Some people may think I've overstated the influence of trail people, and others may think they have become a serious threat.

One thing that is certain is that a fair number of rail properties have had to deal with what is at least a nuisance, at worst something that can destroy them.

A friend of mine on Facebook has compiled a list of roads that have dealt with or are dealing with--oh, I hate to put it this way, it sounds overdramatic--the "trail menace." His initial list includes these roads, all of which have been discussed here at RyPN at one time or another:

Catskill Mountain
Adirondack Scenic
Saratoga and North Creek
Western Maryland Scenic
Santa Cruz and Monterrey Bay
Fillmore and Western
Northern Central RR (Steam Into History)

Not all of the "threats" are equal. Catskill Mountain, Adirondack Scenic, and Fillmore & Western are virtually or really in fights for their lives; Santa Cruz & Monterey Bay apparently is friendly with a dominant trail group (the threats are coming from a much smaller outfit that is also much less influential, supposedly almost discredited); and Western Maryland and Northern Central both seem to be at peaceful coexistence with trails (both being on former double-tracked railroads helps--but at least WM has some people who still want it to go away).

Not on the list are the Stewartstown Railroad (I don't know if it was ever threatened by a trail group, but I would be surprised if it hadn't been in its years of dormancy), and the former Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburgh, which is home to the Western New York Railroad Historical Society.

http://opposeeriecattrailtrail.com/Railroad.pdf

Anothr possible candidate to add to the list would be the freight-hauling Indiana & Ohio (Genessee & Wyoming subsidiary), which apparently has had trail headaches in the Cincinnatti, Oh. area:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/n ... d-may.html

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.p ... c=2517.840

My friend also mentioned some problems the Santa Maria Valley in California had, but I couldn't find confirmation of that.

Anyway, just out of curiousity, are there any other railroads, in particular heritage roads, that readers here may want to add to this list?

"Trail Menace" is a suitable term, perhaps a bit polite.

It is a fight. I still believe in compromise (rails with trails) but those of us with a rails-first mentality cannot afford to be quiet.

Is it the biggest issue facing us? No. Grexit, Isil and a host of others take precedent l, but if railroad preservation is your thing then helping to fight for rails with trails (or in the case of an economic turnaround, rails instead of trails) is a worthy cause.

All cases matter, but the Adirondack situation may become case law for all the others.

Rob

I happened to be visiting the Connecticut Eastern Railroad Museum in Willimantic, CT this past weekend. They are being affected by the construction of the East Coast Greenway. Basically, as a compromise, they are losing the ability to extend their tracks across a river - and the wye they are constructing will have a short tail track, not exactly on its original alignment. Original plans to route the trail straight through their property were thwarted - and the trail mostly follows around the property, until crossing the aforementioned bridge.

Meanwhile, in Maine, the WW&F has taken a different approach. About 3/4 mile of ROW has been converted to a public walking trail and is maintained by the museum. It is adjacent to the Sheepscot River and conservation land, and fairly scenic. Our ownership and maintenance clearly establishes our presence there, should the railroad ever be extended to that location. And a working cooperative relationship with the conservation association helps.

When the JK Line (ex-Erie) was abandoned, the Hoosier Valley Railroad Museum received a donation of one mile of intact track, one mile of ties left in place and 14 miles of right-of-way. The original idea was to turn this entire right-of-way over to a trail group. That never happened and the museum continues to own the complete 16 miles of old Erie ROW. Another trail group has laid a trail alongside the initial mile of track (which the museum runs over for certain events) and for the next 8 miles (9 miles total). The original plan was for the museum to put additional track in beyond the first mile and run east from the museum site, but that plan changed, and the museum now runs over the 11 miles west of the museum over former C&O trackage. There is still the possibility that the museum might lay additional track on at least that next mile of ex-Erie right-of-way in the future, for possible car storage if nothing else. BTW, the side by side trail and rail section has been a success for both the trail and the museum.

Les

Unfortunately our situation (Ct Eastern RR Museum) shows that it is not only the trail groups we have to watch out for. Prior to the grant coming from the feds to CT DEEP (Dept of Energy and Environmental Protection), the museum already had agreements with the town, 2 of the 3 affected trail groups and the local white water group to jointly fix the bridge as a wide deck multi-modal surface (trail, trail maintenance vehicle and train). Allowing the museum to eventually back a train across the river to go from the back wye track to the Airline track for our ride (eventually a wye loop around the museum), there would have been a 14'-20' wide walking surface on the bridge (it was still to be decided if the deck widening would be offset to one side or both sides), and when the white water group (kayakers mainly) would have an event, a flat car could be positioned on the bridge to serve as a bleacher, as the river is wider, and deep in that area (for either a race finish-line or trick area, and the next wide area is next to the dam 1 mile down stream). The museum was also talking about provide shuttle service from Bridge St (their primary site is across the street from our entrance) to the river bridge or trail head outside our fence for the event(s).

Unfortunately when DEEP got the funds to upgrade and create the merge point for the trails they said, with no if, ands, or buts that the bridge would not have rails on it. and wouldn't even allow a paved crossing (even with the rubber flangeway fillers) so we could end our tracks at the bridge and restore (reinstall over) the original track alignment. DEEP wouldn't even allow the bridge repair to be handled separately, if it was going to have rails installed, as the museum and one of the trail groups were already looking into how to fund it ourselves (the museum already had an official engineering report from either the Coast Guard or Army Corps. of Engineers stating what needed to be fixed and how it needed to be fixed, in hand prior to the project starting).

Not sure if it was DEEP or the project head that blocked the multi-modal use, but maybe in the future the trail route can be modified and we can get to the bridge. Only time will tell as administrations and governmental priorities change.

Rich C.

Another one to add to the list:

http://www.psvrr.org/settherecordstraight.html