Railfan & Rails-to-Trails fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you don't want it to turn into a trail, you
> have two choices
>
> 1) The land reverts to adjacent landowners. I'd
> rather have the trail.
>
> 2) YOU buy the railroad line and fix it up so
> Amtrak 3 & 4 can continue to use it.

The problem with the Rails-To-Trails people is that they have more political clout in Washington DC and in State Capitals than the pro-rail people who would like to restore a trail back into a railroad. In a handful of cases, even though the agreements and legal language had been set up ahead of time reserving the right to restore a trail back into a railroad if economic conditions warranted it, these people nevertheless challenge it in court and otherwise "footdrag" the process every step of the way.

Can you come up with ONE example where a train was reconverted back into a railroad? There have been some instances where the desire and economic stimulus to do so was there, but there's this attitude of "once a trail, always a trail."