 |
Re: Supreme Court Deals Massive Blow To Rails-to-Trails Programs
Author: Concerned
Date: 03-12-2014 - 16:36
Brian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bet governments won't be so quick to pull up
> abandoned tracks now. Trails could still be built
> along side the tracks as long as the tracks are
> still "in use", which means rails left in place
> and probably some occasional maintainence.
>
>
> Brian
I don’t understand why people (read foamers) think this court ruling will prevent of slow down railroad abandonments. If anything it will have the opposite effect!
We live in a culture and society where people trespass on abandoned and unused property, then hurt themselves and sue the owners. An unused “abandoned” railroad is a HUGE liability to a company! Plenty of track to trip or fall on, plenty o bridges to fall off of, ect. Rails to trails was so attractive for a railroad because it removed the liability from the railroads, and in exchange, the trail people didn’t have to pay huge sums of money or go through a long drawn out legal process to obtain the land to build a trail. Now with this ruling trail builders are going to be very cautious about trying to move forward with a project, but railroads still want to get rid of the potential liability as fast as they can. This ruling means that future railroad abandonments are likely to end up the same way the Milwaukee Road did… a thousand little parcels of land strung together, with a thousand different owners who have a thousand different ideas about how the land should be used, saved or repurposed. No company in their right mind is going to leave unused tracks in place, to maintain them, pay taxes on them, and have them as a liability. It’s all about money, and how fast you and get rid o those things that lose money.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bet governments won't be so quick to pull up
> abandoned tracks now. Trails could still be built
> along side the tracks as long as the tracks are
> still "in use", which means rails left in place
> and probably some occasional maintainence.
>
>
> Brian
I don’t understand why people (read foamers) think this court ruling will prevent of slow down railroad abandonments. If anything it will have the opposite effect!
We live in a culture and society where people trespass on abandoned and unused property, then hurt themselves and sue the owners. An unused “abandoned” railroad is a HUGE liability to a company! Plenty of track to trip or fall on, plenty o bridges to fall off of, ect. Rails to trails was so attractive for a railroad because it removed the liability from the railroads, and in exchange, the trail people didn’t have to pay huge sums of money or go through a long drawn out legal process to obtain the land to build a trail. Now with this ruling trail builders are going to be very cautious about trying to move forward with a project, but railroads still want to get rid of the potential liability as fast as they can. This ruling means that future railroad abandonments are likely to end up the same way the Milwaukee Road did… a thousand little parcels of land strung together, with a thousand different owners who have a thousand different ideas about how the land should be used, saved or repurposed. No company in their right mind is going to leave unused tracks in place, to maintain them, pay taxes on them, and have them as a liability. It’s all about money, and how fast you and get rid o those things that lose money.
