I believe that railbanking and rail trails are two distinct entities, there are a number of undeveloped railbanked right-of-ways, that are not trails at all, mearly "saved" lines. A right of way dosn't become a trail until a surface (natural or otherwise) is established, and public access can be established.
- Rail trails may be on railbanked rights of way under 16 USC 1247(d) (generally implemented by STB during an abandonment proceeding), or on federally granted rights of way under 43 USC 912/913, as modified, or on rights of way acquired in fee or by eminent domain. Railbanking generally means preserving for future rail reactivation. Because of increased use of 1247(d) for trail formation, and because it assumes preservation for rail reactivation, the term railbanking has become confused with meaning all rail trails. Charles Montange 16:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)15:55Reply
Why is this discussed in an article on rail trails? CapnZapp (talk) 10:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
- Now Railbanking is its own article. (Again, but the merger was in 2005 and the content has been substantially expanded since then) CapnZapp (talk) 15:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
it starts "Rail trail conversions can be complex for legal, social, and economic reasons.[citation needed] Railroads in North America were often built with a mix of purchased land, government land grants, and easements. The land deeds can be over a hundred years old, land grants might be conditional upon continuous operation of the line, and easements may have expired, all expensive and difficult issues to determine at law." Some were built by being taken via "imminent domain" by the government - and limited or NO compensation to the land owner. By one logic no longer in use as a railroad, should have reverted to original owner (or current owner of the original parcel. In some cases - runs through the middle the property parcel. I state some- I will admit know of one specifically that way- no idea if any others that way. IN this case - Rail was built for service to a Defense base. Wfoj3 (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
- I think the paragraph still stands, in light of your comment. Are you suggesting any alteration to the text?--Megustalastrufas (talk) 07:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)Reply
Per WP:IMAGE, images should be to illustrate, not to decorate. The gallery that opens the Europe section appears to be mainly decorative. IMO, we should have no more than one image per country, in that country's section. Does anybody have a convincing reason to retain it? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 23:13, 17 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Agreed, one image per country, in that country's section.--Megustalastrufas (talk) 08:41, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Done. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
