Rails-to-Trails Documentary
 

Just watched this about the history of the rail-to-trails movement:

https://www.pbs.org/video/from-rails-to-trails-Qj9S1f/

Good piece, despite a couple inaccuracies/oversimplifications. 1. Reversion does not always happen upon abandonment. Many roads have fee ownership of parcels. 2. Not all property owned by railroads was given to them by the federal government. That is particularly true in the NE, where "Farmer Brown et ux." often received good money from the acquiring road for a strip of land.

One thing happening here I'm at a loss about. Currently, the Saluda Grade and Ecusta Trail are underway here in WNC, both old Southern Railway properties which became Norfolk Southern. Both tracks now out of service for some years now by NS. The landowners adjoining the rail are seeking compensation for the land the trail will occupy, citing "loss of land use". Before they owned their land ADJOINING the EXISTING RR right of way, and before their parents owned the land, and before their grandparents owned the land, the RR acquired the land. Either they bought it from the landowners at the time, leased it, were granted an easement, given it by the government, regardless the property was acquired by the RR and the RR has owned the right of way along the track roadbed and I assume, a few feet on either side ever since.
So how it is the current landowners are demanding, and RECEIVING compensation for something that was never theirs, is a mystery to me. Except that some law firm in, uh... Alabama? Arkansas?...don't remember where exactly but this law firm contacts all the landowners who's land adjoins the RR and "represents" the group as a whole to get them compensated for their "lost" land. I've yet to hear any type of logical explanation.

My guess is that there was some long term lease with a compensation offered to these farmers by the railway company, like 50-100 years renewable contracts?

We have the same issue in my area in Europe, one of these trails is interrupted every few kilometers, which makes it totally useless on this segment, as bikes are not allowed on the closest road/highway... I was wondering why they did that, but now I'm thinking this might be the same issue (I have to remember to ask that question when I meet people in these villages).

Bike trails are not profitable, unlike railways they have no real source of income, so there are no funds to compensate the owners...?

In a nutshell, what happens to the real property after the rail line is formally abandoned (or service is permanently discontinued in the case of a line that doesn’t need to be formally announced) depends on the language of the deed into the railroad and how the courts in the state where the line is located interpret that language.

For example, if a railroad is granted property in MI for a “ railroad, and for no other purpose”, MI courts have held that that language grants the railroad ownership rather than something like an easement. The deed must include express language creating a reversionary right if the railroad ever ceases to exist before an abutting land owner can lay claim to the property.

Thanks for posting this episode. I found it very interesting learning about the movement in general and the Burke-Gilman in particular since I have ridden it for years but never knew about its genesis. The other local trail covered but not named is the East Sammamish Lake trail. I lived in Sammamish while the lakeside property owners did everything in their power to stop the trail. They spent millions in legal fees to block it, even though the rail right of way was never legally theirs. I spoke at one of the community meetings supporting the trail. I was very happy to see the lake owners and their money go down in flames as the right of way was acquired by the county and turned into the wonderful trail I used three days ago. Thanks again.

I forgot that it was supposed to air starting last night until I saw a post on FB. Ended up streaming it on my desktop computer.

In some cases, opposition comes from an irrational fear of crime. The same is true with some public transportation projects. What usually ends up happening is that such projects increase property values instead of crime. They can also increase local economic activity, resulting in increased tax revenues. (So much for trails not being money makers.). I’ve seen the local economic benefits from trails like the Mickelson in SD and the very popular GAP in PA and MD. Without the latter, you’re not going to get many visitors to somewhere like Rockwood, PA. Someone in W. Boston, PA had the foresight to buy for adjoining properties, fix them up, and turn them into B&Bs. They hit the market several years ago for $800K, which is a lot for that area. Even the house that was used for Buffalo Bill’s house in The Silence of the Lambs has been turned into a rental after being in the market for years. (It’s very close to the GAP). The online gift shop sells Skinsuit So Soft Lotion. :lol:

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f081d9775.jpeg

You nailed the homeowners primary concern - inviting crime into their neighborhoods, which are not borne out by other converted trails. They were also afraid of the unwashed, using their properties as bathrooms, not to mention lack of privacy. King county installed bathrooms and port-o-potties, litter cans and barriers delineating the trail and property boundaries. AND the home owners assessed values did increase and crime has not increased either.

People always fear stuff they don't understand. Having cycling and MUPs is good for a community. In the end yes there can be crime, but probably more crime happening from the people who are complaining than on the actual trails. If you do have crime there is probably a good reason for it and something that is preventable but having a bike path or MUP is not going to cause it.

I would much rather have a bike path near my home than some fancy shopping center or ridiculous NIMBY stuff.

Converted rail lines can become tourist attractions benefiting businesses along its length. One close to Montreal is the Parc Lineaire Le P'tit Train du Nord. This is a 200 km long trail that extends north from the town of Saint Jerome, about a 45 minute drive from my home on Montreal island to the town of Mont Laurier. There are several shuttle services who will allow you to park in Saint Jerome and transport you and your bike to Mont Laurier so that you can ride largely downhill back to your car. There are many bed and breakfasts along the route and it is typical for people to take 2-3 days to ride back. The trail is a mix of paved and unpaved sections winding through the Laurentian mountains following the North river. There are many small towns and villages along the route where you can stop to eat or rest and several campgrounds where you can stay overnight. In summer, you will see hundreds of cyclists and in winter, just as many cross country skiers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parc_L..._Train_du_Nord

The trail is part of the Trans Canada Trail network of trails and routes that cross the whole country and also extend to the Arctic Ocean.

Yep. Like the GAP trail mentioned above. The Katy in MO and Coeur d’ Allenes in ID are two other examples. I even encountered a good number of touring riders on the Mickelson Trail in SD even though it was sort of “pre-season”.

Alciphil - Thank you for posting about that trail. Now I have a new destination to dream of riding, boomer

You might enjoy this bit of history about the trail. Winter oriented

https://skimuseum.ca/memorable-momen...le-leaf-trail/
The p'tit train started out as a passenger service at a time when roads in that area were not cleared of snow in the winter. My parents sometimes boarded the "snow train" and skied from station to station in the Laurentions to board the train again back to the city. The Maple Leaf trail still exits, I have skied along parts of it. Today, the old rail bed is a 12 month of the year facility. The first good snowfall changes the sport it serves