You guys who say that rail-trail users are a barrier to restoration of rail service are looking at it the wrong way. Which is going to be easier to build? A railroad on a former rail-trail (owned by one or two parties), or a railroad on a former railroad (dispersed among hundreds of owners, some of whom have built houses smack-dab in the middle of the right-of-way, and/or are using it as their driveway, or who completely bulldozed the railbed away and built a subdivision on it)? Or even worse: a railroad going through miles of subdivisions. Nobody is going to tolerate a modern-day Robert Moses, wielding eminent domain like a sword.
The choice is not between a rail-trail and a railroad. The choice is between a rail-trail and abandonment.
The choice is not between a rail-trail and a railroad. The choice is between a rail-trail and abandonment.