Discussion | 24 comments

The Mountain Democrat does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy

• KellyDecember 14, 2010 - 3:31 pm

  Well said Jan. If these people just drove by the trail parking lot on Missouri Flat Rd. in the afternoons, they would witness the full parking lot, the cars parked down side streets and people driving around trying to find a spot. That portion of the trail has only been open a little over a year and it is always crowded. That there shows the REAL need this county has for these biking/walking/equestrian trails.

• Greenwood BillDecember 14, 2010 - 6:11 pm

  Hundreds daily? Not hardly. Full Parking lot? Sure, because it has a capacity of 10 cars (oh, and only occasionally full). I use the trails fairly regularly and rarely run into more that 8-10 people. Not much of a crowd! There are literally a hundred trails in this county (I have hiked most of them!) and most are completely empty during the week and only lightly used (if at all) on the weekends.Most rails to trails projects have been failures. A multi-use trail is the only way to go and the only one that will actually bring $ to the county.

• KellyDecember 15, 2010 - 10:40 am

  Well Greenwood Bill, you used the trails. Did you not enjoy them? You stated that you have hiked most of them. They were there and made available to you. Do you wish to deprive others of them? Have you ever been on the Missouri Flat Rd. trail when everyone one is getting off work or are you retired and go in the middle of the day?

• Greenwood BillDecember 15, 2010 - 11:26 am

  I did and still do enjoy them. The current multi-use plan will not deny anything to anybody. The occasional tourist train or speeder can co-exist with the hiker/biker/rider. If you want complete solitude, hike a real trail not a "sidewalk" in the country. I have walked (that's not real hiking btw..lets not kid ourselves!) the trails on various days and hours and it is not the giant draw that trail only purists want you to think. There is more traffic on the Auburn-Cool trail or the old quarry trail than there is on the Placerville trail by a long shot.

• Mike KenisonJanuary 25, 2011 - 8:13 pm

  Bill, the El Dorado trail, as a class 1 bike trail will not be built off the rail bed. It will be too expensive and so the question for you is what is more important? A train for 28 miles or a trail part way, and a trail part of the way. That is the issue. Do you need the train for 28 miles or can you live with a compromise?

• Mountain ManJanuary 27, 2011 - 6:53 pm

  I vote for the 28 miles of train..

• Greenwood BillJanuary 27, 2011 - 7:36 pm

  I vote for both. They can be run side by side.

• mike kenisonJanuary 27, 2011 - 8:08 pm

  They can run Side by side bill. Just at a cost of 35+ million. So no compromise for you Mt Man or you either Bill. Trains get the most desireable part of the corridor and trails get nothing?

• Greenwood BillJanuary 27, 2011 - 8:47 pm

  1) what makes this part of the trail more desirable than others? 2) there is a compromise. Running both together is a compromise. A train (that would bring in outside tourest $) would help pay for trails (that have shown in other other places to not) so its a win win. Go down to the trail on any day and talk to the few (nowhere near "hundreds") trail users. They are almost all locals who contribute nothing additional to the local economy or relatives of locals who are not here for the trail but for family reasons and their use of the trail also doesn't doesn't contribute additional $ to the local economy. the trail boosters need to stop the BS.

• mike kenisonJanuary 27, 2011 - 9:15 pm

  You need to look around this country and see trial economic benefits are very real. There are minimal eco benefits from trains. Talk is cheap Bill, bring the numbers. V and T in carons lost 300,000 in its first year after spending 40 million to build it and they want more. American River Parkway has over 1.5 million visitors a year on the trail and the trail users bring in an estimated 20 million a year. The V and T projected 140 thousand riders and got 120 thousand riders. Trails blow out the train numbers and you will not find numbers to support your 28 miles of train. How many hikers did you talk to in your survey? You are making this easy for me Bill

• Mike KenisonJanuary 27, 2011 - 9:25 pm

  Sorry BilI didn't answer your first question, "what makes the rail bed more desirable than others?" The rail bed could also be a trail bed and it is already graded with a 2% grade that runs through the foothills to the train park in El Dorado. The rails can be pulled for free and you have a trail to Folsom in 30 days. Riders walkers and hikers could use this trail locally and thousands would be draw in from ARP. Thats why the rail bed is more desirable Bill. Any more questions?

• Greenwood BillJanuary 28, 2011 - 8:21 am

  The "1.5 million" number being thrown around is an example of statistical BS. There were ESTIMATED to be that many users to THE ENTIRE PARKWAY SYSTEM, not the trails themselves. The largest segment of the parkway visitors (as shown by other studies) are beach and facility users. Also, the economic impact numbers that people like to throw around are ESTIMATES and do not take into account that most of the ARP trail users ARE LOCAL and do not add to the local economy with their trail use. I have talked to many people on our trails (again, nowhere near the "hundreds" number thrown around), again they are LOCAL or walking with a relative/friend and the trail did not cause them to add to the local economy nor was it a reason they were in the county.

• Mike KenisonJanuary 28, 2011 - 10:07 am

  Oh Bill, Don’t make mistakes here by not knowing the facts. The total American River Parkway estimates are more than 5 million users, and the trail users are better than 1.5 million. I see you don’t like these numbers because it makes trails look much more significant than trains. And the 'Bill survey' suggests that the locals do not buy hiking or running shoes, and bikes and tires, repairs? Do you really think, local users don’t buy coffee or eat lunch after their day on the trail? How do you know this? Have you followed them home? You can question my numbers and I can back them up. You need to justify your numbers and information, with something more than just your opinion. This is an opinion page, so I may be asking too much of you here. My numbers are published! I can point you to all that I say. I can give you my opinions also, but right now the facts are more important.

• Greenwood BillJanuary 28, 2011 - 12:20 pm

  You can not back up your numbers except with an OLD study that was done using statical ESTIMATES. Read it carefully and stop being a parrot. Have you even been on the trail and talked to anybody? I have actually done some rough surveys and asked thinks like where they were from and what the plans were for the day. I don't buy off on "estimates" and statistical BS. Also there are many in the Sac area that highly doubt the numbers that the park claims becasue THERE HAS BEEN NO ACTUAL COUNT! Just estimates. There has been no surveys actually taken. BTW, comparing a trail in a major metro area to anything here is comparing apples to bananas. In addition you need to take a look at other rural rails to trails projects around the country (Paradise for example). You will see that they are under used and ion some cases are being abandoned. The trail will be a nice addition to the county overall but not at the sacrifice of another vanishing piece of history.

• Mike KenisonJanuary 28, 2011 - 1:44 pm

  Parrott? Comparison of trails and trains are tough for you Bill. Bring in your numbers? What, no numbers? Facts are that I want a rolling train in El Dorado and we are going to get some in the Train Park in El Dorado. Keith Barry and the guys are doing a great job preserving history! Most trains today run on a track that also runs a commercial line, that pays for track maintenance. And if there is no commercial operation, then they are subsidized by government funds. We do not have a commercial operation on our corridor and never will. The County has also stated that the train guys are on their own financially. So it is going to be a tough go for them, but I support them. The facts are that short runs have a better chance at success, because there is less track to maintain. The cost to run trains is very high and most of the eco-benefits generated by trains, will be paid in ticket charges, so the money can then be used to maintain train infrastructure and track. Not much left for the surrounding businesses and communities and very different from the significant eco-benefits from trails. So if short runs make is easier to operate trains. Why do you want the full 28 miles?

• Greenwood BillJanuary 28, 2011 - 2:22 pm

  Mike you make no sense. Truth is I would like a train from Old Sac to Placerville as well as a bike/hike trail from San Francisco/east Bay to South Lake Tahoe. Not going to happen but it would be fun.

• mike kenisonJanuary 28, 2011 - 3:16 pm

  My facts make perfect sense. Do you want to wait another 15 to 20 years for slim possibility that this track will see a Heavy train from the county line to Shingle Springs? Or can you imagine A trail this summer on the rail bed from Shingle Springs down. We would still have rolling trains in El Dorado county and a wonderful compromise! What is your thought on a compromise? Or do you want it all for Trains?

• Greenwood BillJanuary 28, 2011 - 3:35 pm

  Never said anything about a heavy train. Simple tour train would work just fine. My compromise is that the trail and train run together on the same right-of-way. Simple. Prepping the trail bed may cost a bit more (unsubstantiated btw) but it is a win win all the way around.

• Mike KenisonJanuary 28, 2011 - 3:46 pm

  Never say anything about a heavy train? Is that not what everyone wants to ride? Steam, 3 passenger cars with a caboose? Thats what people are going to pay for. Speeders and the Skagitt are not going to do get it done in the long run. As you said, this is rural and we need an attraction to draw the people in. I love the Oaks and dry grass in the summer, but it is not a Shasta View, or the Redwoods on the Skunk. Heavy trains are the plan correct?

• Mike KenisonJanuary 30, 2011 - 10:50 am

  A Tour Train will be heavier than the speeders and Skagitt and require replacing every 4th tie? That could run over $300,000 for the complete line. An engine, 3 passenger cars (with a kitchen for wine and food) and a caboose is going to be what? About 300 or 400 thousand? White Rock crossing at $100,000? The washout at $50,000? Shop and yard at $1,000,000? A nice station at 1 to 3 million? What are we looking at from the Train Park Out? How many decades? Or a trail for free, to Folsom, that can be built in a month.

• Greenwood BillJanuary 30, 2011 - 12:43 pm

  A trail that will end up being rarely used. You are refusing to see that. Look outside of Sacramento at other rural trails to trails. They are almost all failures and a waste of money.

• Mike KenisonJanuary 30, 2011 - 2:51 pm

  You have said this a couple of times! The trail will get limited use. So a train will be used more? Bill, you need to do your homework. Here are a few other trails than ARP. I have more numbers if this isn't enough for you. Washington and Old Dominion Trails in Virginia has an economic benefit of between 14 and 21 million a years. The Heritage Rail Trail County Park in Pennsylvania, has an economic benefit of $50 to $80 million per year and users of 200 to 300 thousand. A 2007 economic impact study of the Great Allegheny Passage, not yet complete at the time, determined that it was generating $12.5 million in revenue annually. Hundreds of thousands users a year, mostly cyclists that would jump on our trail for 28 miles, 2% grade, ride from Folsom to SS or P-ville, have lunch and return home. Have you gone out on the new trail off Mo Flat and looked at the numbers on the weekends? You and I need to do a survey. Lets do a bill and mike survey on the trail.

• Mike KenisonJanuary 30, 2011 - 7:01 pm

  How about those train cost? How do you think they are going to pay for the infrastructure? We can build the trail for free and there is no way skagitt and speeders rides are going to raise enough money to build the train infrustructure. You are going to have to repair track at $300k to run those big trains. What plan outlines this and give us a time estimate for the big tour trains?

• Mike KenisonFebruary 08, 2011 - 6:18 am

  Bill? Lets talk Trains. You are happy to put down Trails, but you won't talk Trains! Tell me what it will look like in 5, 10 or 15 years. The guys in Ione are at least honest and say that they will NEVER run big trains on there track. It will be speeders only and I don't think you can sell speeders to El Dorado County as important and interesting. Are speeders worth a 35 to 50 million increase in trail build cost?? Not when you know we can connect to Folsom for free! Any comment of substance Bill??