The Eastern Trail Alliance is hailing as a major success a recent clarification in state law specifying that owners of rail and utility corridors are immune from liability if they allow public access to trails.
Previously, Maine law did not specifically mention railroads and utility companies in its liability law, although some attorneys inferred they were included. Now these companies will not be held liable if a person is injured recreating on the property.
But the change has not encouraged the owners of Guilford Railroad to give the Eastern Trail Alliance easements, according to John Andrews, president of the Eastern Trail Alliance. The railroad owns an 800-foot stretch of property in South Portland and a mile-long stretch in Saco that are of interest to the alliance.
Andrews attributes Guilford’s decision to the simple fact that creating a major shift in the thought process of people and businesses is difficult. In this case it is the idea that people cannot safely share space with trains.
“It’s almost a religious belief that people don’t belong near railroads,” Andrews said.
Guilford Rail Executive Vice President David Fink was out of town, and did not return messages seeking comment for this story.
Still, the fact that the law has been clarified gives Andrews hope that someday an easement will be granted and the Eastern Trail could use some railroad corridors.
But the railroad company is still requiring the Eastern Trail Alliance insure the usage and the costs are prohibitively expensive. Andrews said his organization’s insurance bill would increase from $350 per year to $60,000.
“The insurance is more than we can afford,” Andrews said.
The high cost is related to the perceived threat of injury on a trail within a rail corridor. But Andrews contends that trails in fact make the corridor safer.
Each year there are 500 trespassing-related fatalities on U.S. rail corridors, Andrews said. This equals about one fatality for every 284 miles of rail corridor.
At the same time there has never been a fatality relating to rails with trails though, based on the annual fatality statistics, there should have been 14.
“With no fatalities, they appear to be infinitely safer,” Andrews said. “My math suggests 25 times safer is a more accurate value. Lives would be saved if every railroad corridor had a rail with trail.”
The reasons for the increased safety are simple. Andrews said well-designed trails guide people away from the track and create a more law-abiding atmosphere that inhibits reckless behavior.
While it is possible to work around the railroad corridors in Saco and South Portland it would be much more convenient to use the corridor for the trail.
“They are quite important. In order to complete the Eastern Trail we need a number of easements,” Andrews said.
The small victory Andrews gained with the passage of the law has been enough to cause some interest among other rail and trail organizations. Groups from Virginia, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and Ohio have contacted him.
Currently there are very few rails with trails in Maine. There is one on the Eastern Prom in Portland and two-mile stretch in Hallowell. But the recent law clarification may expand the number and benefit many other Maine trail projects such as the Mountain Division Trail, which will connect Portland to Fryeburg and into New Hampshire and Vermont.
“There are probably hundreds of examples here in Maine if people were allowed to share rail corridors,” Andrews said.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
