What stands out in the photo of the station is the good condition the track appears to be in. That trail group wants to take that out? They want to take out what the volunteers have clearly put so much time into? What's wrong with them?

There's a wonderful third option in all this: follow the tracks with a parallel recreation trail. This gives the multi-purpose use that this trail group is persuing, and gives the railroads in the Catskills (Delaware and Ulster, Catskill Mountain Railroad, Trolley Museum of New York) the opportunity to rebuild the tracks to use for passenger operations, which all three groups have proven is possible, viable and cost-effective. Everyone would stand to benefit. And the railroads would gain a path that they can move equipment along to reach locations where track work is being preformed.

That third option is a good idea, but the issue with that being the seperation of the two. In some locations along the right of way there is just not enough room to include a walking path at a safe distance from the foul point. I would throw this out into the thought process though, from an engineers stand point. I don not like people close to the main line walking/biking etc along the train. Also, I'm sure that it would be an insurance and liability nightmare for the railroad operators and insurance providors. Not saying that this is a bad idea, but....I (as an operations guy) would not feel comfortable running trains with hikers and bikers into foul. Just my 2 cents, and maybe this has worked well in the past, but it wouldn't give me a warm fuzzy.....

One thing not mentioned with this proliferation of trails, especially trails built in conjunction of highway projects is: Who's going to maintain all of these trails? Winter snow removal makes this a really interesting problem. To wit:

http://www.ravallirepublic.com/news/local/article_32bbf64e-1a39-11e1-aab1-001cc4c002e0.html

The parks department of the town would have been better off not plowing the trail at all.

Which is a parallel trail to a newly 4 laned U.S. 93 in Montana. One thing that should be demanded of trail supporters is a posted bond or endowment to keep the trail maintained or plowed. Otherwise the maintenance moves from a private corridor (railroad) to a public corridor (street).

The trail in the article is paved throughout, though I don't know if it is/will be plowed throughout (all 40 miles of it.

I am always wary of the "trails people" because so many of them would rip up the tracks belonging to your local short line or tourist railroad in a heartbeat. I totally love riding my bicycle and after being hit by cars twice I prefer to stay on trails. Riding on a rail trail is always fun when it is a trail using a right of way that is dead and gone. I would rather see a trail than the total loss of the right of way. I have ridden on a few rails with trails and when done well I don't see it as a problem from either a cyclist or railroaders point of view.

Tom, I'm afraid we, or at least the Adirondack people, will have to be very skeptical of the trail people, or at least some of them:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32021

I must apologize for that earlier comment in this thread. I knew about this, and was just expressing how amazing it is that some people really dislike railroads. I'm sorry if this wasn't as clear as it should have been.

I live in Indiana and the trail people want ever piece of right-of-way they can get here. There was a 23 mile former mile line torn-up here that never should have been. The trail people wanted this right-of-way so fast, that they ran the contractor off the property before he completed his cleanup. All along the line are waste piles of railroad ties which the contractor was to remove, now it is on the tax payers. The entire trail was paved. I have never seen any more then 5 people on the trail at the same time and the only time it is used, is on the weekends. It runs from no-where to no-where.

While there are currently people working on keeping the trail up, who is going to pay when the pavement needs repaired or replaced? They have placed benches alone the trail in cement, but people keep stealing them.

While the MONON trail in Indianapolis has been well received, the crime problem many property owners alone the trail warned about is taking place. Now the police have to spend more time policing the trail area.

I have nothing against the trails, but lets concentrate on a few good trails that are well used.

Hotels in Lake Placid have very nice 8.5x11 stand up displays with petition cards to fi out demanding the railroad be scrapped.

This appears to be a well organized opposition.

Rob

Well organised it most certainly is.

http://www.adirondackexplorer.org/stories/bikepath.php

From the earlier topic listing--commentary by a writer who is normally into walkable communities, high-speed rail, modern rail, etc.:

http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress ... mment-2036

There is a new pro-rail group at work. But do they have enough momentum?

http://nextstoptupperlake.org/

For some reason, I can't find it, but there was something about the supposed real motives of the anti-rail crowd, and that was to reintroduce wolves and other creatures into these woods, and part of what they perceived as necessary to do so was to get rid of the railroad, which runs through the middle of a large wilderness area. To reintroduce such large and potentially dangerous creatures into their former habitat also suggests that people be kept away--which meant, supposedly, not only no rail, but no trail. . .

Possibly the most effective argument that the pro-rail group can make to keep the railroad intact and expand it would be for access by those who are not physically able to use a trail. I doubt that the ADA would apply here as a legal recourse to prevent the railroad from being torn up, but since the general public really doesn't care about our personal love of trains arguments for keeping the line intact, I think this line of reasoning might resonate enough to tip the balance. If the opposition is as well-organized and backed by powerful economic interests as it appears, then this might be their only real hope. If they decide to go that route, they need to form a coalition with some local or regional disabled activists to go to hearings with to jointly testify.