It has been such a benefit to both those towns and I'm sure a similar benefit would be gained for Ladysmith and for the riders on a trail between Wagga Wagga and Ladysmith.

As Alan Brown said in the article, 40 out of 50-plus people surveyed like rail trails.

It would be interesting to see surveys of farmers along the Rosewood-Tumbarumba Rail Trail and other rail trails such as those in north-east Victoria to see what impact it has it has had on them.

READ MORE LETTERS:

Landowners opposing the Wagga-Ladysmith Rail Trail are out of touch. They choose to be uninformed and selfish in the extreme. In The Daily Advertiser on August 4, landholder Daryl Schipp says the rail trail would be more invasive even than the original trains. "If you've got the time each day when a train goes through and people are inside it, it's a far different scenario to anyone riding through at any time of the day or night," he said. In other words, we the public cannot be trusted unless we are locked up in a train carriage.

Mr Schipp chooses not to accept that the rail corridor will be fully fenced at the boundary, containing cyclists and walkers within the corridor. Fencing of property boundaries is a requirement for all landholders to be biosecurity compliant, a cost landholders would be relieved of as part of the rail trail development.

Fencing a tool of stock management, especially for those that embrace modern grazing practices. It has been proven worldwide that rail trail developments do not hinder farm management or cause them economic loss in any way.

In fact, rail trails provide another level of security, amenity, biodiversity, fauna and flora zones, whilst providing fire breaks/access for fire tankers, and emergency escape routes. Each adjoining landholder has always known the corridor was not theirs to decide its uses, it is a government (public) asset that they have had concessional use of and will still be able to strip graze post the construction of the rail trail.

The placement of buildings by landholders in proximity to the rail boundary was their uneducated decision, assuming the government-owned asset had no chance of ever being repurposed shows their lack of foresight and not prudent, considered planning.

Alan Brown still peddles the perils of "biosecurity incursion", a risk that is mitigated by a carefully designed rail trail, a perfect example being the Tumbarumba-Rosewood Rail Trail, where biosecurity compliance was foremost in the planning, design, and build.

The community and taxpayers have supported the farming fraternity through droughts, fires, floods and difficult economic periods. It's now time the farmers showed community spirit and support a development that will not only re-purpose a redundant government asset, it will facilitate sustained economic renewal and wealth creation throughout the community, providing health and well-being benefits with far reaching value to society.

HAVE YOUR SAY: Do you have something to get off your chest? Simply click here to send a letter to the editor.