabricated Steel 416 20,000 27,466 Tons

Feed and Seed 7,000 24,750 49,750 Tons

Fertilizer 1,600 20,000 21,600 Tons

Food Products 1.5

1,650 14,500 1,650

26,077 1,650

Tons Truckloads

Logs/Pulpwood 300

50,000 500

308,300 16 million

30,000

360,666 21.48 million

66,900

Tons Board feet Cords

Lumber 60,000

250 million 18.6 million 250 million

84.36 million 250 million

Board feet Square feet


Wood Products 500

40,000 50,000

390 million 57,100

393 million Tons Board feet


9. What shipping mode(s) do you use for outbound freight?


10. Of your outbound freight’s total volume, what percentage is shipped by each mode? 132 businesses indicated their modal split.

Trucking is by far the dominant mode for these northern Wisconsin businesses. All but 15 businesses ship outbound freight entirely by truck.

Of the 5 businesses that ship by water, 4 of them are located in Marinette, Wisconsin or Menominee, Michigan.

o Two of those businesses ship 15% of their outbound volume by ship or barge.

Of the 10 businesses that ship freight by air, only 2 of them ship more than 10% of their total outbound volume by air.


11. Where do you ship your outbound freight?

135 businesses indicated the destinations of their freight.

States: Regions:

The most common freight destinations in Canada include:

o Ontario (24 businesses) o British Columbia (14 businesses) o Quebec (13 businesses) o Alberta (12 businesses) o Manitoba (11 businesses)

17 businesses ship freight to Mexico.

21 businesses export freight outside North America.


12. For your outbound freight, who decides which shipping mode to use? Check all that apply.


We do (112)


Other (17)

13. In which county is your business located? If you have multiple facilities, please account for each of them separately, even if they are in the same county. Also, indicate each site’s ability to handle freight.

County Number of Businesses County Number of Businesses

Ashland 2 Oneida 17

Barron 21 Polk 1

Brown 1 Price 14

Clark 1 Rusk 9

Eau Claire 1 Sawyer 1

Florence 5 Shawano 1

Forest 16 Taylor 1

Langlade 17 Vilas 12

Lincoln 10 Dickinson, MI 4

Marathon 1 Gogebic, MI 4

Marinette 9 Menominee, MI 1

Oconto 1 Unknown 1

15 businesses indicated that they have multiple facilities.


14. Check all the reasons why you don’t use rail.

143 businesses answered this question. Multiple reasons could be chosen by each business.

Other reasons given for not using rail: o We used to use the railroad. They became undependable and too expensive. They

lacked an understanding of customer service. o According to rail authorities, the end of our spur needs improvement before they will allow

an engineer on it. Neither of us wants to pay for this improvement. o Can't get cars in a timely manner. o By the time we would get to put it on rail we are half way to our destination.

Number of Businesses


15. If an inactive rail line in northern Wisconsin were put back into service, would you use it? 141 businesses answered this question. 43 businesses said they would use rail service.

If you answered NO, check all the reasons why you wouldn’t use it:

16. If an inactive rail line in northern Wisconsin were put back into service, what (if any) transportation infrastructure improvements – new roads, rail spurs, etc. – would you need in order to utilize it? Please describe where those improvements would be located.

Most responses were based on the following:

Improvements to existing spur

New spur or siding

New road

Nothing, just need service

Pickup location or loading sites

Number of Businesses


17. What (if any) transportation infrastructure improvements – new roads, rail spurs, etc. – do you need in order to utilize existing rail service? Please describe where those improvements would be located.

Most responses were based on the following:

Improvements to existing spur

Need an intermodal or transload facility

New spur or siding

Loading and storage area

18. How familiar are you with using rail as a freight transportation mode?

Of the 110 responses to this question:

63 businesses were not familiar.

47 businesses were familiar.

19. What effect would using rail as a shipping method have on your business?

The most common answers were:

No significant effect (51)

Cost would decrease (25)

Would need to train employees on different shipping method (25)

Volume of freight shipped out would increase (23)

Inbound freight would ship in a different container, or would be packed differently (17)

Outbound freight would ship in a different container, or would be packed differently (17)

Would need to modify buildings or other parts of the business property (17)


20. An “intermodal facility” is a place where goods may be transferred from one type of carrier to another, such as between a truck and a rail car. (This question will disregard shipping by water.) An intermodal transfer can be direct or intermediate. a) A direct intermodal transfer occurs when a truck trailer or an International Standards

Organization (ISO) shipping container is loaded directly on to (or unloaded from) a rail car. The contents of the truck trailer or shipping container are not unloaded during the transfer.


33 businesses indicated that they would be interested in a direct intermodal facility.

Suggested locations: o Antigo (suggested by two businesses) o Argonne (suggested by two businesses) o Armstrong Creek or Cavour o Barron or Cameron o Black River Falls o Cumberland o Eau Claire or Superior o Green Bay o Iron Mountain, Michigan o Ladysmith o Marinette, Wisconsin or Menominee, Michigan o Polk County o Poskin o Rhinelander (suggested by two businesses) o Rice Lake (suggested by two businesses) o Wausau (suggested by two businesses)

b) An intermediate intermodal transfer – also called a “transload” – occurs when the

contents of a truck trailer or rail car are unloaded from one type of carrier and then reloaded on another. The unloaded cargo may be stored at the site before being picked up by the other carrier.


37 businesses indicated that they would be interested in a transload facility.

Suggested locations: o Antigo (suggested by 2 businesses) o Argonne (suggested by 2 businesses) o Armstrong Creek (suggested by 2 businesses) o Barron or Cameron o Crandon (suggested by 4 businesses) o Eau Claire or Superior o Kennan o Ladysmith o Monico o Prentice o Rhinelander (suggested by 2 businesses) o Rice Lake (suggested by 3 businesses) o Three Lakes


21. Please share your perspectives and opinions.

a) Describe any favorable impressions you have about freight rail.

Efficient for large loads

Cost effective way to move large amounts of product

Cheaper than truck

We ship 95% small package, very little freight. It may well be that those packages are already utilizing the rail service that is available and would benefit from the inactive line being reopened, but I do not see that side of our shipping.

It should be more economical.

It is usually cheaper than truck.

When you have over 120 miles, rail would be better if a rail service worked well with our industry.

I'm glad that other businesses are able to use the rail service. I'm glad it's here - it's good for the city and for the area.

Better rates to west coast

If the spurs were reopened and cars were easy to get, it would be a great option to ship pulp wood!

May cut costs for our input

Highly economical in certain industries shipping large quantities to given areas

I think freight would work out cheaper with larger loads, not sure though

Rail would be more efficient for all loggers if cost would be affordable.

It should decrease the transportation cost

Very efficient, fuel-wise.

Saves fuel/reduces carbon footprint

Would be cheaper to ship by rail than by truck hopefully

Cost per ton should be lower

Cheaper, more volume

In larger volumes we could maybe save

Would love to see it being used

I wish it would help my business, as well as the community.

Good for large volumes

Long haul rail is good. Cheaper

Cheaper; more volume

Fast for high volume

Better rates possible

Deliver more product in shorter time

Cheaper- note the price of diesel.

Better for the environment (uses less fuel than semi trucks and less infrastructure/road damage).

Less trucks on the highway system

Makes more sense than having all the trucks on the road

Low cost high volume

I think freight rail has its place with bulk commodity type products.

It's inexpensive.

Low cost shipping

Would increase business and economic growth of our area.

Cost effective for larger distances

Because you can move a large amount of freight at one time

Can receive lumber from further away for less money

Rail freight is great if you have a high volume, long lead time commodity. It is a very economic mode of transportation.

Depends upon cost compared to trucking

Less expensive than truck/trailer hauling


We view freight rail as an effective means to ship some of our products, however we do not have a facility located close enough to utilize it more often.

Reduced freight cost for larger industries

Rail works if there are good sidings with good timing to load cars. In most cases, you need to be at least 25 miles to the mill to make rail economical.

Low cost mode of delivery

Perfectly OK

Moving pulpwood by rail makes sense

No opinion one way or the other

Think it is worthwhile for businesses that it fits

I personally like trains.

Good for the State of Wisconsin and its businesses.

Usually yards are large and have easy access for trucks

Would like to see rail use renewed

Amount of volume of product shipped at one time

Economical for larger volume shipments

Less costly

It is a great tool.

More efficient in cost and environmentally

Product moves continuous

Could cut costs

Move more freight with less fuel

Possibly timing advantage

Not enough info to know

It's a necessary infrastructure component for manufacturing and helps to keep semi-tractor trailers off of the roads for safety and upkeep issues.

When we first used it, it was a money saver. But the costs per car doubled in a couple years - so we found a new source for raw material.

It can be efficient/cost effective if we could ship door to door. Used when there is a lack of available trucks.

Economics of shipping large quantities of bulk items further distances. More feasible with rail versus truck when it comes to shipping aggregate.

Freight rail leads rural areas to the Twenty-first Century. In order to compete in a world market you must be connected to it. Transportation does not add value to a product. Areas that are far removed from main stream areas must be able to get products to market cost effectively. Rail does that.

Larger volumes delivered at lower cost per ton/mile

Cost (2)

None (10)

b) Describe any unfavorable impressions you have about freight rail.

Slow - not flexible

Inconvenient

Not as convenient as trucking, not as fast as trucking

Labor unions made the railroad we used to have go out of business

Lead time is much longer than truck.

Rail authorities are getting hard to deal with as years go by.

Strict container loading practices

Right now it's not user-friendly and not enough close spurs to load cars!

They can overcharge when product must come by rail.

Access to use the service


Timeframe for shipping. Larger load means larger bill to pay.

Lack of service not good

Decrease jobs in trucking companies

Inefficient and frustrating, time-wise.

Not practical

Time constraints to load gondola

Can't get a car when you need it

Hard to get cars; unreliable schedules; stolen freight.

Too slow. Rail can't cover my delivery need.

Waiting for empty cars to ship grain out

Cost taxpayers more money

Worry about damage

Poor rail service for cars

Hard to ship parcels.

Hard to deal with - logistics, attitude

Cost, slow delivery

When selling pulpwood it is bought by the ton so the longer it takes to get to the mill the less it weighs. The problem with lumber nobody keeps an inventory so when they order they want it yesterday.

Cannot count on a rail car to be there when you need it.

Most likely cost big $ to get freight rail back

Larger inventories.

Short window to unload freight.

In our area, the loud horn volume through the night upsets many people.

No benefit for short hauls under 400 miles

Train blows through but hates to stop and pick up raw forest products.

Rail uses upper Wisconsin but does not want to help us.

Freight rail wants to cater to big customers, Wisconsin Central was easier to work with.

Formerly, it was difficult to get cars, get them regularly and on time. Pulpwood was often lost from rail cars.

Time frame would extend load times.

There are high infrastructure costs associated with rail freight, at least in the initial set-up. Rail is also very intransigent when it comes to the specific needs of the individual. This is a big drawback in an economy where just in time deliveries are commonplace.

Inconvenience

Longer shipping times, does not deliver directly to final jobsite location

Can take longer than hired truck carriers or air freight for some products that we ship and receive

Accidents

High price and scheduling can be a nightmare.

Shipping time, damage

Complicated logistics to get to a line

Unreliable

We have used rail in the past. I have never seen a business that will not guarantee when a car is going to show and then when it does they give you 24 hours to load it or pay demurrage.

Unpredictable arrival time in Wisconsin Northwoods

At one time (about 5 years ago) I had high hopes of using rail as a major method of moving goods. But, in that time business bombed and I lost my facility next to the rail lines. Now I think I'm too old to get big enough to make good use of the rail system.

Railroad crossings, effects on traffic flow

'Rigid' fixed point service

Maybe need more time for transport

Damage

Very undependable on placing cars on time


Inconvenient

Lack of service

Costly to have access - loss of goods. Timely to get to door to door

Competition for our company

Transportation still needed to terminal. Move around too much in intermodal transport - risk for damage.

Responsiveness; lead time; flexibility

Noise and safety issues at railroad crossings

Slower transit times = perishable freight. Demurrage rules.

Logistics

The service in our area is not marketed aggressively enough. It needs a heavy handed approach in order to be successful. It brings great opportunity and possibilities to areas.

Ordering cars in a timely fashion

Poor service (2)

None (8)

c) In your opinion, how does your industry view freight rail?

In general, it is not used as our incoming and outgoing freight is light.

Our manufacturers use them for obtaining raw materials but finished goods are shipped via truck.

In some cases it would be a good way to ship freight.

We don’t have enough industry here to warrant

Open minded

Poorly

Not favorable

Useful

Not enough locations to load pulp wood on cars! Hard to depend on getting cars on time!

Used generally for incoming shipments from Asia.

We ship shorter distances overnight; don't think rail would work.

So/so, for and against. Raw material suppliers use rail as raw product is easily stacked for handling. Finished products are not, and thus rail is not used.

Larger businesses in our industry use it frequently.

Too expensive

Not very well

They liked it.

Our industry views it as un-reliable.

Money may be taken away from the general road budget to supplement the freight rail resulting in less work for our company.

Not feasible

Bad

Works good over longer distances

Hard to control delivery times

Bad for loggers - good for paper mills

As a viable alternative

Not a factor

Needed, especially during fall harvest

We could move more freight cheaper

Does not think about it

Inconvenient

Longhaul more effective for trucking

We could move more freight.

Too large


Favorable - mills need it

Not feasible

I'd like to see the rail as another option but I don't know how to use it.

Unreliable

Big plus if we have it

Helps with importing

Just doesn't fit with the product we produce

Pretty slow

We know rail is economically and environmentally good for our nation's competitive survival!

I know our bigger mills use your rail services as they have large volumes.

Will use it if it saves money

Not familiar with it, so no opinion

Right now- unreliable

It is used. How much I'm not sure

It would improve my business a lot.

Important

The unreliability of rail service forced us to make a great investment in truck. Now we have that investment.

There is a place for rail in today's economy but it needs to become more flexible in its approach to the individual and should try to gain better utilization from its infrastructure by being more innovative in its ideas.

Open

Used for hauling raw materials (steel beams/plate), not convenient for finished product

Slow

Necessary for large bulk/heavy freight

OK for shipping but more handling for deliveries

Not possible to use

Some sawmills use rail for lumber deliveries

Not very good

Our particular company does not have the right freight/volume to utilize rail.

Not very practical for us

Competitor, yet necessary for logging industry

Obsolete, most rails have been out of service for so long, many people are unfamiliar with how it works.

Useful for moving containers from seaport to rail terminal for dispatch to truck load carrier

Bad service and they overcharge because they don't want to deal with the wood industry.

Less expensive but not convenient

Not needed for our business

Very important

No interest

Indifferent

Fine for the applications with enough volume to justify

A necessary mode of transporting goods that's important for retaining and creating jobs

Good, if rail prices are lower than by truck

OK

It was good - but big cost jump seemed strange in so few months

Good when door to door. Inefficient when NOT door to door.

Forest products industry views rail in a positive way but they say it is not as dependable as it should be. Wisconsin Central had a great operation.

Poorly

Poor service

Good (6)

Favorably (6)


d) In your opinion, how does your local community view freight rail?

We have learned to get along without it.

Don’t need

Living close to the rail can be bothersome (noise). But the people know, a busy rail means the economy should be good or getting better.

A thing of the past

Not necessary

No complaints

Want the rail system to succeed and be reopened in areas that have been closed down

Small town - no effect

Very negative, being a tourist-driven economy

Don't hear much about it anymore

No way

They liked it.

Great for moving frac sand

Not feasible - The rail right of way was sold off.

Neutral

Obsolete

After rail left things went downhill.

Don't need it

They miss it.

They would love to have it active again.

Not very supportive.

The forestry industry in the area is very positive and driven to see it improve.

I think everybody is going to be happy to see the rail working again.

Not sure. It was good jobs at one time.

Unneeded

This local community is generally against anything bringing change.

Unfavorable

Don't have freight rail in my town

Should be used more often!

Important

It would have to prove itself.

It welcomes it but again would like it to be more viable to many different sectors of the community.

Open

Hasn't been here for over 30 years

No opinion except trails on old railroads are used heavily in this tourist community.

Overall they view it as good. However, it can be a nuisance at times because the rails go right through the middle of town.

Everyone likes trains.

Not enough manufacturing that uses rail to have a lot of input.

Probably feel it is not needed

They do not like all the traffic of the sand cars constantly blocking rail road crossings. Also loading and switching at night.

Necessary

Nostalgic

Trains make too much noise - horns blare at night!

Maybe some resistance since it has been dormant for so long

Lack of service

Lost form of transportation


Low interest

Not a fan, comes straight through town

Unsure, as we have no access to local service

We see it as a positive way to transport goods.

Rail is good and economical way to move freight.

Inefficient due to lack of service to our doors

Haven't had a very active rail service in many years

Large majority of people are uneducated in what it brings to rural areas and what it can mean for a community. Lose rail and lose our chance at participating in the Twenty-first Century.

Good (7)

Favorably (3)

OK (2)

e) In your opinion, how do your neighbors at your business site view freight rail?

Don’t need

A thing of the past

Not necessary

No problems

Valuable option

They would probably not use.

Would neither be for nor against.

Used to train going through here fairly fast

Positively

It's not needed. This is a recreational and vacation destination. Not an industrial area.

Price of fuel needs to go down

I am certain they haven't considered it.

They all seem to be excited about it.

Not efficient for our business

This local community is generally against anything bringing change.

No one wants trains close to homes and property for noise factor.

My guess is that it is unfavorable because it's right in the city.

They say it should be used more often!

Important

Noisy

We only have one neighbor who uses rail (they have a spur) and they utilize it as much as possible.

Open

Beneficial

Not needed

Trains are too noisy. They blow their horns at intersections in the city and disturb the neighborhood.

No problems

Very important

Low interest

A necessity to compete in today's economy

As something that should be converted to a trail. The last thing our area needs is another abandoned rail grade.

Good (6)

OK (2)

Favorably (2)


f) In your opinion, what factors will determine whether freight rail use will increase or

decrease in northern Wisconsin?

Need of customers and availability of service

Manufacturing. There is little manufacturing in our area. Rail would demand increase with an increase in manufacturing's need for raw materials.

If costs can be kept low and the rail line can be relied on for pickup and delivery schedules, companies will use them. Rail is a great way to ship overweight and over length items, or where large bulky items such as logs, lumber and paper need to travel long distances.

If business improves, economical recovery or no taxes on middle class

Industry growth

In my opinion, the rail business has forgotten about the small guy. They want to get from point A to point B as fast as they can. The towns along the way seem meaningless. That philosophy will have to change.

If the markets we ship to can unload cars. Better rail service.

Volume of product

If it will help bring jobs back to communities built on manufacturing it is great.

Location to load from mill site.

How user-friendly it will be, and the cost to ship freight compared to truck!

Competition

Having the industry to support it

Thing of the past

Is there enough demand for service and cost

The logging

Cost and availability

It has to be cost effective and convenient.

Cost and demand

As long as sand is being mined it's great.

Make it more accessible, reliable and easier to deal with

Sand mining

Rail is inefficient for shipping freight for short distances.

Volume by shippers

Education

Availability, price of gasoline

The price of diesel fuel; availability of manpower in the trucking field; if rail could become a more reliable and cost-effective tool.

New ethanol plants, and more grain acres

Cost of freight compared to trucking

If we have enough usage to be profitable for the railroad

Rail landings; car availability; cost to use rail; better management of rail system

Since we don't have rail service now it can only improve.

Volume of freight and mines

Fuel costs - mill acceptance - ease of use

One family of parts (3 part members) cost the customer $250,000 annually in freight so production was moved closer to their location. A secondary factor would be flexibility. Any schedule that could cost an extra day or two would be unacceptable.

The economy

Cost of fuel

If we have it available

How much tax money is put into it

Whether there is significant product shipments to warrant the method

Fuel prices, convenience, reliability


Increase for logging and sand

Availability and convenience

If a mine goes in up north

Economically, competitive, with the rest of the U.S.

I think it would be too costly to put it all back.

If it can save money, it would be beneficial.

Based upon need by individual businesses

Main factor- stop and pick up my products and stop whining. Build new rail spurs on roads or wood yards so we can drop off our products.

Cost and convenience

If they would be more reliable and easier to work with

Whether rail service would serve its customers well and in a cost effective way

Cost, convenience

A better, more easily accessible and flexible infrastructure without such a larger financial barrier to hurdle to gain access to the benefits.

Cost and logistics compared to trucking costs

Availability of spur lines and consistent service

Economy and land acquisition

The availability of facilities to load or unload products

Demand

Cost and dependability, like anything

Fuel costs raise rail to become more important

Access and a promise of lower costs

Easy access and lower cost than trucks

Cost and convenience

How well the CN decides to work with shippers

The ability to bring cost effective manufacturing/industry back to the U.S. and Wisconsin. Natural resource utilization will have a big impact as well. (Coal/mining/forestry)

If it is cost effective

Cost to use and accessibility

Logging and mining - Rail would need to depend mainly on those two industries.

Safety

The amount of iron ore, sand, grain we sell to other states

I don't want to live near a train track.

Cost to use to and from locations east of dispatch or load delivery options availability

Government pressure

Shippers would need to see it as convenient and cost effective. Rail lines would need to be reliable and convenient.

Economy (funding available). Number of businesses needing and using rail. Workforce needed to maintain and use rail.

The price of fuel and the cutting of timber in the National Forest

Ease of use and cost effective

Cost, efficiency and demand

Cost, effectiveness, ease of use

Growth of frac sand industry

Increase cutting of timber on federal lands and the ability to market timber and bio-mass products to a global market. Possibly giving tax credits to railroads who invest in equipment modifications to assist in transporting timber products.

Pricing

Frac sand mining

Fuel costs - overall trucking and our commitment to it


CN is willing to place equipment at requested locations. Businesses on sidings will benefit. Traffic would need to be on CN lines for door-to-door shipments without running on other rail lines. Otherwise, switching fees are incurred.

Volume of product for shipping/rail companies.

Market the service properly. Be dependable, be aggressive, and make Forest County a shipping hub.

If the railroad companies want it to increase, it will increase. If not, more of the same poor service.

Cost (8)

22. Do you have any additional comments?

Wisconsin Central was hard to work with, CN is worse.

I do not believe there is enough business to use rail.

We need rail and an unloading and locating center so we don't have to ship product to Twin Cities.

I think as fuel keeps increasing in price, the need for a rail system in the north will become more important! It will be the lifeline to the north part of Wisconsin.

We would consider if cost came out cheaper than truck per item hauled, if the load origin business would be willing to extend payment due dates because of larger load. If the unloading of the train car could be done by fork lift and not manual labor.

There are better uses for infrastructure spending.

Waste of tax payer's money

Would love to see rail for industrial/commercial use as well as at some point passenger use again

I believe all loggers would use rail if the mills pushed it and it wouldn't be such a hassle getting cars spotted and billing out and timely methods on logistics.

I believe that in Northern Wisconsin we need products to ship on rail. We have a national forest that is actually under cutting its forest by 50%. The state needs to work on the federal government to cut on federal land where it belongs. Then the rail will have products to haul.

I have zero experience with freight rail service. Thinking broadly, it would seem to have the best potential with in-bound raw materials. That would still involve accessibility at both ends to make it viable. On the out-bound side, it is hard to imagine a way to succeed in our just-in-time environment.

This survey should be better targeted to potential users. We are not one of them. We use UPS.

The rail service in Wisconsin has gradually become more difficult due to many factors. Canadian National taking over the rail and the increase of costs of railcars, and penalties the rail imposes for unloading/loading cars within a particular period.

On average we ship 2 containers to Europe per year. Having access to rail would simplify the logistics and lower cost. In 2012 we had (2) out and (2) in. 2013 we'll have (4) out.

I believe the way to ship pulpwood is by rail. I have not shipped by rail for 30 years because of cost and inconvenience. The last time I used rail it took 3 weeks to get a rail car and you were allowed 1 day to load. The cars were in poor shape and tracks were so rough we lost wood. But I believe if loading sites were put back in and cost addressed, pulpwood would again start moving by rail, taking a lot of pressure off of our highways.

I am in favor of rail, however it doesn't have much direct effect on my business. Note: Inbound freight into our facility comes from a variety of locations, depending on where factories are located.

Where would we find information on shipping by rail such as costs and locations of intermodal transfer stations? There are many Amish in this area who would possibly be interested in using rail service to transport pallet stock and other goods. Have the Amish businesses been contact with this service?

I'm definitely interested in getting quotes from port to Rhinelander for heavy equipment and container hauls. Would consider site to customer if costs are reasonable and easy to schedule.


As a small business I am always concerned when government spends money.

We would still need a truck to move the freight from the rail stop to our door.

Hopefully the rail system will once again be fully implemented and lines put back in.

If the CN wants to abandon any portion of line, I believe they should be forced to abandon all of it from Pembine to Ladysmith. If they are allowed to abandon only the middle, the ends will be faced with unreasonable freight rates and horrible service. If the line is unable to be reopened at this time it should be put into the rail bank system for future review and consideration. Tear up of this line should not be considered.

Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Study Page N1-1

Notes

1 IHS/Global Insight, Transearch freight database, 2011

2 Ibid.

3 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, accessed at:

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Mines/documents/SilicaSandMiningFinal.pdf

4 Ibid.

5 University of Wisconsin Extension, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, Factsheet 05, 2013

6 Marshall J. Adkins and James M. Rollyson. Hi Crush Partners LP, Launching on High Quality, Low Cost Frac

Sand and Producer Hi Crush with MO2 (September 14, 2012): 3. Quoted in Environment & Energy Publishing,

accessed at http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059982951

7 Association of American Railroads, accessed at: https://www.aar.org/newsandevents/Press-Releases/Pages/2010-

04-21-EarthDay.aspx 8 National Waterways Foundation, accessed at: http://nationalwaterwaysfoundation.org/study/FinalReportTTI.pdf

9 Minnesota Historical Society: Soo Line Railroad Company – Overview and Historical Note, accessed at

http://www.mnhs.org/library/findaids/00343.xml

10 1948 Handy Railroad Atlas of the United States, Rand McNally & Co., 1948; reproduced by Kalmbach

Publishing, 1989.

11 Annual Report of the Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co., Including Chicago Division

(Wisconsin Central Ry.) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1920, Accessed at

http://books.google.com/books?id=-

2U4AAAAIAAJ&dq=inauthor:%22Minneapolis,+St.+Paul+%26+Sault+Ste.+Marie+Railway+Company%22&sour

ce=gbs_navlinks_s

12 Minnesota Historical Society: Soo Line Railroad Company – Overview and Historical Note.

13 “The Wisconsin Central Railway,” American Rails web site, http://www.american-rails.com/wisconsin-central-

railway.html

14 James Lydon, History of the Soo Line, accessed at

http://www.pchswi.org/rrweb/wiscentral/lyden/chapternames.html


(Wisconsin Central Ry.) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1920.


17 John Gaertner, The Duluth, South Share & Atlantic Railway, 2008; preview at

http://www.amazon.com/Duluth-South-Shore-Atlantic-Railway/dp/0253351928

18 Canadian Pacific – Subsidiaries, Canadian Pacific Railway web site, accessed at

http://www.cpr.ca/en/in-your-community/living-near-the-railway/Pages/subsidiaries.aspx

http://www.eenews.net/stories/1059982951

https://www.aar.org/newsandevents/Press-Releases/Pages/2010-04-21-EarthDay.aspx

https://www.aar.org/newsandevents/Press-Releases/Pages/2010-04-21-EarthDay.aspx

http://nationalwaterwaysfoundation.org/study/FinalReportTTI.pdf


http://books.google.com/books?id=-2U4AAAAIAAJ&dq=inauthor:%22Minneapolis,+St.+Paul+%26+Sault+Ste.+Marie+Railway+Company%22&source=gbs_navlinks_s



http://www.american-rails.com/wisconsin-central-railway.html






19

799 F.2d 317, Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company et al v. United States of America and

Interstate Commerce Commission, Respondents, Decided Aug. 20, 1986, accessed at

https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/799/799.F2d.317.85-1953.85-2122.85-1573.85-2123.85-1683.html

20 Michael W. Blaszak, “Wisconsin Central,” Pacific Rail News, January 1988. Accessed at

http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/pages/516/37353/january-1988-page-27


22 Statistics of Regional and Local Railroads, Economic and Finance Dept., Association of American Railroads,

1988.

23 Ralph O. Gunderson and J. Scott McDonald, Wisconsin Railroads: Success in the Heartland; UW-Oshkosh, Sept.

1991.

24 John Leopard and Andrew S. Nelson, “FRVR + GB&W = Fox Valley & Western,” Pacific RailNews, June 1994,

accessed at http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/pages/335/24822/june-1994-page-16

25 “CSX Joins the ‘Superior Connection;’”Railway Age, May 1, 1996, summary accessed at

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-18313829.html

26 Stephen Franklin, “Illinois Central Goes To Canadian National Railway,” Chicago Tribune, February 11, 1998

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-02-11/business/9802110374_1_railroad-mergers-canadian-national-railway-

canadian-firm

27 “Canadian Railway to Buy Wisconsin Central,” New York Times, January 31, 2001,

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/31/business/company-news-canadian-railway-to-buy-wisconsin-central.html

28 Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation, Draft State Rail Plan 2030, Chapter 3:

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/state/docs/railplan-chapter3.pdf

29 “CN to invest $35 million in Wisconsin to serve Superior Silica Sands frac sand plant and other producers in

future,” Canadian National web site, August 13, 2012, accessed at

http://www.cn.ca/en/news/2012/08/media_news_invest_wisconsin_frac_20120813

30 Malcolm Rosholt, Trains of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985, accessed at

http://www.mcmillanlibrary.org/rosholt/trains-of-wi/

31 James P. Kaysen; The Railroads of Wisconsin, 1827-1937. The Railway and Locomotive Historical Society, 1937.

Online facsimile at http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/turningpoints/search.asp?id=63

32 Surface Transportation Board Decision 29296, decided June 15, 1998, accessed at

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/83fd59cf17adc80785256559007ba132/12e73d6d73cc442685256

625003c9c89?OpenDocument

33 Joe Piersen, “Chicago St. Paul Minneapolis & Omaha – A Capsule History,” Chicago & North Western Historical

Society; accessed at http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_cnw.htm

34 Janet Krokson, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW;”

Spooner-Wisconsin Train Times, a publication of the Spooner Advocate, 1999. Accessed at

http://www.kohlin.com/soo/omahahis.htm

35 Malcolm Rosholt, Trains of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985.


http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/pages/516/37353/january-1988-page-27

http://www.trainlife.com/magazines/pages/335/24822/june-1994-page-16


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-02-11/business/9802110374_1_railroad-mergers-canadian-national-railway-canadian-firm






http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/83fd59cf17adc80785256559007ba132/12e73d6d73cc442685256625003c9c89?OpenDocument


http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_cnw.htm



36

Ron Kohlin, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW,”

accessed at: http://www.kohlin.com/soo/omahahis.htm

37 Barnaby J. Feder, “Union Pacific to Buy Chicago and North Western,” New York Times, March 11, 1995.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/03/11/business/company-news-union-pacific-to-buy-chicago-and-north-western.html

38 2013 Wisconsin Railroads (Map), Bureau of Planning, Wisconsin Department of Transportation.

39 “Union Pacific in Wisconsin – Fast Facts 2012,” Union Pacific Railroad web site;

http://www.up.com/cs/groups/public/documents/up_pdf_nativedocs/pdf_wisconsin_usguide.pdf

40 Malcolm Rosholt, Trains of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985; featuring reproduction of map showing build-out

and abandonments of the CM&St.P, submitted in 1927 Bankruptcy Court filing.

41 Todd R. Jones, “Milwaukee Road in the 70’s: What really happened?” TrainWeb, 2000.

http://www.trainweb.org/milwaukee/article.html


1991.

43 Escanaba & Lake Superior Railroad web site, http://www.elsrr.com/

44 799 F.2d 317, Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company et al v. United States of America and



45 Michael W. Blaszak, “Wisconsin Central,” Pacific Rail News, January 1988.

46 “Canadian Railway to Buy Wisconsin Central,” New York Times, January 31, 2001.

47 2013 Wisconsin Railroads (Map), Bureau of Planning, Wisconsin Department of Transportation.

48 U.S Census Bureau; “State & County Quickfacts”; generated by Liat Bonneville; <http://quickfacts.census.gov>

(16 August 2013).

49 Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development, 2012.

50 Initially, 1,294 businesses were identified according to the selection criteria. 200 companies were then eliminated

based on additional research and local economic development officials’ recommendations. 20 surveys were

returned due to bad addresses (replacement addresses were not found) or business closings.

51 Two survey response options were offered, written or internet format. Mailed in written response forms were

entered by WisDOT staff onto the SelectSurvey.net survey tool.


53 1948 Handy Railroad Atlas of the United States, Rand McNally & Co., 1948; reproduced by Kalmbach

Publishing, 1989.


55 Ibid.

56 Wisconsin’s Railroads, Part I. WisDOT Division of Planning, March 1974,








57

Minnesota Historical Society: Soo Line Railroad Company – Overview and Historical Note.

58 James Lydon, History of the Soo Line, accessed at



(Wisconsin Central Ry.) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1920, accessed at

http://books.google.com/books?id=-

2U4AAAAIAAJ&dq=inauthor:%22Minneapolis,+St.+Paul+%26+Sault+Ste.+Marie+Railway+Company%22&sour

ce=gbs_navlinks_s

60 “The Wisconsin Central Railway,” American Rails web site, http://www.american-rails.com/wisconsin-central-

railway.html


62 “Readers can travel old Blueberry line through book,” Rice Lake Online, May 8, 2013, accessed at

http://www.ricelakeonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=32&SubSectionID=113&ArticleID=25761


64 Ibid.

65 "Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Railway". Michigan History 53 (1): 62–72. Spring 1969, cited at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth,_South_Shore_and_Atlantic_Railway

66 Rail Index – DSS&A, found at http://www.r2parks.net/dss&a.html

67 John Gaertner, The Duluth, South Share & Atlantic Railway, 2008; preview at


68 DSS&A fan page – Chronology, accessed at http://www.dssa.habitant.org/chrono.htm


70 “Railroads of Montana – Soo Line,” accessed at

http://www.railroads-of-montana.com/Research_Soo_Line_Montana.htm

71 March 1, 1970 Soo Line Station Manual, referenced at

http://mke04507.tripod.com/scenesalongthesooline/id1.html

72 “Canadian Pacific – Subsidiaries,” Canadian Pacific Railway web site, accessed at


73 Manitowoc Riverwalk Master Plan and Design Guidelines (October 2009), accessed at

http://www.manitowoc.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/881

74 799 F.2d 317, Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company et al v. United States of America and



75 “Wisconsin Central,” Pacific Rail News, January 1988.








http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth,_South_Shore_and_Atlantic_Railway

http://www.r2parks.net/dss&a.html


http://www.dssa.habitant.org/chrono.htm

http://www.railroads-of-montana.com/Research_Soo_Line_Montana.htm

http://mke04507.tripod.com/scenesalongthesooline/id1.html


http://www.manitowoc.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/881



76

Minnesota Historical Society, Soo Line Railroad Company – Overview and Historical Note, accessed at


77 James Lydon, History of the Soo Line, accessed at http://www.pchswi.org/rrweb/wiscentral/lyden/chap28.html

78 112 F.3d 881, Wisconsin Central Ltd. V. Surface Transportation Board, no. 95-3728, US Court of Appeals,

decided April 30, 1997. https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/112/112.F3d.881.95-3728.html

79 Statistics of Regional and Local Railroads. Economic and Finance Dept., Association of American Railroads,

1988.


1991..

81 Ibid.

82 Greg McDonnell, Heartland, Stoddard Publishing, 1993.


1988.


1991.





87 Surface Transportation Board Decision – STB Finance Docket No. 33290, January24, 1997, accessed at

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/83fd59cf17adc80785256559007ba132/d769fb1cc77a7e25852565

4800782265?OpenDocument

88 “CSX Joins the ‘Superior Connection,’”Railway Age, May 1, 1996, summary accessed at


89 Stephen Franklin, “Illinois Central Goes To Canadian National Railway,” Chicago Tribune, February 11, 1998

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-02-11/business/9802110374_1_railroad-mergers-canadian-national-railway-

canadian-firm

90 “Canadian Railway to Buy Wisconsin Central,” New York Times, January 31, 2001,




92 Mischa Wanek-Libman, “Building the Energy Boom,” Railway Track & Structures, June 10, 2013;

http://www.rtands.com/index.php/freight/class-1/building-the-energy-boom.html?channel=275

93 “Trains back in action on old railroad tracks,” WQOW-TV, December 18, 2012, accessed at

http://www.wgem.com/story/20377008/2012/12/18/trains-back-in-action-on-old-railroad-tracks


http://www.pchswi.org/rrweb/wiscentral/lyden/chap28.html

https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/112/112.F3d.881.95-3728.html



http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/83fd59cf17adc80785256559007ba132/d769fb1cc77a7e258525654800782265?OpenDocument

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/83fd59cf17adc80785256559007ba132/d769fb1cc77a7e258525654800782265?OpenDocument






http://www.rtands.com/index.php/freight/class-1/building-the-energy-boom.html?channel=275

http://www.wgem.com/story/20377008/2012/12/18/trains-back-in-action-on-old-railroad-tracks


94

Wikipedia excerpt of Interstate Commerce Commission Reports, Vol. 103, 1926, accessed at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains/ICC_valuations/Marinette,_Tomahawk_and_Western_R

ailroad

95 Tim Sasse, “Lumber Railroads of Wisconsin – Lincoln County,” accessed at

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wilincol/railroads.htm

96 1932 Moody’s Manual of Steam Railroads, as cited at http://donsdepot.donrossgroup.net/dr080.htm

97 “Short Feud-Born Railroad Thrives,” Sarasota Herald-Tribune, Feb. 12, 1956, p. 35; accessed at

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=A7-hzOuI2KQC&dat=19560212&printsec=frontpage&hl=en


1988.

99 Edward A. Lewis, American Shortline Railway Guide, 5

th Ed., 1996, Accessed at

http://books.google.com/books?id=3i6K_Nf9e2EC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

100 STB Finance Docket No. 33358, Decided May 21, 1997, accessed at

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/7FACCAE0625F37EA8525654100703622/$file/21701.pd

f

101 Genesee & Wyoming’s Tomahawk Railway web page, accessed at

http://www.gwrr.com/operations/railroads/north_america/tomahawk_railway.be#ContactInformation

102 Joe Piersen, “Chicago St. Paul Minneapolis & Omaha – A Capsule History,” Chicago & North Western

Historical Society; accessed at http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_cnw.htm

103 Wisconsin’s Railroads, Part I. WisDOT Division of Planning, March 1974.

104 Malcolm Rosholt, Trains of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985, accessed at


105 “The Iron Riches of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula,” Donna Stiffler, Michigan Department of Natural Resources,

accessed at http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-54463_18670_18793-53100--,00.html

106 Malcolm Rosholt, Trains of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985

107 James P. Kaysen; The Railroads of Wisconsin, 1827-1937. The Railway and Locomotive Historical Society,

1937. Online facsimile at http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/turningpoints/search.asp?id=63

108 Official Railroad Map of Wisconsin, 1900, accessed at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/map_item.pl

109 James P. Kaysen, The Railroads of Wisconsin, 1827-1937.

110 Ibid.

111 Official Railroad Map of Wisconsin, 1908, accessed at

http://collections.lib.uwm.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/agdm/id/52/rec/19

112 Joe Follmar, Connie Francart, and Al Vanderpoel, “The Laona Line,” Northwestern Line Magazine, Summer

1991; excerpted and accessed at http://www.laonahistory.com/TheLaonaLine1991.html

113 1943 C.S. Hammond Map, accessed at http://wiroots.org/maps/wi_rr_1943.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains/ICC_valuations/Marinette,_Tomahawk_and_Western_Railroad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains/ICC_valuations/Marinette,_Tomahawk_and_Western_Railroad

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wilincol/railroads.htm

http://donsdepot.donrossgroup.net/dr080.htm

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=A7-hzOuI2KQC&dat=19560212&printsec=frontpage&hl=en


http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/7FACCAE0625F37EA8525654100703622/$file/21701.pdf

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/7FACCAE0625F37EA8525654100703622/$file/21701.pdf

http://www.gwrr.com/operations/railroads/north_america/tomahawk_railway.be#ContactInformation

http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_cnw.htm


http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-54463_18670_18793-53100--,00.html

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/map_item.pl

http://collections.lib.uwm.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/agdm/id/52/rec/19

http://www.laonahistory.com/TheLaonaLine1991.html

http://wiroots.org/maps/wi_rr_1943.jpg


114

1948 Handy Railroad Atlas of the United States, Rand McNally & Co.; republished by Kalmbach Publishing.

115 “The Laona Line,” Northwestern Line Magazine, Summer 1991.

116 Donna Stiffler, “The Iron Riches of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula,” Michigan Department of Natural Resources,

accessed at http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-54463_18670_18793-53100--,00.html


Historical Society; http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_spmo.htm

118 Wisconsin’s Railroads, Part I. WisDOT Division of Planning, March 1974,

119 Janet Krokson, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW;”

Spooner-Wisconsin Train Times, a publication of the Spooner Advocate, 1999. Accessed at



121 H. Roger Grant, “Minnesota’s Good Railroad – The Omaha Road,” Minnesota History, Winter 2000-2001


123 1923 Railroad Map of Wisconsin, Railroad Commission of Wisconsin; as published by Malcolm Rosholt, Trains

of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985.

124

Wisconsin Historical Society (web page) – National Registry of Historic Places listings, entry for Soo Line

locomotive 2442,

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/hp/register/viewSummary.asp?refnum=09000310


126 H. Roger Grant, “Minnesota’s Good Railroad – The Omaha Road,” Minnesota History, Winter 2000-2001.


Historical Society, http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_spmo.htm

128 Ron Kohlin, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW,”

accessed at: http://www.kohlin.com/soo/omahahis.htm

129 H. Roger Grant, “Minnesota’s Good Railroad – The Omaha Road,” Minnesota History, Winter 2000-2001.

130 Joe Piersen, “Chicago St. Paul Minneapolis & Omaha – A Capsule History;” Chicago & North Western

Historical Society.

131 Ron Kohlin, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW.”

132 “Rail Service in Northern Wisconsin: A Reconnaissance Study,” Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission, Fall

1974.

133 Ron Kohlin, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW.”

134 Keith A. Meacham, “I Remember: The Chicago & North Western in Marshfield, 1967-1982,” (oral history),

Portage County Historical Society: http://www.pchswi.org/rrweb/misc_articles/cnw19671982.html

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-54463_18670_18793-53100--,00.html

http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_spmo.htm


http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/hp/register/viewSummary.asp?refnum=09000310

http://www.cnwhs.org/ch_spmo.htm


http://www.pchswi.org/rrweb/misc_articles/cnw19671982.html


135

Ron Kohlin, “Railroad Timetable: a TimeLine History of The Omaha Road – A Predecessor of the C&NW.”

136 Lawrence C. Lohmann, “From North Woods, tale of the little railroad that could,” Milwaukee Journal, November

29, 1983, Pt.2, p. 12, accessed at

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=jvrRlaHg2sAC&dat=19831128&printsec=frontpage&hl=en

137 Larry Van Goethem, “Short Line Links Nicolet to the World,” Milwaukee Sentinel, September 20, 1984, Page 1,

Part 3, accessed at

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=wZJMF1LD7PcC&dat=19840920&printsec=frontpage&hl=en

138 Edward A. Lewis, American Shortline Railway Guide, 5

th Ed., 1996, Accessed at


139 Camp 5 Museum/Lumberjack Steam Train web site, http://www.camp5museum.org/

140 Statistics of Regional and Local Railroads; Economic and Finance Dept., Association of American Railroads,

1988.

141 Surface Transportation Board Decision 29296, decided June 15, 1998, accessed at

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/83fd59cf17adc80785256559007ba132/12e73d6d73cc442685256

625003c9c89?OpenDocument



143 Barnaby J. Feder, “Union Pacific to Buy Chicago and North Western,” New York Times, March 11, 1995.


144 Tom Murray, Chicago and North Western Railway, 2008, P. 113. Page preview at Google Books.

145 STB Docket Number AB 33 114 X, dated January 11, 1999:

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/98C502D992B9030C852566F6005B7430/$file/29942.pdf

146 Washburn County Comprehensive Plan – Chapter 3, Transportation Element, Preliminary Final Draft, November

1994:

http://www.co.washburn.wi.us/countyinfo/comprehensiveplanning/plannarrative/Element3-Transportation.pdf

147 STB Docket Number FD 33947:

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/5E221CAB472A8A6C8525697D0072F0A9/$file/31384.p

df

148 Chippewa County Resolution 75-01, accessed at http://gis.co.chippewa.wi.us/minutes/County%20Board/rail.htm

149 Mark Gunderman, “Boomtowns on the rail line,” Chippewa Valley Business Report, January 25, 2005, accessed

at http://www.chippewavalleybusinessreport.com/articles/2011/03/17/news-winter05/05rail1.txt

150 “Barron to Almena rail ideas aired,” Rice Lake Chronotype, May 5, 2011, accessed at

http://www.ricelakeonline.com/main.asp?FromHome=1&TypeID=1&ArticleID=21692&SectionID=6&SubSectionI

D=208

151 “Rail authority in final steps of land deal,” Rice Lake Chronotype, April 16, 2009, accessed at

http://www.ricelakeonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSectionID=64&ArticleID=17126&TM=33204.01

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=jvrRlaHg2sAC&dat=19831128&printsec=frontpage&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=wZJMF1LD7PcC&dat=19840920&printsec=frontpage&hl=en


http://www.camp5museum.org/





http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/98C502D992B9030C852566F6005B7430/$file/29942.pdf

http://www.co.washburn.wi.us/countyinfo/comprehensiveplanning/plannarrative/Element3-Transportation.pdf

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/5E221CAB472A8A6C8525697D0072F0A9/$file/31384.pdf

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/5E221CAB472A8A6C8525697D0072F0A9/$file/31384.pdf

http://gis.co.chippewa.wi.us/minutes/County%20Board/rail.htm

http://www.chippewavalleybusinessreport.com/articles/2011/03/17/news-winter05/05rail1.txt

http://www.ricelakeonline.com/main.asp?FromHome=1&TypeID=1&ArticleID=21692&SectionID=6&SubSectionID=208

http://www.ricelakeonline.com/main.asp?FromHome=1&TypeID=1&ArticleID=21692&SectionID=6&SubSectionID=208

http://www.ricelakeonline.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSectionID=64&ArticleID=17126&TM=33204.01


152

Chippewa County Resolution 2-10, January 12, 2010, accessed at

http://205.213.167.200/Minutes/2010/County%20Board%202010/Resolution%202-10.pdf

153 “Local railroad work on hold,” Rice Lake Chronotype, September 23, 2010, accessed at


154 STB Decision Docket FD 35617, Decided May 1, 2012, accessed at

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/0702D674E5C14F0C852579F1006FA0B6/$file/42351.pd

f

155 Chris Vetter, “Sand boom ending rail authority, saving Chippewa County $800,000,” Eau Claire Leader-

Telegram, June 12, 2012, accessed at http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/daily_updates/article_9c3c7176-b4fc-

11e1-819a-001a4bcf887a.html

156 STB Docket No. AB 1101X, Decided July 19, 2012, accessed at http://docs.regulations.justia.com/entries/2012-

07-25/2012-18128.pdf

157 “CN to invest $35 million in Wisconsin to serve Superior Silica Sands frac sand plant and other producers in

future,” Canadian National web site, August 13, 2012, accessed at


158 Adam Belz, “N.D. oil boom gives railroads new life in Minnesota, Wisconsin,” Minneapolis Star Tribune,

August 18, 2012, accessed at http://www.startribune.com/business/166656556.html

159 “The right thing to do,” Rice Lake Chronotype, August 22, 2012, accessed at


160 “Union Pacific in Wisconsin – Fast Facts 2012,” Union Pacific Railroad web site;


161 “The Milwaukee Road: A Brief History…” Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, & Pacific Railroad Company, 1968:

http://www.oldmilwaukeeroad.com/content/brief/doc.htm

162 Wisconsin’s Railroads, Part I. WisDOT Division of Planning, March 1974.

163 “The Milwaukee Road: A Brief History…” Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, & Pacific Railroad Company, 1968.


165 Ibid (from reproduction of map showing build-out and abandonments of the CM&St.P, submitted in 1927

Bankruptcy Court filing).

166 1948 Handy Railroad Atlas of the United States, Rand McNally & Co.; republished by Kalmbach Publishing.

167 Malcolm Rosholt, Trains of Wisconsin, Rosholt House, 1985 (featuring reproduction of map showing build-out

and abandonments of the CM&St.P, submitted in 1927 Bankruptcy Court filing).


169 Ibid (from reproduction of map showing build-out and abandonments of the CM&St.P, submitted in 1927

Bankruptcy Court filing).

170 “The Milwaukee Road: A Brief History…” Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, & Pacific Railroad Company, 1968.

http://205.213.167.200/Minutes/2010/County%20Board%202010/Resolution%202-10.pdf


http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/0702D674E5C14F0C852579F1006FA0B6/$file/42351.pdf

http://www.stb.dot.gov/decisions/readingroom.nsf/UNID/0702D674E5C14F0C852579F1006FA0B6/$file/42351.pdf

http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/daily_updates/article_9c3c7176-b4fc-11e1-819a-001a4bcf887a.html

http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/daily_updates/article_9c3c7176-b4fc-11e1-819a-001a4bcf887a.html

http://docs.regulations.justia.com/entries/2012-07-25/2012-18128.pdf

http://docs.regulations.justia.com/entries/2012-07-25/2012-18128.pdf


http://www.startribune.com/business/166656556.html


http://www.oldmilwaukeeroad.com/content/brief/doc.htm


171

Todd R. Jones, “Milwaukee Road in the 70’s: What really happened?” TrainWeb, 2000.


172 Ralph O. Gunderson and J. Scott McDonald, Wisconsin Railroads: Success in the Heartland; UW-Oshkosh,

Sept. 1991.

173 Escanaba & Lake Superior Railroad web site, http://www.elsrr.com/

174 Carol Jouzaitis, “Soo Closes $570 Million Purchase of Milwaukee,” Chicago Tribune, February 21, 1985.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-02-21/business/8501100743_1_soo-line-milwaukee-road-chicago-

milwaukee

175 Fundinguniverse.com Corporate History of Wisconsin Central,

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/wisconsin-central-transportation-corporation-history/

176Wisconsin Railroads 2013 (map), Wisconsin Department of Transportation Bureau of Planning and Economic

Development.

177 William Duchaine, “History of Escanaba & Lake Superior Railroad,” Escanaba Daily Press, December 27,1950,

posted at the Escanaba& Lake Superior web site: http://www.elsrr.com/ELS%20History.htm

178 784 F.2d 831, No. 85-1785, US Court of Appeals, Decided Feb. 27, 1986:

https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/784/784.F2d.831.85-1785.html

179 Statistics of Regional and Local Railroads; Economic and Finance Dept., Association of American Railroads,

1988.

180 Escanaba & Lake Superior web site, http://www.elsrr.com/ELSRR%20system%20map%204-22-10.pdf



http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-02-21/business/8501100743_1_soo-line-milwaukee-road-chicago-milwaukee

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1985-02-21/business/8501100743_1_soo-line-milwaukee-road-chicago-milwaukee

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/wisconsin-central-transportation-corporation-history/

Wisconsin Department of Transportation

Bureau of Planning and Economic Development Dennis Leong, Chief of Economic Development

4802 Sheboygan Avenue, Room 901 P. O. Box 7913

Madison, WI 53707-7913

Documents

A study of Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Studynorthwoodsrail.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/FINAL... · 2017-03-15 · Wisconsin Northwoods Freight Rail Market Study Page