The Cycle Path to Nowhere, State sanctioned Vandalism

Up for grabs: 72 Km 3’6” gauge heavy duty railway line, worth $40 Million in situ! Yours for nothing.

Stuart Bryce, a vigneron on the line at Lalla, represents some 250 residents and landowners who either border or live in close proximity to the North East Rail Line. The group, known as the North East Residents and Farmers (NERAF) was formed in May last year to be the collective voice to oppose the conversion of the north east rail line into a cycle trail.

One of the major objections is the almost complete lack of interest shown by the aldermen and councillors at Launceston and Dorset Councils respectively. All have been written to directly. Bryce has had two emails from Mayor van Zetten, an email from Alderman Cox (about the Derwent Valley Railway), one attendance at the monthly meetings of NERAF by Alderman Simon Wood (who assured us that this wasn’t on his radar) and by Councillor Greg Howard, the Mayor of Dorset.

Mr Bryce has received a letter from Launceston’s General Manager Robert Dobrzynski who indicated that “the view” of the aldermen was that the Council supported the Rail Trail “Subject to the reasonable concerns” of adjoining property owners. The “reasonable concerns” of the adjoining property owners is one voice: they don’t want a cycle trail passing by their back yards or through their farms. Mr Bryce is aware of one property owner in Dorset who is quite happy to have the Rail Trail passing through his property and Only one adjoining the 37 Km of line which is in the Launceston municipality. Have the “reasonable concerns” been addressed? No, not to any degree of satisfaction.

For reasons of privacy, security and biosecurity the answer is an emphatic NO to a cycle trail. From the limited responses from individual councillors and aldermen, one could conclude that Launceston and Scottsdale councils are run almost completely by the general managers. If that is the case, it is understandable why the aldermen and councillors have been virtually silent. That being the case, then, why are they there? The only clear response NERAF has been given is an emphatic “Yes” from Mayor Howard and a “not interested – there is nothing in this for Launceston” from Mayor van Zetten, given in a meeting he had with Hon Tania Rattray and Leigh Arnold. Mayor van Zetten told Mr Bryce in an email that the matter didn’t go to council. If that is the case, then what does Mr Dobrzynski mean when he cites “the view of the aldermen”?

Attempts by NERAF to obtain evidence of the number of letters sent out by Dorset Council and to whom they were addressed has proven fruitless. That being the case, NERAF can only assume that the concerns of adjoining property owners have not been addressed, and certainly not by Launceston Council.

Mr Bryce believes that any group can submit a business plan for whatever to the National Stronger Regions Fund (NSRF), obtain a grant, and then the government will bend over backwards to ensure that funding comes to Tasmania, and even change legislation. Regardless of whether any other group objects to its application the funding becomes paramount – even at a time that New Zealand is having trouble meeting the cost of maintenance of its cycle trails. If this goes ahead, Dorset ratepayers will bear the total costs of maintaining the rail trail – and provide the required matching finance of $1.47 Million.

As the matter has not been heard in council by Launceston, NERAF is asking under what authority was the gift of $3,000 paid to Dorset Council?

The proposal is to lift a railway line, completely renewed with heavier rail as recent as 1994. The line was used for only ten years and is valued at least at $40 Million. To replace it with a cycle trail that will run from Scottsdale to Cold Water Creek where there is no road access is simply, State sanctioned vandalism.

The Rail Trail Board is constantly providing comparisons with the New Zealand rail trail experience. But in the NZ case, no rail lines were ever lifted to facilitate a cycle trail, as they had been removed decades before. The original Bill 39 of 60 tabled by Minister Hidding and passed by the lower house completely excluded trains from using the disused rail corridors. One can only wonder if there was a road transport interest in that? Fortunately, the exclusion of trains did not prevail. Thank God for a house of review.
STUART BRYCE Chairman NERAF