How often do we think of a railway in the context of the communities and businesses it served? I’m sure that some people must have trouble understanding that a railway is more than an application of a form of technology that for some strange (and never understood) reason, holds a great many of us in fascination. Railways were built for a purpose and although they exist as distinct entities with often their own particular characters, they also form strong and vital links with the communities they serve, and contribute in a major way to local economies and culture.

all sorts of decisions people were making in respect of the location of their businesses and their homes. So how was the railway equipped at the outset to serve what was then an anticipated community need rather than an existing one?

At the time of the opening of the Gembrook Railway on 18 December 1900, the station was equipped with the absolute bare essentials to meet the needs of the local community. A platform with a single portable shed, a run-around loop, a goods loop and shed, and a siding to service and store locomotives was about it. It could not have been provided with less if it was to be in any way functional as a station and terminus.

The basic nature of the Gembrook facilities was completely understandable given the uncertainty of the times to come. The excellent local soil, the farms already under cultivation and the tall stands of fine timber to the North, East and South all augured well for the future; but no one could say for sure what would transpire in the form of traffic and how the railway and its services should be shaped to meet that need.

In 1896 the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Railways anticipated that traffic in timber, potatoes, other root crops and tourism would provide the mainstay of the line. They were proven to be correct and Gembrook was the prime example. Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of timber and produce were carried over the line during its life, and passenger traffic from day trippers and holiday-makers was very healthy, particularly in the early years.

The railway responded to the growth in tonnage in the ways and means necessary to meet demand. General produce, potatoes, split posts and palings, timber from some of the smaller mills and passengers were catered for at the West end of the station ground while the timber industry dominated activity at the East end. This division between the ends of the yard was real. The traffic handled at each was different and by and large the people making use of each end were also different. Let’s examine the West end first.

The original siding arrangements here, simple though they may have been, proved to be adequate to meet the loadings required over the years. Concessions were made for passengers in the form of additional sheds, toilets, verandas, longer and wider platforms and railings. All tended to disguise the temporary nature of the original structures and those that supplemented them later on.

The passenger traffic, which led to the improvements in platform accommodation, was not just the result of the travelling habits of the Gembrook residents. The journey and the destination proved popular with Melbournites for weekend and holiday jaunts, particularly until the I 930s. Many locals let out rooms to visitors and, of course, the Ranges Hotel offered accommodation and

entertainment. This all added to the vitality of Gembrook as well as helping to line local pockets. The townspeople made use of the railway for recreation as well. Football teams playing matches against teams from neighbouring townships would often travel to and from the game by train.

As farms were cleared and developed the East end of the yard became busy with livestock ready for despatch or waiting to be collected, having arrived from markets elsewhere. Drays loaded with potatoes could be found with owners assisting in loading the railway trucks. But by far the dominating feature of the yard in the early years was the piles of split posts and palings destined for suburban backyards. Bullock teams were common at this end as they were the prime means by which the split timber was brought to the station.

At the East end of the yard the head shunt curved off to the North East, hinting at the possibility of an extension to serve other communities and industry in the bush up Beenak way. As we know today this extension never materialised. Instead the bush came to Gembrook loaded on tram bogies of 3 feet, and 3 feet 6 inch gauges.

The timber traffic on the line was very large, particularly until the mid 1930s when road transport began to have an impact. It is interesting to examine how the railway responded to the volumes and importance of this traffic. Yelland and Barnacle constructed their 3 feet 6 inch gauge East Beenak Tramway into the station in 1904 and made use of the head shunt as a loading point for their timber.

For the next thirteen years this arrangement satisfied requirements; but the boom years following the Great War were to add considerable strain. By 1919 there were seven sawmills sending timber through the East end of the yard. In September of that year the 3 feet gauge Beenak Tramway was completed with the promise of a further growth in traffic. Bill Russell, along with Maurie Dyer, the driving force behind the tramway, negotiated the construction of an additional timber siding branching from the "new" head shunt at cost of 269 pounds. The siding became known as "Russell Road" and extended to the yard boundary at Innes Road. Grundy, the owner of the East Beenak Tramway at that time, shifted his line to the South side of the yard to make room for both the new siding and the Beenak Tramway. This provided a rare situation where three gauges of railway met. The 2 feet 6 inches Government line, the 3 feet gauge Beenak Tramway, and Grundy’s 3 feet 6 inch gauge line.

Facilities were to remain stable for the next seven years while timber extraction was concentrated in the Beenak area to the North. The Beenak Tramway provided the connection to the railhead at Gembrook. But matters were to change in 1926 when Bill Russell commenced construction of a new tramway to exploit the forest in the valley of the Black Snake Creek. This was ultimately built as a steel-railed three feet gauge line and was completed through to Gembrook station by November 1926.

During the early part of 1927 the Railway Commissioners extended the head shunt on a curve parallel to "Russell Road" around to Innes Road. At the same time the area

between the two lines of rail and also the open ground on the South side was regraded to provide a more level stacking and loading ground. Previously both sidings had perched on top of embankments making loading operations difficult. This was the last change to occur to the trackwork at Gembrook and was done because of the expected high volumes of timber to come from the Black Snake Creek region.

Along with the mills the railway indirectly contributed to the local economy in other ways as well. Men such as Henry Harvey, Huby, Jack Saunders, Tom Ingram and Bob Hocking were employed around the timber sidings loading the railway trucks with their employers’ timber. They, along with other tallymen, lived within the town and their incomes were important contributions to the local economy.

Likewise the passengers and crews of the trains provided significant custom for the Ranges Hotel and local guest-houses. Early in the century Gembrook boasted a market which was well served by the railway in the form of bringing in customers from further up the line and sending away purchased stock and produce.

Because the railway is no longer a necessity to the Gembrook community it would be impossible to fully recreate the past. However it will be an interesting challenge in the future to recreate at least some of the former character of the terminus; for an attractive destination will only add to the desire to make the trip. One would hope that the P.B.P.S., by working with the residents and businesses, who have much to gain from the return of the railway, can perhaps help them to again "own" the railway as they once did and contribute to creating an environment that is as mutually beneficial as it once was.

References:

Cuffley, Peter, That Little Train, The Five Mile Press 1987.

McCarthy, Michael, Bellbrakes, Bullocks & Bushmen, LRRSA, 1987.