I’ve heard the land reverts back to the original owners when the rails are removed. How can you make it into a public trail?

A Federal law was passed in 1983 - the Rail Banking law - that says an organization can acquire a corridor for a trail without triggering reversionary clauses, specifically preempting all state and local laws. Court rulings have generally favored trail sponsors, both to acquire a corridor and build a trail without burdensome requirements. Iowa Pacific, the current owner of the corridor, has promised the state that they will cooperate with the Rail Banking Statute when they abandon the corridor.

Does the Rail Banking law preempt Article 14 of the New York Constitution, the Forever Wild provision?

According to the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, absolutely. As a practical matter, however, state agencies are able to resist unwanted federal preemption. F-UHRT supports Article 14, but believes a rail trail is an entirely appropriate recreational feature in the Park. Interestingly, the state insisted that Iowa Pacific agree to eventual trail use - not just on the 13 miles of state land that the corridor passes over, but the entire 29 miles. That is, the state has indirectly expressed support for a trail, and the concept of Rail Banking. Due to the novelty of a railroad ROW on Forest Preserve lands, it had been difficulty to get any words of support from the state.

What exactly is a “multi-use” trail?

Where they exist elsewhere (there are thousands of them), they are often called “bike trails”. But they are used by runners, walkers, skaters, roller-skiers, and the disabled. Snowshoers and skiers in the winter. Sometimes snowmobilers. They all have smooth surfaces good for bicycles with wide tires; those with asphalt surfaces are good for all bicycles, plus skaters and rollers. There are usually features that prevent vehicles (including ATVs) from gaining access to the trail.

Will snowmobiles be allowed?

The truth is that we do not know. The who, what and how of this decision (and many others) are all uncertain. Our guess is that snowmobiles would be allowed in some sections and not others. The status quo might be maintained: snowmobiles are allowed between Northwoods Club Rd and Blue Ridge Rd. But again, we do not know.

Will horses be allowed?

We’re checking on the feasibility of equestrian use. For double-track corridors, it’s easy to ride a horse alongside the paved portion of the trail. However, our corridor has only a single rail bed, ten feet wide. It might be possible to widen it in some places, but not others.

Will the trail be paved?

After salvage, the surface will be some mixture of dirt and gravel, perhaps graded and rolled. That would be the most “natural” surface - walkable and rideable on a mountain bike. Most rail trails are paved, however, either with a mixture of fine crushed stone (aka stone dust, trail mix) or with asphalt. Some feel crushed stone is more in keeping with the natural surroundings and the ethos of the Adirondack Park. Others feel that the rail bed is such a dominant feature that the surface might as well be asphalt, which will broaden the trail’s appeal and reduce routine maintenance requirements. The reality is that the decision will be made by the entity that builds or funds the trail - probably not the Friends. Our group favors a decision-making process that takes all factors into account.

What does APA and DEC think about this project?

This project poses some challenges from a regulatory point of view. For example, the portion of the corridor leased from the state (in Minerva, mostly) - is it part of the Forest Preserve? Must it be classified? If so, is it classified for the right use?  Should the state resist the rail banking law, and claim reversionary rights? What happens in 2062, when the lease expires? Should DEC adopt the trail project as its own? How should federal preemption be accommodated? APA and DEC have a lot to think about. Of course, we hope they also think about gliding silently through a canopy of sun-dappled trees, next to a babbling brook, on a warm sunny day, on their way to the magical destination of Tahawus.

Update: It seems the current UMP is silent on the railroad corridor. For example, none of the bridges appear on the list of manmade structures. There is no recommendations or findings related to the corridor. Apparently, at the time the UMP was issued (April 2005), the DEC believed the corridor was not under its jurisdiction, and this status determination survived through the extensive review process. OSI was actually pursuing the development of a bike path on this corridor at the time, managed by Joe Martens, who was President of OSI at the time. More recently, DEC and DOT went out of its way to extract a promise from Iowa Pacific to cooperate with trail conversion upon abandonment.

Has the Adirondack Council, “Protect!” or ADK taken a position on the trail?

These organizations have not made any public comment to our knowledge. “Protect!” vigorously opposed the Federal government over this rail corridor during and after WWII; they may feel that the time has finally come to let the corridor return to nature. A reasonable point of view, but not the only one. The concept of the Adirondack Park is one where multiple points of view are taken into account. The benefit of returning the corridor to nature (not entirely possible) should be weighed against the enormous public benefit and low environmental impact of the trail.

Where will the trailheads be?

Bike trails are usually accessed from both formal and informal places. We have no designs at this point, but a good guess is that there would be formal departure points at North Creek, North River (possibly near the Barton Plant), and at Tahawus. There will be informal spots along the Hudson at North River and at the Route 28N crossing. Some might park at the Upper Works trailhead or the other trailheads on Tahawus Road.

Will the trail follow the rail bed through North River?

Ultimately, a balance must be struck between public benefit and the interests of property owners in North River. No decisions have been made, or will be made for some time. During this time, North River residents will want to learn as much as they can about bike trails, and the Friends wish to hear all concerns. The Friends are unlikely to be decision-makers on routing, but hope that - after considering all the options - we can properly guide the decision-making process. Fortunately, there appear to be a number of reasonable options so even the worst case outcome will not be a show-stopper.

I hear the Tahawus Mine is going to re-open. True?

Certain rail fans shamelessly promote these rumors. We’ve even heard talk about opening the mine up for rare-earths, as though you can just dig anywhere for rare-earths. You just have to go up there and look around to know the mine will never re-open. Even the big power lines out to North Hudson have been removed. NL Industries has sold the rail corridor. 

What about Barton Mines? Don’t they need the corridor?

We can be empirical on this question: Barton’s has never used the corridor in its 67 years of existence. They never used it even when they routinely shipped material by rail (they shipped it from North Creek). If you own a plant with access to rail service, it is potentially more valuable. If you have a responsibility to shareholders, you have to try to hold on to assets, even those you don’t actually own. They do have a big pile of tailings that they have hopes of selling. If they find a customer, they must then decide if it makes sense to build a conveyer system to move the material down the mountain to their Hudson plant. Alternatively, they can transport the material directly to North Creek. The last time we spoke with them (we have friendly relations), they had not done a financial analysis on these options, or on the viability of the product itself.

The community is entitled to weigh the realism of Barton’s product and transportation plans with the realism of a bike trail. A rail trail will be enormously successful and beneficial to the community - this has been demonstrated by thousands of other bike trails. We hate to think about waiting five years, or 23 years, or 68 years only to find that the corridor is still unused.