Armidale Regional Council is considering replacing the railway line between Armidale and Ben Lomond with a rail trail. While recreational trails can have value, this proposal would permanently remove a strategic public asset. For communities north of Armidale, there are compelling reasons to oppose it.

1. Permanent loss of vital infrastructure
The railway corridor is a once-in-a-generation asset. Once the tracks are removed, restoring rail services in the future would be prohibitively expensive. This would permanently close off future transport opportunities for the region.

2. Loss of the only rail link toward Queensland
This line represents the New England region’s only direct rail corridor to northern Australia and Queensland. Preserving it keeps open the possibility of reconnecting New England with one of Australia’s fastest-growing regions.

3. Reduced freight and economic opportunities
A functioning rail line could support:

agricultural exports,
freight movement,
logistics industries,
renewable energy projects,
regional manufacturing.
A rail trail cannot provide these economic benefits or support large-scale industry.

4. Fewer transport options for future generations
Population growth, rising fuel costs, and changing transport needs may make rail increasingly valuable. Removing the line would deny future generations the option of passenger or freight rail services.

5. Increased dependence on road transport
Without rail, the region becomes even more reliant on trucks and private vehicles. This means:

more heavy traffic on local roads,
higher road maintenance costs,
increased accident risks,
greater vulnerability during fuel shortages or supply chain disruptions.
6. Rail supports climate and sustainability goals
Rail transport is far more energy-efficient and produces significantly lower emissions than road freight. Removing rail infrastructure is inconsistent with Australia's long-term decarbonisation objectives.

7. Rail trails do not require rail removal
Many regions successfully develop rail-with-trail models, where recreational trails coexist alongside operational or preserved rail corridors. This approach protects future rail options while delivering community recreation benefits.

8. Economic benefits of rail trails are often overstated
Rail trail tourism can provide some local benefits, but these are typically seasonal, limited, and concentrated in a few businesses. They rarely match the long-term economic potential of freight rail, passenger services, or rail-based industry.

9. Strategic corridors should be protected, not dismantled
Transport corridors are irreplaceable. Governments around the world are investing in rail infrastructure—not removing it. Once lost, such corridors are almost impossible to recover.

10. The decision is irreversible
A rail trail can always be developed later if rail is proven permanently unnecessary. But once the railway is removed, restoring it would be extraordinarily costly and politically difficult.

The Core Issue
This is not simply about a bike trail. It is about whether the region chooses to preserve a strategic transport corridor for future economic growth, freight, passenger services, and connectivity—or permanently surrender it.

The community should oppose any proposal that removes the railway line.

A better solution would be to explore a shared corridor that accommodates both recreation and the preservation of rail infrastructure.