I agree. The whole point of Rails to Trails and Railbanking is to preserve the right of way to allow future use as a rail line; though in some cases the disconnected short segments retained suitable only to be paths to the end of time.

The underlying question is if GNP has the "right" to reinstate service on a line they don't own. It sounds like the demand for service should have been served on the line's present owners, who are then stuck with what to do. The other option would be for someone to acquire it under the feeder line rules (like Coos Bay), but that means proving that service is being demanded and buying it for Net Liquidation Value.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out - but my bet is GNP doesn't have the money to back it up.