Ambus Amtrak Bus Service (San Juaquin Between Arcata and Martinez)

Amtrak (Cali funded) is now a bus carrier: Lost Coast Outpost

The matter at hand had never occurred to me; to ride an Ambus, you need a connecting rail ticket. I mean, why else would you ride an Ambus? It's the "last-mile" connection when you're destination is not served by rail. Well, California passed a law allowing intermediate passengers.

Amtrak Now Allows Bus-Only Travel to All Stops Between Arcata and Martinez, No Train Ticket Required

Used to be that you could only ride the bus on Amtrak’s San Joaquins Route 7, which hits 18 stops between Cal Poly Humboldt and beautiful downtown Martinez, if you had also purchased a segment of train travel as part of your trip.

No more!

Thanks to some state legislation (SB 742) passed in 2019 and collaboration with local stakeholders, bus-only tickets are now available between all 18 stops along Route 7.
...

Amtrak San Joaquin Press Release:

Riders traveling on Amtrak’s San Joaquins Route 7, the Thruway Bus route extending from the Martinez Amtrak Station to Arcata (Cal Poly Humboldt) and encompassing a total of 18 stops, can now purchase bus-only tickets for all city pairs along the route. This recent expansion of service significantly broadens the scope and connectivity of the bus top pairs previously available on Route 7.

This expansion along Route 7, which was approved by the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority (SJJPA) Board of Directors at the July 21 meeting, represents the latest step in Amtrak San Joaquins’ efforts to provide a comprehensive transportation alternative to travelers in communities throughout the state, beyond where the train can service.

Historically, travelers on all Thruway Bus routes were required to have a segment of train travel as part of their overall trip to travel on the Thruway Bus. However, state legislation, SB 742 authored by Senator Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica), was passed in 2019 to remove the requirement for intercity passenger rail/thruway bus services to sell companion rail tickets as a condition of the sale. As such, following extensive planning coordination, in 2021 after the impacts of the pandemic had eased, SJJPA opened parts of the Amtrak San Joaquins Route 7 as well as Routes 1c, 10, 18, and 19 for bus-only sales.

“We are pleased to now be at the point where we can expand connectivity along Route 7 to its fullest extent,” said Pat Hume, Chair for the SJJPA. “Fully opening Route 7 is a result of extensive collaboration with local stakeholders and regional transit providers and is a part of our ongoing effort to make Amtrak San Joaquins a comprehensive transportation solution for communities statewide.”
...

I mean, why else would you ride an Ambus? It's the "last-mile" connection when you're destination is not served by rail.

It's wholesale discrimination against residents who need to travel short distances (who are never banned on Amtrak rail services) and the only service is a State (a.k.a. Taxpayer) funded bus service, but won't serve that rider SOLELY because they are not travelling to a train.

Maybe, as retribution towards those impacted citizens, CalTrans should implement a policy that any Amtrak passenger must ALSO make use of a bus service as part of their trip. (Of course that's stupid when you think of it that way, so why is it any less stupid to discriminate against bus riders?)

It was a policy that never should have been implemented. Public transit is public transit, and if the bus/train is going that way, anyone should be fully welcome - AND encouraged - to use it.

There is also an exemption clause in state law for local traffic between Sacramento, Placerville and Lake Tahoe.

wigwagfan wrote: ↑Sat Sep 02, 2023 8:50 pm

I mean, why else would you ride an Ambus? It's the "last-mile" connection when you're destination is not served by rail.

It's wholesale discrimination against residents who need to travel short distances (who are never banned on Amtrak rail services) and the only service is a State (a.k.a. Taxpayer) funded bus service, but won't serve that rider SOLELY because they are not travelling to a train.
...
It was a policy that never should have been implemented. Public transit is public transit, and if the bus/train is going that way, anyone should be fully welcome - AND encouraged - to use it.
...

Just to be clear, my question was rhetorical. Just because I didn't consider it doesn't mean it didn't deserve consideration.

Of course you should be able to ride intermediate stops. An Ambus is basically a train on wheels, and a connecting service. Were the Ambus have trucks and ride on rails it wouldn't even be a question.

Hey, there's an idea! hi-rail buses!

I think the Thruway services were generally designed to not serve intermediate stops so as not to compete with private bus companies to avoid that competition complaint coming up in congress. That said, once a state begins subsidizing the service, I don't see the value in avoiding that complaint as the state wouldn't be subsidizing the bus service if private operators were providing it because it made money for them.

Also, private operators are dropping out by the dozens.

The concept of an Ambus serving intermediate points along an LD route is sound, even if I'm not sure what cost-benefit any such arrangement would deliver.

I guess that concept has an LD stopping only at stations where it is required to stop for crew changes, fuel, water, 500 mile inspections, whatever. Originating Ambushes would depart sufficiently ahead of the train so as to deliver passengers at the station in time for the train to arrive. With text and voice communications available with the bus, say, at Sanderson.TX, there was a nobody on, nobody off situation, the bus would just keep moving to, say El Paso on I-10. If somebody wanted to board or alight, then it would be a "duck off the Interstate and take care of business".

How will they market this? Will they add the Ambuses to the local transit agency's website? Perhaps Amtrak subsidizes through-ticketed passengers and the state or transit agency subsidizes bus-only users?

Busses replacing stations on the LD routes are a sure way to increase costs and depress any passenger traffic on those routes, and at least when terminus-to-terminus traffic is already well more than "just" overnight, the time savings to those passenger are negligible, and likely at inconvenient times for people wanting to use the busses locally. The Thruway busses should extend the train network where they can, not be used as a method of killing it.

RandallW wrote:The Thruway busses should extend the train network where they can, not be used as a method of killing it.

What's happening is the other way around - one train a day killing off multiple bus frequencies (including service to stops that the train blows through at 79 MPH). So the "I'll never ride a bus" crowd gets their gold plated, red carpet experience at a high cost to taxpayers; those who NEED that bus service for essential and critical trips (i.e. to work, to doctor's appoinments, medical care, etc.) are denied it - and are forced to drive.

Of course the private bus companies aren't running the route anymore, when they are required to pay a whole slew of local, state and federal taxes, while Amtrak is fully tax-exempt, and allowed to operate at a loss and charge fares below the cost of service. Frankly, Greyhound should be getting $5 billion a year (AND not pay one penny in taxes), but of course "that's unfair" - despite the fact it's literally, to the letter, the same deal Amtrak gets. How is that not fair???

Going through my recent travel history, I've traveled by Greyhound more frequently than by Amtrak and between locations served by Amtrak. The bus remains less expensive and faster than Amtrak between Washington DC and Harrisburg PA (at least when direct). But when I take the Trailways from Harrisburg to Williamsport PA, that's...oh wait, fully subsidized by the state of PA (and all air traffic to and from Williamsport was federally subsidized until even that was terminated). I have also ridden other routes where the busses serve the same towns as the train in TX. Pre-pandemic they were busy, not hurting for business, but were generally ignoring the same towns that Amtrak ignores.

As far as I can tell, VA subsidies both in-state busses and Amtrak, and hasn't gone all in on busses because they get stuck on the same interstate traffic jams as everyone else, and expanding Interstates is way more expensive than running a train.