Important MI Single-Track Legislation

[MWEISSEN]

Smit-dog, I looked for an answer to your question on the DNR site, but I couldn't find the definition. I sent for the entire set of State of Michigan maps, which included a pamphlet on the definition, but I pitched the pamphlet (silly now, I guess). From memory, I think single track was defined as 28", but am really not sure. F&S will certainly know.

If y'all haven't taken advantage of the "order maps" link on the DNR site, you should do so! You can get a full set of Michigan maps for the asking. Including the pamphlet I lost.

I did notice on the DNR site that there's $1.37M of grants for ORV trail maintenance, development and legal enforcement for 2003.

 

[Smit-Dog]

Thanks MW. I did as much searching as my sore little eyes could handle, and I read through all the DNR ORV pamphlets that I had. (The ORV pamphlet is available online, BTW). They define trail/route, but within the "trail" spec, other than the current 50" maximum, I couldn't find anything specific to single track.

I just want to make sure that we're not getting our panties in an uproar if this bill ultimately doesn't affect us. Other than allowing a slightly wider ATV on existing ATV-designated trails, single track will not be affected. Unless there are not any hard and fast rules/policies in place to protect motorcycle-only trail designations, please tell me what I'm missing here.

The DNR site is great. I also found meeting minutes posted from the monthly ORV Trails Advisory Board meeting. F&S was representing, and like he said earlier, there were a vocal bunch of 4x4 types there whining about being overlooked by the DNR.

 

[Smit-Dog]

Originally posted by MWEISSEN
... I think single track was defined as 28"...

But doesn't the max width specification refer to the vehicle width, not the trail width? Yes? No?

Maybe single track is designated for "2-wheeled" vehicles under 40"? The bars on my bike are at about 32".

:think:

 

[fatherandson]

I have not read a copy of the bill yet.  I have been doing more talking than reading (so far). 

The trail width clearance does vary by the type of trail.  The motorcycle trail needs to be cleared at the ground to 24" and 40" at the handlebar.  The All Terrain trail needs to be cleared to 50" from top to bottom.  FYI.  The majority of the trail around LMC is considered ATV (not bike trail).   The ORV route needs to be cleared to 72".  The heigth clearance is 8 ft.

I am looking for more information on the counter proposal about opening more of the forest roads in the lower pennisula.

 

 

[MWEISSEN]

One thing I did notice on the DNR site was that ATV's were defined as having engines 50 to 500 cc's. Does that make the new Bombardier DS650 and the Yamaha Raptor (660?) illegal on ATV trails??? Hmmm....

 

[Smit-Dog]

And the DNR definition of an ATV specifically states:

A 3 or 4 wheeled vehicle that is designed for off-road use, that has low-pressure (balloon-type) tires, with a seat that is designed to be straddled by the operator, powered by an engine in size from 50 cc on up to 500 cc displacement.

Argos are either 6 or 8 wheeled vehicles, and the seat is a bench-type, and is not straddled.

So even if the bill, as worded today, is passed, Argos will not be able to ride on anything other that an ORV "Route".

And F&S, what you're saying is that most of the trails that I've been on around LMC are ATV trails? I'm usually so busy trying to keep up that I don't remember the sign designations as to cycle-only or cycle/ATV. Seems like a lot of those trails around LMC are too narrow for a quad, so I assumed they were cycle-only.

:think:

 

[fatherandson]

Just to clarify, there are 75 miles of trail from 131 to the Higggins Lake loop (NOT including the 45 miles of the Higgins Lake loops) and this includes two loops of trail.  The two loops of trail (15 miles total) are the cycle only trail for this section of the MCCCT.  The other 60 miles are cycle and ATV trail according to the DNR.

I will attempt to attach a map from the DNR website to help show where these loops of trails are located.

http://www.dnr.state.mi.us/spatialdatalibrary/pdf_maps/trail_maps/orv/missaukee.pdf

 

[rickshaw]

I'm still working on this and swapping voice mail messages Valde and his "scheduler" Brett.

We have the support of the CCC from Ron Mollitor and Bill Chapin who are very interested in attending the meeting when it happens.

Our letters are getting the message through to Valde Garcia and he appears to be concerned with the cost of widening the trail and safety.

Details to follow and for those of you who have not sent letters, get em in the mail today :o

rickshaw

 

[tripdog7]

I agree with Smit about finding what the true impacts if this bill passed both houses and was signed by Granholm. (remember, any congressman can add or modify this original bill as it passes through committees)

Based on the Michigan legislature website, this is what I read:

Section 81101 is revised.

Line (f) is now:
"Forest trail" means a designated path or way capable of travel only by a vehicle less than 50 inches in width.

Line (f) would be:
"Forest trail" means a designated path or way capable of travel only by a vehicle 57 inches or less in width.

Line (v) is:
"Trail improvement fund" means the ORV trail improvement fund created pursuant to section 81117.

Line (v) would be:
"Trail improvement fund" means the ORV trail improvement fund created under section 81117.

Section 81123 just eliminates old target dates to a generic statement.

I don't know the senator's intent, but I see it as A) widening the "Forest trail" by 7 inches, and B) Instucting the "department" to further work on trail develpment and scramble areas. If anyone hears what the bill's sponsers intentions are, enlighten us.

 

[bbartol88]

Several of the loops in the state have single track trails that run alongside the wider ORV Trails. One example of this is the Meadows system. At the Meadows there is a single track trail running usually about 50 feet from the ORV Trail. This allows for both types of trails, in the same land footprint. Everybody is happy, at very little additional cost, considering the single track is not usually "built" but just ridden in. I am not sure why all of the trails are not created like this.

 

[rickshaw]

Tripdog7, welcome aboard and excellent points on SB 110.

I hope to talk to Garcia today in an attempt to coordinate a meeting. Keep the information coming and we will assemble a detailed presentation.

And if you're not doing anything on Saturday, come up to Gladwin and freeze your but off with fellow Michigan DRN'ers.

rickshaw

 

[rickshaw]

Talked with Brett yesterday for about 30 minutes. They are very aware of interest on this bill through the CCC members, yourselves, and ??? Michigan ATV Organization.

Their next step is to coordinate a meeting within the next 45 days with all concerned parties to understand concerns and alternate solutions. Brett did say nothing will happen with this bill until all parties are given a chance to present their issues.

He also used the "A" word...Argo. I siezed the opportunity to ask him if he was familiar with the Argo percentage of the states ORV population. He was not and very surprised at my swag of .04% ( thanks Smitdog ). And he even chuckled with my backhanded comment about the Guv acquiring an Argo!

It appears that they are interested in options to reduce cost to taxpayers and safety, while providing access to these behemoth's of an ORV. I provided Brett with the contact information for Ron Mollitor - CCC Prez and Bill Chapin - Ex. Director of the CCC. He had another CCC leaders name who is equally engaged in changing this bill.

That's it from the hill today, time to pack for ridin' tomorrow!

rickshaw

 

[Smit-Dog]

:thumb:

I posted a sign in my front yard "Rick 'Racer' Shaw for State Senator" in my front yard.

My neighbors are asking how they can contribute to your PAC. When's the fund raiser at the club house?

:thumb:

 

[Smit-Dog]

Ricky - Are you back from the land of sun and oranges? Did you pick out your retirement home? ;)

Any news from your golfing buddy Senator Garcia? It's been a month so thought I'd shoot this back up on Page 1.

We saw some Argo tracks on the trails this past weekend, but no sign of the Governor... :think:

 

[rickshaw]

Billy, got back last night. Still sore from the semi annual St. Lucie Inlet Watercaft Launch Site for retired pwc racers...

I have not heard from Garcia's office and will call tomorrow.

Details to follow.

So you were riding last weekend???

rickshaw

 

[Smit-Dog]

You still racing/riding stand-up PWC? Cool! Rode them a lot as a kid - like dirt bikes on water. Remind me to tell you about jet skiing at Lake Powell.

I have not heard from anyone on the 7 letters I sent out. :think:

Did some trail maintenance last weekend around Moorstown w/ Napper, Fred, F&S, Drew/Dad, and a few LMC members. Look for the new stop signs - you can't miss them!

 

[rickshaw]

Well, this one is on the back burner for now according to Valde Garcia's aide Brett. They are focusing 100% on the budget for Jenny.

I was impressed that he remembered me and even spit off my phone number. They have asked the DNR to investigate the feasibility of this bill and make alternate recommendations. I called Mike Maurer to head em' off at the pass with his DNR contacts who will ask the field operations to respond.

Brett assured me that there will be a forum to present options with attendance by the CCC, some ATV group, myself and anyone interested. There were many references to "alternative solutions" made by Brett.

And of course it wouldn't be a rickshaw conversation without a little cynical remark " hey why don't ya offer the 6 Argo owners in the state to attend the meeting." He got the point.

rickshaw

 

[Smit-Dog]

:thumb:

 

[Smit-Dog]

Well, it's been almost 9 months since this issue was last visited. I recently checked up on the status of SB 0110, hoping that it was dead. It appeared to still be held up in committee, so I sent Senator Garcia an e-mail asking about the status of the proposed legislation, as well as re-iterating my strong opposition to the bill.

Here is his response (complete with misspellings)...

Thank you for your recent e-mail regarding Senate Bill 110, which would change the definition of forest trail to accomodate Off Road Vehicles of 57" or less. I appreciate you contacting me to get an update on the legislation.

I am continuing my efforts to pass Senate Bill 110. I realize that there are some people that have concerns about this bill, and I have been working with the Department of Natural Resources to address those concerns since the bill's introduction. I believe that it is important to provide an adequate forum for all sport riders to enjoy their sport. I also believe that this bill can be crafted in a way to make that happen without compromising the utility of the existing trails or costing the state an excessive amount of money.

Again, thank you for your input. If there is anything more that I can do to be of assistance to you, please feel free to contact me.

RickShaw.... Time to put down your snowboard and place another call to your buddies over at Senator Garcia's office. How about getting that "meeting of the minds" set up, along with CCC representation?

 

[rickshaw]

I'll talk to Ron Mollitor and see how he would like to coordinate a meeting.

It's amazing that our state government doesn't have more important legislation than this!

Details to follow!

 

[Smit-Dog]

... I'll talk to Ron Mollitor and see how he would like to coordinate a meeting. Details to follow!

Saw a 3-page thread over on the Michigan Jeepers forum about this Argo bill. At first they were all excited about it thinking they'd be able fly down the wider trails with their CJ-7s, then realized that their Jeeps are slightly wider than the proposed 57". More here...

-> http://www.michiganjeepers.com/foru...pe=&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post367853

Called Garcia's office today. His "scheduler" Robin is out until next week. The intern who answered the phone said to call back next week to set up a meeting through Robin to discuss the merits of the bill with Senator Garcia.

Let's do this before riding season... I've started drafting an opposition statement letter. Also found a press release from the DNR regarding the proposed bill. The initial estimate is that it will cost $5.4 MILLION to widen the trails. :|

-> DNR Press Release Link: http://www.michigandnr.com/legislation/position/SB 110 Analysis.htm

State of Michigan

JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM
governor

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Lansing

K. L. COOL
director

February 20, 2003

1. Bill Number and Sponsor

Senate Bill No. 110
Introduced by Senators Garcia and Leland

2. Purpose

Senate Bill No. 110 would amend Part 811, "Off-Road Recreation Vehicles" (ORV), of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, by amending Section 81101 and 81123 (MCL 324.81101 and 324.81123) to:

· Redefine the definition of “Forest Trail”. It would increase trail width from less than 50 inches to 57 inches, or less.

· Remove current date reference in statute (Section 81123) for completion of comprehensive plan and designation of scramble area(s) in the northern Lower Peninsula and southeast Michigan.

3. How Does This Legislation Impact Current Programs in the Department?

This legislation will have significant impact on the programs of the Department. This bill would require widening over 1,709 miles of designated State Forest trails and 466 miles of National Forest trails to accommodate vehicles greater than 50 inches in width.

4. Introduced at Agency Request

No.

5. Agency Support

No.

6. Arguments Against the Bill

From its inception, the ORV trail system was intended, designed, and designated for vehicles less than 50 inches in width. If this legislation is passed, virtually every ORV trail in the State would have to be widened. This work would include tree and stump removal and, in many circumstances, actual trail bed construction. This effort would require significant time, planning, and expense above and beyond the normal funding and maintenance performed by volunteers through the ORV grant program. Trail managers and trail riding interest groups are concerned that trail widening may also diminish user satisfaction and increase resource impacts.

7. Arguments for the Bill

Senate Bill 110 would provide additional off-road trail riding opportunities for vehicles 57 inches in width, or less.

8. State Revenue/Budgetary Implications

Trail manager’s estimate approximately $5.4 million dollars would be needed to accomplish initial trail widening efforts.

This is a conservative estimate based on the following assumptions:

· Approximately twenty five percent (25%) of the trail system would require significant trail widening.

· Contracts for tree removal, trail bed construction, bridge and culvert improvements would be required.

· Field verification and environmental assessments by department staff is needed in order to determine actual needs and budget implications.

· Real costs may be higher or lower based on field verification.

9. Implications to Local Units of Government

None.

10. Administrative Rules Implications

While this legislation would have minimal implications on Administrative Rules, it would supercede current rules that define minimum width of “Forest Trail”.

11. Other Pertinent Information

The Department facilitates access to State lands for recreation by vehicles greater than 50 inches in width.

Current practice allows these vehicles to travel on:

· 380 miles of designated ORV Route in the northern Lower Peninsula

· 2,198 acres of ORV designated scramble area in the northern Lower Peninsula (i.e. Silver Lake State Park, St. Helen Motorsport Area)

· 165 miles of designated ORV Route in the Upper Peninsula

· 2,376 miles of State Forest roads in the Upper Peninsula

· 7,000 miles of National Forest roads in the Upper Peninsula

12. User Groups/Customers that Support this Legislation (if known)

The Michigan Motorcycle Dealers Association supports the legislation.

The following organizations oppose the proposed legislation:

· Cycle Conservation Club of Michigan
· Michigan All-Terrain Vehicle Association

K. L. COOL
DIRECTOR
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

DRN statement on Argo use on state land:

http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10365_15070-73964--,00.html

 

[Smit-Dog]

Spoke with Robin, Senator Garcia's assistant.

Dates tentatively open to meet:

- Friday, March 12, anytime after 12pm.

- Monday, March 15, open all day.

- Friday, March 19, anytime after 2pm.

These are days that the senator is out in the district. We could get together for a breakfast / lunch meeting, or we could meet at the Genoa Township Hall.

Rick - Can you meet any of these days? Can you contact Ron Mollitor and see if he can meet as well?

Anyone else in the area (F&S ?) that would like to attend, please let me know.

 

[rickshaw]

I just left a message for Ron Mollitor on his work number. He expressed interest in the past and I'm sure he'll be interested if available.

Details to follow!

 

[Racer#213]

can we write her a letter stating our feelings of the bill?

 

[Smit-Dog]

By all means! :thumb:

Senator Valde Garcia
District 22
PO Box 30036
Lansing, MI 48909-7536
(517) 373-2420
[email protected]

Senator Burton Leland
District 5
PO Box 30036
Lansing, MI 48909-7536
(517) 373-0994
[email protected]

Send a letter to Garcia (bill sponsor) and Leland (co-sponsor), as well as your district representative. Find your district rep and contact info here:

http://senate.michigan.gov/SenatorInfo/find-your-senator.htm

Thanks Racer!

(BTW, Garcia is a HIM, not a HER).