 |
Re: NCRA/NWP Co. Memos Regarding "Railbanking"
Author: Juppo
Date: 07-16-2012 - 09:55
MG42 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
I think that the THA is on the right path (pun intended) with the mutual rail/trail/excursion corridor around Humboldt Bay. I've never been a fan of the Rail-to-Trails scheme, but like the WP museum in Portola, these people know they're doing and seem to have a solidly positive and productive background.
If "Rails-to-Trails" changed their name and their mission statement to "Rails-with-Trails," they'd get more accomplished and everybody would be happy. I agree, trails parallel to rail lines are a railfan's best friend. Safe, legal access to the ROW that isn't standing at a grade crossing.
It's interesting what you say about the ROW reverting to private property owners. Two good examples of this is the former SP/NVRR ROW from St. Helena to Calistoga on the Napa Valley Railway and the middle section of the Modoc Line that I've driven a couple times. Both have had the ROW subdivided and integrated into surrounding property with wineries nearly completely erasing the NVRR ROW and rancher's fences strung across the trackless ROW on the Modoc.
I'm wondering what the property ownership and lines are along the Eel River ROW? How much is private property and how much is public land? How many private property owners are there up there? Can't be many.
Although I do agree with everyone that Mexican Cartels, etc are growing LOTS of illegal Cannabis up there, I disagree that it is a problem for the railroad or potential trail users. If the railroad reopens WITH a trail and an illegal pot farm happens to be nearby, the growers will move elsewhere, more secluded. A bunch of machete wielding Hispanics harassing trail users is bad for their business and they know it. This isn't Mexico.
Also, (not directing this at anyone in particular) it's time to get over the whole "evils of marijuana" nonsense. This isn't 1955 anymore. McCarthyism, J. Edgar Hoover, Communism, gays and the smoking of weed are either dead, or about as harmful as an excess of laughter. I feel bad for the few people left who sit alone in their house concerned that there are people out there smoking weed and having a fun, safe and enlightened time.
A person's political and social ideology aside, marijuana is not anyone's (negative) issue or enemy.
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
I think that the THA is on the right path (pun intended) with the mutual rail/trail/excursion corridor around Humboldt Bay. I've never been a fan of the Rail-to-Trails scheme, but like the WP museum in Portola, these people know they're doing and seem to have a solidly positive and productive background.
If "Rails-to-Trails" changed their name and their mission statement to "Rails-with-Trails," they'd get more accomplished and everybody would be happy. I agree, trails parallel to rail lines are a railfan's best friend. Safe, legal access to the ROW that isn't standing at a grade crossing.
It's interesting what you say about the ROW reverting to private property owners. Two good examples of this is the former SP/NVRR ROW from St. Helena to Calistoga on the Napa Valley Railway and the middle section of the Modoc Line that I've driven a couple times. Both have had the ROW subdivided and integrated into surrounding property with wineries nearly completely erasing the NVRR ROW and rancher's fences strung across the trackless ROW on the Modoc.
I'm wondering what the property ownership and lines are along the Eel River ROW? How much is private property and how much is public land? How many private property owners are there up there? Can't be many.
Although I do agree with everyone that Mexican Cartels, etc are growing LOTS of illegal Cannabis up there, I disagree that it is a problem for the railroad or potential trail users. If the railroad reopens WITH a trail and an illegal pot farm happens to be nearby, the growers will move elsewhere, more secluded. A bunch of machete wielding Hispanics harassing trail users is bad for their business and they know it. This isn't Mexico.
Also, (not directing this at anyone in particular) it's time to get over the whole "evils of marijuana" nonsense. This isn't 1955 anymore. McCarthyism, J. Edgar Hoover, Communism, gays and the smoking of weed are either dead, or about as harmful as an excess of laughter. I feel bad for the few people left who sit alone in their house concerned that there are people out there smoking weed and having a fun, safe and enlightened time.
A person's political and social ideology aside, marijuana is not anyone's (negative) issue or enemy.
