Heritage rail passenger numbers

Summary

The request sought details on heritage rail passenger counting methods and specific single-journey figures for the Manx Electric Railway (MER) from 2015 to 2019. The Department of Infrastructure disclosed the transition from manual counts to a Ticketer system, provided aggregate MER passenger data, but stated they could not supply the requested specific single-journey breakdowns.

Key Facts

• Passenger counting methods changed in 2015 from traditional physical counts with estimates to a digital Ticketer system.
• The Department does not hold data in a format that allows for the provision of single-journey passenger figures for specific MER sections.
• Group travel (coach parties, cruises, school trips) has been difficult to record accurately on the Ticketer system.
• The Douglas Bay Horse Trams have never been counted using the traditional method.
• Cash revenue for the railways showed a general increasing trend over eight years despite a decrease from 2018 to 2019.

Data Disclosed

• 2015
• 2019
• 10,000 passengers
• 15%
• 682 groups (2017)
• 698 groups (2018)
• 731 groups (2019)
• 121,459 (MER Traditional 2012)
• 133,853 (MER Traditional 2019)
• 135,857 (MER Ticketer 2019)
• £1,119,652 (Cash revenue 2012)
• £1,794,001 (Cash revenue 2019)

Original Request

Please provide details of how passenger numbers on the heritage railways - MER, SMR, Steam Railway and horse tramway - are collated and counted for publication for the years 2015 to 2019 inclusive. How, and when, did the method for calculating passenger numbers change? Please provide figures for the number of single journey passengers travelling on the MER between Derby Castle and Groudle, Groudle and Laxey, Laxey to Maughold and Maughold to Ramsey in each year 2015 to 2019. And please provide figures for the total number of single journey passengers on the MER in each of those years, avoiding the double or triple counting of passengers who may have travelled on more than one of these sections - Douglas to Groudle, Groudle to Laxey, Laxey to Maughold and Maughold to Ramsey - during one journey.

Data Tables (2)

Full Response Text

Department of Infrastructure Sea Terminal Building, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM1 2RF

Contact: FOI response Team/HLB/MF Telephone: (01624) 686785 Email: dpo-doi@gov.im

Our ref: 1168849 9 March 2020

Dear ###

We write further to your request which was received on 6 February 2020 and which states (sic):

"Please provide details of how passenger numbers on the heritage railways - MER, SMR, Steam Railway and horse tramway - are collated and counted for publication for the years 2015 to 2019 inclusive. How, and when, did the method for calculating passenger numbers change? Please provide figures for the number of single journey passengers travelling on the MER between Derby Castle and Groudle, Groudle and Laxey, Laxey to Maughold and Maughold to Ramsey in each year 2015 to 2019. And please provide figures for the total number of single journey passengers on the MER in each of those years, avoiding the double or triple counting of passengers who may have travelled on more than one of these sections - Douglas to Groudle, Groudle to Laxey, Laxey to Maughold and Maughold to Ramsey - during one journey."

Our response is as follows. 1. Traditional methods of recording passengers have been used, which are the station masters counting physical passengers at the principle station and then adding a percentage/number to allow for customers who board or alight at the minor stations.
This was the only method prior to 2015. IMR - Physical counts of Douglas Departures, Castletown Departures and Port Erin Departures. With an added 10,000 passengers to estimate departures from other stations along the route which cannot be physically counted i.e Port St Mary, Colby, Ballasalla etc. Then the dining car numbers are added on separately at the end of the year, from our booking system, which include dining car main season, dining car Christmas and Santa Trains. MER - Physical count of Derby Castle departures, Laxey departures, Ramsey departures +15% to compensate for the other stations/stops along the line that cannot be physically counted. SMR - Physical count of Laxey departures to summit + bungalow arrivals from summit then divided by 2 as SMR is recorded on return journeys.

DBHT Please note Douglas Bay Horse Trams have never been counted in the traditional method 2. Since 2015 passenger numbers have been recorded by our Ticketer system by the guards on the modes of transport in question with added dining car passengers for the main season, Christmas and Santa Trains. However we have many groups that use the railways (coach parties, cruises, school trips etc) and these have been difficult to record on Ticketer as there can be up to 100 people getting on/off at once; this has led to some groups being fully recorded and others not. The Department is working on new procedures to ensure group travel figures are accurately recorded in the future. We have recorded the number of groups over the past three years; however we do not have accurate figures for the number of passengers that this equates to. 2017 - 682 groups 2018 - 698 groups 2019 - 731 groups 3. We do not hold the information in a format which allows us to provide MER single journey passengers for the locations that have been requested. However you may find the below table useful - MER numbers for the years 2012 to 2019 recorded by Traditional and Ticketer methods. Transport Mode 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 MER Traditional 121,459 123,198 123,420 127,174 138,807 140,291 145,841 133,853 MER Ticketer Method 91,327 200,003 197,952 202,289 135,857 You may also find it useful to see the pattern of cash revenue generated by the railways for each year. While it shows a decrease in cash revenue from 2018-2019, it also shows a trend of increases over the 8 years. 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Cash revenue in £ 1,119,652 1,236,339 1,242,986 1,519,546 1,478,148 1,662,168 2,043,639 1,794,001

Please quote the reference number 1168849 in any future communications.

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your freedom of information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically or by delivery/post.

An electronic version of our complaint form can be found by going to our website at https://services.gov.im/freedom-of-information/Review . If you would like a paper version of our complaint form to be sent to you by post, please contact me and I will be happy to arrange for this. Your review request should explain why you are dissatisfied with this response, and should be made as soon as practicable. We will respond as soon as the review has been concluded.

If you are not satisfied with the result of the review, you then have the right to appeal to the Information Commissioner for a decision on; 1. Whether we have responded to your request for information in accordance with Part 2 of the Freedom of Information Act 2015; or 2. Whether we are justified in refusing to give you the information requested.
In response to an application for review, the Information Commissioner may, at any time, attempt to resolve a matter by negotiation, conciliation, mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution and will have regard to any outcome of this in making any subsequent decision. More detailed information on your right to a review can be found on the Information Commissioner’s website at www.inforights.im. Should you have any queries concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Further information about freedom of information requests can be found at www.gov.im/foi. We will now close your request as of this date.

Yours sincerely

FOI Response Team