January 2026
A nationwide system of trails that millions of Americans use for walking, biking and outdoor recreation is facing a significant threat from proposed federal legislation that critics say could dismantle rail-trail development as it exists today.
At the center of the controversy is the “Rails to Trails Landowner Rights Act” (H.R. 4924), a bill that trail advocates warn would effectively undermine railbanking, a policy that has preserved thousands of miles of unused railroad corridors for future transportation needs while allowing interim use as public trails .
Railbanking was established by Congress in 1983 as an amendment to the National Trails System Act and has been repeatedly upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Under the policy, unused rail corridors are protected from being sold off or broken into fragments, ensuring they remain intact for potential future rail service while providing immediate benefits as recreational trails. Today, railbanked corridors span 43 states and Washington, D.C., crossing 162 congressional districts, with more than 9,000 additional miles identified as future rail-trail opportunities .
Supporters say the proposed legislation would fundamentally alter that system.
According to an analysis released by the Rails to Trails Conservancy, H.R. 4924 introduces a series of requirements that would make railbanking impractical or impossible for most communities. Among the most concerning provisions, the bill would shift financial liability for landowner compensation from the federal government to local trail sponsors, typically cities, counties, or nonprofit organizations, regardless of whether a valid property interest exists .
The legislation would also require trail sponsors to obtain written approval from every adjacent landowner within 30 days as a condition of railbanking. Failure to secure consent from even a single landowner would halt the process entirely, potentially resulting in corridors being permanently lost or fragmented .
Additional provisions would impose lifetime maintenance responsibility on trail sponsors, mandate costly and arguably irrelevant cost-benefit studies, and require the Surface Transportation Board to re-evaluate all existing railbanked corridors—steps advocates say would overwhelm federal agencies and discourage local governments from participating in trail preservation efforts .
Trail supporters argue that the consequences extend far beyond recreation. Rail-trails have become vital economic engines for rural and urban communities alike, supporting tourism, small businesses, public health, environmental conservation, and long-term transportation planning. Missouri’s 240-mile Katy Trail State Park, one of the nation’s earliest railbanked trails, is frequently cited as a model for how preserved corridors can generate lasting economic and quality-of-life benefits .
Opponents of H.R. 4924 warn that if the bill advances, it could jeopardize not only future trail projects but also existing rail-trails across the country, reversing more than four decades of bipartisan transportation and conservation policy.
As Congress considers the proposal, communities, trail organizations, and outdoor advocates are urging lawmakers to recognize railbanking as a proven tool for preserving national infrastructure—one that balances private property rights, future transportation needs, and public access to America’s shared outdoor spaces.
Trail advocates emphasize that individuals, local governments, and community organizations have an important role to play as the legislation is debated. Supporters of rail-trails are encouraged to seek additional information and analysis from the Rails to Trails Conservancy, which has been tracking the bill and its potential impacts nationwide.
Outdoor groups are encouraged to organize resolutions opposing H.R. 4924, signaling broad public support for preserving railbanking as a cornerstone of federal transportation and land-conservation policy. In addition, trail supporters are encouraged to engage directly with their local congressional representatives to voice opposition to what many describe as a sweeping and disruptive change to long-standing federal transportation law.
Advocates stress that railbanking has functioned successfully for more than four decades, balancing private property rights with public benefit, and warn that dismantling the policy could permanently eliminate critical transportation corridors and community trail assets across the country.