Cycling Rail Trails a Boost to Local Economies
by Warren McLaren, Sydney on 12.24.06
Rail trails are based on disused railway lines being ripped up and their relatively level trackways being converted to recreational applications like walking or cycling. The idea really started to gather steam in the mid-eighties in the US, where these days the Rail Trail Conservancy supports about 13,600 miles (~21,900 km) of rail-trails. The concept of railway reuse has spread around world. In Western Australia, for example, old logging lines were converted to make sections of the almost 1,000 km (620 mile) Bibbulmun bushwalking track, which in turn inspired the Mudda Biddi bike trail. On the Australian east coast there is the Murray to Mountains Rail Trail, of which a recent study found that cyclists had brought $2.3 million AUD in eco-tourism to local economies, over a single holiday weekend. As the head of the bicycle advocacy group put it, “It probably cost $4 million to build the Murray to Mountains Rail Trail so they can say they’ve got half their money back in one weekend.” The 94 km (58 mile) trail is a bitumen sealed track utilising the gentle gradients of unused rural railways to bring tourists to a country area, the financial impact of which was described as the same as introducing another crop to the region. ::Murray to Mountains Rail Trail, via the Border Mail.
It's sad that train tracks aren't being used for trains. Turning the railways into recreational paths is fun, but not very practical or sustainable. We've already got so many roads, we don't really need more, do we? How about rallying to the bring trains lines back, and promoting policies that give bicyclists, pediestrians, and other human-powered transportation options equal access and more respect on the billions of roads we already have?
Tracks to no where are useless. As the article says they are probably old tracks from gone industries, mining, logging, etc. Not tracks from city to city.
Spain has also converted lots of disused train tracks into bike paths. I support this idea. If the tracks are not going to be used for trains, then they should be made available for bikes. In Spain, if I remember correctly, most disused tracks are due to a change in carriage size which made many tracks useless. So I think their conversion a good thing. However, I also agree with the previous poster. If those tracks could still be used, it would be even better to repair them for a renewal of train use.
Train tracks that go from nowhere to nowhere aren't going to be very useful for rec paths either :-) In my city, we've lost many many inter and inner city train lines that have been converted to rec paths, and they are planning hundreds more.
People in Contra Cost County, here in Northern California, celebrate two train trails between many of the population centers and commercial centers of the various communities up and down the main local valley. The story of neglect of the railroads is sad. The conversion to walking and cycling is better than complete disuse. But it's not an ecological victory, it's at best a monument to what should have been ... and what should, in my opinion, be a priority for those communities in the coming years.
I commute 13 miles to work on one of those trails every day. The tracks are still there for much of it, except one short section that was no longer used. Even in Minnesota, at 25 degrees (-4 C), at 7 in the morning, it's full of commuters. Weekends, it's full of people biking with their families (or on their own) to local businesses, to friends', or just out for a ride.
I am a rail fan and a cyclist and have been recently selected to serve on the board of directors for the Friends of the Lafitte Corridor, an organization dedicated to turning an abandoned rail line running from the New Orleans French Quarter into public recreation space.
In the USA, part of the reason that so many miles of former railways have been converted to trails is due to Rail Banking, a system whereby the right-of-way, land and route of a closed railway is preserved so that service can be restored if circumstances change at a later time. By turning the rail right of way into a bike trail, former owners cannot encroach upon or reclaim segments; thus, the right of way remains intact. Also, the cost and liabilities of maintaining the right of way are no longer on the railway operator when the property is railbanked.
The rail line that ran through the historic Lafitte Corridor was owned by Norfolk Southern. Many years ago, it led to one of several railway passenger terminals in the New Orleans; but the line became obsolete when all the railroads consolidated their passenger services into one location (New Orleans' Union Passenger Terminal).
Although Norfolk Southern leased the rail corridor from the city, Hurricane Katrina has severely strained city finances and there was the very real threat that the city of New Orleans would sell off parcels of the corridor to private investors. Had this occurred, the corridor would have been broken up & lost forever.
What a great idea. Most of us need to walk more, and take back the earth from the noisy, polluting cars. Most of our butts could use a bunch of walking. Unfortunately in a town full of pickup trucks and clattering illegal mufflers and boomcars, a walk is unpleasant.
More walks, less motors, more health.
Rail trails tend to marginalize bicycling and walking. When recreational paths (also known as Multi-Use Recreational Paths, or MURPs) become popular, bicycling and walking start being seen as "special" forms of transportation that need their own special facilities, rather than being respected and legally protected on the public roads. We should be spending our limited recources to promote policies that turn the roads that we already have into roads that we want to use and that are mostly free of smog producing, speed addicted, cell-phone distracted car drivers. We should be demanding that our public roads are accessable and safe for all users, and not just hand the roads over to the people who make them unsafe and unpleasant in the first place!
Why settle for a few pretty trails, when we could have all of the roads be more healthy, safe, beautiful, and practical for the more sustainable forms of transport like biking and walking?
Separated bike facilities are a great encouragement for bicyclists and prospective bicyclists. Many everyday bike commuters began as "trail" riders. Bike paths don't "marginalize" bicyclists, any more than a freeway "marginalizes" motorists.
I'm supportive of anything that helps people get out on bikes. If it's a MURP, so be it. If its a complete street, so be it. I'm in favor of diverse, redundant systems. We need alternatives.
Check out what NYC is doing with a disused elevated freight line that runs down the west side of Manhattan:
http://www.thehighline.org/
I was at some of the earliest planning meetings, and the only opposition to it voiced was from the owners of parking garages below the old infrastructure- they contended that the highline was unsafe and unsightly- both categorically wrong. It was made clear that their real intention was to develop the land that they got on the cheap so they can turn left-over (or rather 'under') space into pricy condos. Very exciting stuff! New Yorkers will have a greenway winding through and above a neighborhood that has a dirth of greenspace otherwise, the character of the neighborhood is maintained, and the railbanked infrastructure will be available if it is ever needed for transportation again. But just try taking it back from the public!