 |
Re: NCRA/NWP Co. Memos Regarding "Railbanking"
Author: MG42
Date: 07-15-2012 - 18:05
Juppo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I don't understand is, do the pro-trail
> people realize how isolated the middle segment of
> the Eel River Canyon is? With the exception of a
> handful off small, poor quality, isolated roads,
> the most isolated segement is well over 50 miles.
> Is anybody really going to access this trail?
> Is anyone going to walk or bike 50 plus miles? I
> can't see the railroad being torn out and replaced
> with a bike path.
Juppo, you are 100% right about that. The only place a trail really makes much sense is around Humboldt Bay Samoa to Eureka, where most folks live in Humboldt, to maybe as far south as Alton. This is also the best section of track for THA to use when compared to the Eel Canyon, at least as far as repairs go. Which leads me back to my question-why bury the rails THA can use in order to build a trail, when there is plenty of room to build that same trail right next to the tracks?
>
> Years ago (late 1990's/early 2000's) it was said
> that it would cost MORE to remove the Eel River
> line than it would to relay and upgrade the track.
> The reason given was that under current law, you
> couldn't tear out an industrial facility or sell
> former "brown land" without restoring it to strict
> enviornmental standards. If they just rebuild
> the railroad, they are required to clean up less,
> hence cheaper. I wonder if this is still true
> today?
I think so. I know of a local car dealer who bought some land in a prime location near the highway, and he allowed another neighboring business to dump their contaminated soil on his lot(the whole area was a lumber mill in the past). Now, under this law, I presume, the car dealer can't pave the lot and open up, so it has been empty for about five years now.
>
> This has always led me to beleive that the Eel
> River line will simply continue to sit and
> deteriorate.
I don't disagree with that assessment. Hopefully something changes down the road. One thing the pro-trail crowd also seems to forget, is that if the line is ever officially abandoned, the ROW will go back to the property owners, more than likely. Property owners, who will be less than enthusiastic about giving up their land for trails. They should try working with us railfans, most of whom don't mind a trail next to the ROW (some of whom, myself included, would use such trail to railfan!), instead of blaming us for blocking their plan (which is a blatant lie). Otherwise they may never get what they want, even if NCRA gives in.
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I don't understand is, do the pro-trail
> people realize how isolated the middle segment of
> the Eel River Canyon is? With the exception of a
> handful off small, poor quality, isolated roads,
> the most isolated segement is well over 50 miles.
> Is anybody really going to access this trail?
> Is anyone going to walk or bike 50 plus miles? I
> can't see the railroad being torn out and replaced
> with a bike path.
Juppo, you are 100% right about that. The only place a trail really makes much sense is around Humboldt Bay Samoa to Eureka, where most folks live in Humboldt, to maybe as far south as Alton. This is also the best section of track for THA to use when compared to the Eel Canyon, at least as far as repairs go. Which leads me back to my question-why bury the rails THA can use in order to build a trail, when there is plenty of room to build that same trail right next to the tracks?
>
> Years ago (late 1990's/early 2000's) it was said
> that it would cost MORE to remove the Eel River
> line than it would to relay and upgrade the track.
> The reason given was that under current law, you
> couldn't tear out an industrial facility or sell
> former "brown land" without restoring it to strict
> enviornmental standards. If they just rebuild
> the railroad, they are required to clean up less,
> hence cheaper. I wonder if this is still true
> today?
I think so. I know of a local car dealer who bought some land in a prime location near the highway, and he allowed another neighboring business to dump their contaminated soil on his lot(the whole area was a lumber mill in the past). Now, under this law, I presume, the car dealer can't pave the lot and open up, so it has been empty for about five years now.
>
> This has always led me to beleive that the Eel
> River line will simply continue to sit and
> deteriorate.
I don't disagree with that assessment. Hopefully something changes down the road. One thing the pro-trail crowd also seems to forget, is that if the line is ever officially abandoned, the ROW will go back to the property owners, more than likely. Property owners, who will be less than enthusiastic about giving up their land for trails. They should try working with us railfans, most of whom don't mind a trail next to the ROW (some of whom, myself included, would use such trail to railfan!), instead of blaming us for blocking their plan (which is a blatant lie). Otherwise they may never get what they want, even if NCRA gives in.
