Quote:
Originally Posted by mishman
Hesitant to wade into these shark infested waters but how many of these commenters have been on a well maintained bicycle trail in a tourism hot spot like our lake?
I admit that I don't know the number of train riders but I would wager many, many times more people (locals and tourists) would use the trail for hiking and cycling than train riders. These bike trails generate lots of tourism dollars as people want healthy forms of recreation. You can see it all around the country.
I have ridden bike trails in FL, on the west coast and principally in New England. Almost without exception, businesses along rail trails love the business these trails generates. Cyclists and walkers stop for refreshments, meals, a beer (or two) and come back again and again. Cycling is easy on the joints and I know many cyclists in their 70s who easily do 20 miles daily (especially along rail trails with their modest grade changes).
I would like to see trail accommodate more people than the limited numbers of train riders - and I have nothing against trains. It is simply a matter of highest and best use of this corridor. Hands down it is for people powered transport.
Well, I guess there is blood in the water now
|
if people want to get worked up over it that's on them; we're just talking here. The argument in favor of keeping the rails seems to boil down to "it's always been there and thus it shall ever be"