Michigan Trails - Brainstorming Part II

[2TrakR]

I'm not following you on the trailpass idea.

You would still buy an ORV sticker, for ice fishing, getting into Silver Lake (dunes) and so on. Now, if you also wanted to ride the ORV trails you would buy a trail pass which would be a separate fee and would only pay for trails.
Comparison to snowmobiles - you have to have registration on the sled regardless (maybe not if just on private land, not sure off hand). Then if you also want to ride the designated snowmobile trails you need to purchase an additional trail pass. Their pass is $25 for a year now.

Trail maps need clarification. The DNR maps have a solid red line for cycles and ATV's less than 50". If there are cycle only single track how do you know?

Well geez, didn't you know the maps designate it by the little picture in the bottom right corner? If that's not enough, don't forget to look in the title of the trail. Ha ha ha! I truly agree with your point though. Seriously, if the name of the trail includes "motorcycle" and/or if the picture in the bottom right corner has a bike, but not an ATV, then it's a cycle trail. Yeah, that's plain as day, isn't? Most CO and DNR Field Personnel don't even know this and I can't blame 'em for it. They really need to change the language on the maps.

 

[buffmaster]

What about bumping up the sticker price, say in the $20-25 range, maybe even up to $30, if it would only help out the trail systems. Like it was said earlier/elsewhere, $16 a year isn't all that much.

BTW, a little off-topic here, but who else doesn't have their sticker on their rear fender? I understand how the DNR feels about it, but after having to buy another sticker early in the season due to me rubbing off all the data on the sticker due to racing, I've decided to run it on the fork leg.

 

[2TrakR]

What about bumping up the sticker price, say in the $20-25 range, maybe even up to $30, if it would only help out the trail systems.

I'm all for it, but there are a lot of sticker purchasers that are already resentful that their dollars are paying for something they never use - my tired example of the ice fisherman who does not ride public trails (this is cited quite a bit in the 99 study). Do we say to them "tough do-do" and jack the price up anyway? It would surely generate more revenue overall. We already have a 3 million surplus in our ORV fund, how do we explain that while jacking up the price?
I'm not arguing with your suggestion, but asking questions I have and have heard elsewhere.

BTW, a little off-topic here, but who else doesn't have their sticker on their rear fender?

Mine get run on the rear number plate or airbox cover; had same issue with the stickers when on the rear fender. Been stopped by DNR 4+ times this past year and none of them had any issue with sticker placement.
Speaking of stickers, there's been some interest lately in getting back to registration of ORVs including registration decals (again, like snowmobiles). You would be required to display a nice big sticker on your ORV that has identifiable numbers and pay some sort of annual/biannnual registration fee in addition to ORV stickers. This would be good 'cause you could identify people by their reg numbers (think of that jerk doing donuts on the road in front of your place). I'm not against the idea, but as it's been described to me, there's probably room for improvement. The immediate concern I heard from the CCC would be "where" on a bike would you put said sticker? Good question. You shouldn't need such a sticker if you are plated, but there are plenty of bikes that are not plated. Maybe if they did a "mini" plate like Ohio does and it would be attached to the rear of the vehicle. Seems like that would work for most ORVs. Thoughts?

 

[TCTrailrider]

BTW, a little off-topic here, but who else doesn't have their sticker on their rear fender?

I put mine on the fork leg. Don't want to add $16.00 to the price of a broken fender. If I break a fork leg I'm probably out for a fiew months healing.

 

[TCTrailrider]

Well geez, didn't you know the maps designate it by the little picture in the bottom right corner? If that's not enough, don't forget to look in the title of the trail. Ha ha ha! I truly agree with your point though. Seriously, if the name of the trail includes "motorcycle" and/or if the picture in the bottom right corner has a bike, but not an ATV, then it's a cycle trail. Yeah, that's plain as day, isn't? Most CO and DNR Field Personnel don't even know this and I can't blame 'em for it. They really need to change the language on the maps.

I put my reading glasses on and sure enough, there is a little picture. No wonder the quads crash through them, they don't know there not supposed to be there.

 

[buffmaster]

I've had one DNR officer give us some crap once about not having our stickers on the fender. It would've went well, but one of the guys I was with decided to be antagonistic. Luckily, I went to school w/the other officer.

Anyway, like someone was saying earlier (I think), what about a general sticker for guys w/4x4's and whatnot that don't use the trails like we do, and then another one for ppl that use the trail systems? Or a base sticker for everyone and add-on's for specific users? I'm thinking that separate stickers might be more cost efficient. And speaking of cost, if I KNOW that my dollars are going to the upkeep of the trail systems, I don't have a problem w/a price increase. I just don't want to have the money go to a fund that's not going to benefit us at all.

 

[Godzuki]

as for the sticker i put mine on the fork leg to myself. i have only been asked where it is 2times, both usfs, and they had nothing bad to say about it.

 

[FLEM]

I'd definitely be up for a trailpass system, possibly drop the reg. down to $10 and let that fund education, enforcement, and general stuff and a trail pass for $20-25 wouldn't be be bad. Although you might get some pushback from families, you get 4-5 passes purchased for the first ride of the year and it a hunk out of alot of peoples wallet,( maybe there's a family pass that covers 4-6 ORV's at the same address). I've got two bikes right now probably add a third, for wife and nephew's(TT-R125L) so that would be $60-75 bucks for the year, I'd be up for it as long as I can see it being applied to new/improved trails,access, etc.

 

[morgan]

Ok, bear with me here:

How about requireing a $16.25 sticker just like we do now----same sticker for ATV's and bikes, But and this is a big butt-------

For all bike's require an additional Bike/Single track sticker. Make it cheap, $3 to $5. Doing this will:

1. Get quaders off our backs ---because we would be some what funding our own trails (I.E. the ones quads can't ride) with the funds from this sticker.

2. Give authorities an enforcement tool--"You don't have a single track sticker Mr. Quad riding the single track, here's your ticket".

3. Give us a "free" census of how many bikes are riding the trails---just count how many of these stickers get sold. Actually instead of having to pay out for a census we would get money. Also subtract the number of "Bike Stickers" from the number of "$16.25 ORV Stickers" and you have a count on how many ATV's there are on public land.

Yeah I know, it's more money out ---and only from us bikers. But heck, I'd pay it. M.

 

[TopWop]

Morgan,
I think I like your idea if its the samething im thinking?

Do you mean to charge cyclist like 20-21 bucks,and with this they receive a DIFFERANT ORV sticker from the 16.25 ORV sticker?And this would allow you guys your own exclusive trails and help assist in the cycle only trail?

And ATVers and other ORVers EXCEPT cyclist will pay 16.25 and we stay off your trails?

I am not opposed to having differant fee's and differant ORV stickers for cyclists and for the other ORVers[2 differant stickers ONLY].It would make our census count pretty easy[as you indicated]and I think it would also help keep the ATVs OFF the cycle trails.

You might be on to something here?

 

[bbarel]

Good idea, and I have NO problem paying a few extra bucks to fund new cycle trail, but I really don't think it is a funding issue to make more trail, but I believe it is a land access issue. I would also really question the reliability of using these permit sales as census data because I suspect many retailers and consumers may not understand the difference, at least initially, and may just get the cheaper permits, but possibly still utilize the cycle trail.

 

[morgan]

Morgan,
I think I like your idea if its the samething im thinking?

Do you mean to charge cyclist like 20-21 bucks,and with this they receive a DIFFERANT ORV sticker from the 16.25 ORV sticker?And this would allow you guys your own exclusive trails and help assist in the cycle only trail?

And ATVers and other ORVers EXCEPT cyclist will pay 16.25 and we stay off your trails?

I am not opposed to having differant fee's and differant ORV stickers for cyclists and for the other ORVers[2 differant stickers ONLY].It would make our census count pretty easy[as you indicated]and I think it would also help keep the ATVs OFF the cycle trails.

You might be on to something here?

:cool: Exactly. I, sir, want to shake your hand. Sorry if you or someone else already mentioned it----honestly can't remember. I was thinking of bike's having an additional sticker just for bikes but what you suggested would do the same thing.

If doing this would heal the wounds in regards to the bike vs quads thing then it would be worth it just for that. Then maybe we could all get on with things and together put ALL of our energys towards keeping Michigan the greatest ORV trail state in existence. This as opposed to what went on in NJ---a true tragedy---please read the last post of the "Bottom Line" debate over at the Thumper Talk site. BTW up until these last few weeks I really never realized all of this stuff was even an issue. I thought both camps (quads/bikes) coexisted pretty well here in MI.

And like I said before, there would be a better count of things. At least on bikes. Still no way to separate the numbers as to how many quads use the trail and how many use the ice.

Anyway Top, glad to see we might be on the same page. :cool: M.

 

[morgan]

Good idea, and I have NO problem paying a few extra bucks to fund new cycle trail, but I really don't think it is a funding issue to make more trail, but I believe it is a land access issue. I would also really question the reliability of using these permit sales as census data because I suspect many retailers and consumers may not understand the difference, at least initially, and may just get the cheaper permits, but possibly still utilize the cycle trail.

Maybe have the ATV sticker have a big old picture of a Quad and Bike Stickers have a bike pic? Having the ATV sticker on a bike being a violation? Maybe different colors so the officials can tell easily.

Again, same as you I have no problem paying a few bucks extra. Heck, what's a couple Big Macs cost? M.

 

[bbarel]

Yes, if it is done right, and the stickers could be made so their different usage was overwhelmingly obvious, and if the program included sufficient pre-emptive education, and some enforcement to get everyone on board, then I think it could work. I would still caution about considering the sales as reliable census data for at least the first year or two anyhow.

 

[TopWop]

I really like this idea,and I really dont see a problem here with the sales either?If you ride a cycle,you have the burden of the extra fee,no matter if your going to ride cycle only or not..And all other ORVs will be charged the 16.25 fee..

Somebody should talk to Bill Chapin and Dick Reeney about this?I'll see them on Janurary the 8th,I'll ask them about it than.

 

[MWEISSEN]

Ok, bear with me here:

How about requireing a $16.25 sticker just like we do now----same sticker for ATV's and bikes, But and this is a big butt-------

For all bike's require an additional Bike/Single track sticker. Make it cheap, $3 to $5. Doing this will:

1. Get quaders off our backs ---because we would be some what funding our own trails (I.E. the ones quads can't ride) with the funds from this sticker.

2. Give authorities an enforcement tool--"You don't have a single track sticker Mr. Quad riding the single track, here's your ticket".

3. Give us a "free" census of how many bikes are riding the trails---just count how many of these stickers get sold. Actually instead of having to pay out for a census we would get money. Also subtract the number of "Bike Stickers" from the number of "$16.25 ORV Stickers" and you have a count on how many ATV's there are on public land.

Yeah I know, it's more money out ---and only from us bikers. But heck, I'd pay it. M.

This is an EXCELLENT solution.

 

[TopWop]

The only real issue we MIGHT see with this is?

1.The 4x4 ORV Truck Drivers have expressed a HUGE concern for more differant types of riding areas for THEIR use,like rock climbs,more mud pits,and larger hills ect..

We MIGHT get a fight from these guys??The cyclists get their own exclusive trails,how about the truckers paying the samething as cyclist and getting their OWN little playground too?

Im not saying it WILL happen,but there is that POSSIBILITY?

bILL

 

[fender92883]

This is an EXCELLENT solution.

Seconded! :worship:

 

[fatherandson]

I like the idea of the extra fee and different sticker for bikes. I have not been reading all of the posts on this issue, but I like this idea.

TW, we have met at the advisory meetings. I always found you willing to find solutions to ORV issues. I think this idea can go a long way to improving the relationship between quads and two wheelers. I will try to be there on January 8th to support the idea and the discussion.

Mike

 

[TopWop]

Thanks Mike,
We dont actually have an ORV advisory meeting on Janurary the 8th.However,myself and a few other ORV personnel are meeting for a final discussion of certain issues before introduction to the powers that be.

I agree that instead of hassling each other, its best for all user's to try to work together to serve the best possible interests of ALL ORVers.Sometimes,it dont work out that way though..

And I have to admit,I really like the idea of the two differant stickers..

Michigan has SO much potential for ORVers.Now we need to come together.

 

[morgan]

.The 4x4 ORV Truck Drivers have expressed a HUGE concern for more differant types of riding areas for THEIR use,like rock climbs,more mud pits,and larger hills ect..

I would guess Michigan's terrain would limit this type of special use. Not many rocks to climb here and everything else impacts the whole erosion thing. A 4X4 club has some land down here close to me. Just the nastiest rutted out muddy mess with a lot of run off. Whatever was holding it together (sod, roots) is now exposed. Pretty much useless to anyone now.

But what you say does bring up a good point. Would a separate bike sticker divide us even further more? I just don't know.

Also I'm sure some bikers would scoff at the idea, that's a given. Add this higher bike sticker fee to the now "on the table" proposed increase in CCC events fees and we might hear some noise. Now if it could be sold/presented to the biker's some other way than "This is solely to pay for your single track"? Maybe couple it with "also this is a step to keep unauthorized vehicles off of your single track". Or "this is also to gain more single track". Might be easier to swallow that way?

Then there is pushing this past the DNR who does the whole sticker thing. Would they be willing to gear up their equipment to put out a different sticker----and attempt to explain to the sticker sellers what the change is all about? Maybe the extra bucks would help to finance this.

To me it's no big deal, I'd pay the extra for the bike sticker even though I don't even ride single track. M.

 

[woodsy]

It will probably take a few more threads to accomplish this, but here's the next step. I've noted the comments taken under Woodsy's original idea for the brainstorming thread. Those have subsequently been summarized and categorized below. The hope is that further comments, suggestions and ideas will be presented in this thread; discussion of all points is encouraged. TBL is discouraged from posting in this thread.

Data:
Accurate statistics relating to ORVs (usage, user base, # on trails, etc.)
Advertising of local businesses @ trailheads
Inventory of ORV accessibly county roads

Infrastructure:
Additional spending on trail maintenance
Cell phone coverage of trail systems
Connectivity of ORV Routes (linear trails)
Cycle only Trail (more)
Kids riding area/trail(s)
Larger Parking Lots, better ingress/egress
Linear Trails (loop connectors)
Loading ramps @ trail heads.
Loop options on one way trail
More challenging trails; challenging loop options off main trails
More trail grading (whoop removal)
More trails of all type for motorized use
Parallel Trails (cycle/ATV)
Relocation of existing trails
Restrooms @ trailheads
Separated trails, separated use fees/stickers
Trail spurs for services (gas/food options)
Trail system/area in SE Michigan, connector trail to other systems further north
Use RTP program to fund SE Mich Use Area/Trail(s)

Legal:
Allow ATVs to be made street legal
Law enforcement who ride trails on ORV
Legal to ride from a designated camp to trail system
Mandatory Safety Training for all riders under 25
More law enforcement
Non-law enforcement trail riders for aid, assistance and education (ie ORV Safety Patrol)
Open forest roads in Lower Peninsula
Open snowmobile trail to ATVs
Removal of age restrictions for ATV operation

Other:
Volunteer forest clean ups

Signage:
E911 System
Education/signage @ trail heads for trail types, use and consequences
GPS trail markers
More signing of trails (such as you are here)
One way Trails
Road names on stop signs
Sign plans for each trail
Signing of private drives in USFS areas
Two way trails

ALL FOR AN EXTRA $5 STICKER!!!! Sounds like we REALLy do have an accord!! :laugh:
Seriously, I agree totally on the different sticker solution!
SOUNDS GREAT!!
Woodsy

 

[Godzuki]

i also like this seprate sticker thing ill shell out the extra for the cycle only trail. as for how to make the stickers differnt id say use the pictures the dnr already have for each you know the markers ive seen of a quad from the side, and one of the cycle from the side and lets say you make one orange and one yellow. if you wanted to get real crazy you even mark each trail with the same color as the 2differnt stickers, on atv trails you could put a sign with both the yellow sign of the cycle and the orange sign of the atv, and on cycle only trails you have only the cycle sign up, and maybe a red x or / across the atv.

 

[tall1]

:| PAY EXTRA TO RIDE SINGLE TRACK.... NO WAY!!!
I'm not with you guys on this one. My general observation has been that the DNR spends more money on grooming the two tracks. I ride Cedar Creek, Tin Cup, and Little Manistee. The later two places have both single track and a ORV route. I know that the Little Manistee ORV route was groomed in the fall of 03 and then again in May of 04. They must have used a road grader on it because this route was smoother than the public streets in my town. I would find it hard to believe much was spent grooming the single tracks at Tin Cup or Little Manistee. Maybe that is an ok way to do it since more ATV riders are paying in to the fund and most bikers don't like their trails that smooth, but I still don't think motorcycles should pay extra because we ride the lower maintainence trails. I suggest that this idea be dropped, New out houses and picnic tables are a much better idea.

By the way, how much snow is on the ground around Cedar Creek Now? :ride:

 

[buffmaster]

My only issue w/this grand new idea is w/TW's aspect of it. If I'm reading it correctly (and I mighta skimmed over it too quickly both times, and if so, my bad), I'm not sure how things'd work out w/having separate trails, one for ORV and the other for bikes. I like the idea myself, but I'm just wondering about the feasibility of it.

1) Some of the ORV trails would probably have to be used as connectors.
2) (And this may have to be a combination thing w/#1) Some of the ORV trails would have to be given up to become bike trails.
3) Some motorcyclists just like riding ORV trails and not the bike only ones (Some of my buddies from down state think that some of the ORV trails are too tight for them in spots, but they love coming up here to ride the rest of them.).

I like the idea a lot, but I think it's going to have to be more of an accomodation/mix of the two.

And like I said earlier, TW, if I misunderstood what you said, my bad.