I have to say the parrallel trail layout is really the best compromise, give choise to all riders and allow families or groups of riders on mixed machines to base and ride together. and in light of the furture trail expansion this would be the most cost effective use of funds. as you can expand the riding opportunities while utilizing already existing trail heads and parking areas. I remember back in '90-'Gladwin used to be a technical trail in areas. now you can drive a suburban through alot of the areas. additional s parallel system on the southern loops would go along way to allieviate pressure on the northern loops.
Motorcycle only trail !
- Thread starter tdunn976
- Start date
Does anyone know who does the DNR contract to do the trail maintenance on these MC trials? I would like to think if a MC club does it, it stays narrow and if a ATV club does it, it gets wide. The Sandstormers does the trail maintenance on the Bass Lake trail and it still narrow after a lot of years. Bass Lake probably does not see the amount of riders some of the lower Michigan trails see and that helps keep it narrow too.
TCTrailrider
Member
- Jan 19, 2004
- 980
- 0
katoom125 said:
Bingo, the issues are very different below the bridge.
I agree, and here's my $0.02.katoom125 said:
I believe the root of the problem is a lack of riding opportunities and overuse by both motorcycles and atvs.
I'm all in favor of some motorcycle only trail and my name is on that petition. But frankly I hate to see it happen at the expense of atv riders and I believe that's what is happening. (if there are more atvs than motorcycles, should there be more atv trails than motorcycle trails?).
Rather than argue with atv riders about where they should or should not ride. I would like to work with them to get this elusive 800 mi. of new trail on the ground. Be it parallel single track (clearly marked as motorcycle only) or new loops wide enough for side by sides.
Can anyone tell me exactly what the sticking point is with this new trail or the S.E MI riding area. Is it the DNR? The head of the DNR? Is it the legislature? Is it endless bureaucratic red tape? Who should we be talking to?----Anyone?
I'll get off my soap box :blah: .
- Thread starter
- #31
I was not trying to bring a riff between Cycles and ATV's and my oppinion really is not worth anything here. And I will still do everything I can to protect land use for ALL types of ORV's.
I believe that parallel trail is still the best solution to allow all to have the type of trail that they perfer to ride but that is not on the table right now.
We should continue to work togather to get HB 4323 on the books, which would benefit both ATV'S and Motorcycles.
Then we can and will have the power to re-write PA 451.
Without a victory here we will be powerless from in-fighting to move our trail program in the future.
Keep our eyes on the big picture and let not our own differences of what we ride allow the Powers that Be to win without a fight.
Thomas Dunn
I believe that parallel trail is still the best solution to allow all to have the type of trail that they perfer to ride but that is not on the table right now.
We should continue to work togather to get HB 4323 on the books, which would benefit both ATV'S and Motorcycles.
Then we can and will have the power to re-write PA 451.
Without a victory here we will be powerless from in-fighting to move our trail program in the future.
Keep our eyes on the big picture and let not our own differences of what we ride allow the Powers that Be to win without a fight.
Thomas Dunn
D.LEATHERS
Member
- Jun 28, 2002
- 527
- 0
Your Opinion
tdunn976 said:
BadgerMan
Mi. Trail Riders
- Jan 1, 2001
- 2,479
- 10
2TrakR said:
This map sure seems to indicate "cycle only" status........
http://www.dnr.state.mi.us/spatialdatalibrary/pdf_maps/trail_maps/orv/evart.pdf
:coocoo:
All we're trying to do is protect existing Motorcycle Trail.
Certain trails are designated MC trails; the maintenance standard for these trails is 24" on the ground and 40" at handlebar to 8'. The standard fro ATV Trail is 50" ground to 8'. The standard for ORV Route is 72" ground to 8'. (All per MDNR Trail Mtce specifications).
By definition, then, operating a 50" ATV on a 24" trail is causing a problem. These trails are not intended, maintained, or designed to be used by these vehicles.
There are about 2500 miles of MC/ATV/ORV trails in Michigan. Not counting the UP "open unless posted closed," and what HB4323 will give the ATVers. Currently about 766 miles is "designated" MC trail. About 187 miles of this trail has been widened enough to need to be reclassified as ATV Trail. We are hoping to protect the remaining MC Trail from being damaged... Approximately 24% of recognized MI trail.
I agree that in some cases parallel trail is a great idea. I do not think that it is the answer to everything. I feel that protecting a legitimate amount of single-track is a good idea.
I, for one, am very pleased that the MDNR is willing to respond to, and attempt to address, the needs of a very important user group.
Certain trails are designated MC trails; the maintenance standard for these trails is 24" on the ground and 40" at handlebar to 8'. The standard fro ATV Trail is 50" ground to 8'. The standard for ORV Route is 72" ground to 8'. (All per MDNR Trail Mtce specifications).
By definition, then, operating a 50" ATV on a 24" trail is causing a problem. These trails are not intended, maintained, or designed to be used by these vehicles.
There are about 2500 miles of MC/ATV/ORV trails in Michigan. Not counting the UP "open unless posted closed," and what HB4323 will give the ATVers. Currently about 766 miles is "designated" MC trail. About 187 miles of this trail has been widened enough to need to be reclassified as ATV Trail. We are hoping to protect the remaining MC Trail from being damaged... Approximately 24% of recognized MI trail.
I agree that in some cases parallel trail is a great idea. I do not think that it is the answer to everything. I feel that protecting a legitimate amount of single-track is a good idea.
I, for one, am very pleased that the MDNR is willing to respond to, and attempt to address, the needs of a very important user group.
Last edited:
BIG THANKS!!! to T. Dunn and all helpers for your time invested and work efforts for ANY improvements that are made to the trail system. I am sure you working in the best interest of Bikes within the framework that you can!
Any improvements are better than a loss or no improvements!
Any improvements are better than a loss or no improvements!
- Jan 1, 2002
- 794
- 0
BadgerMan said:
It's funny, I use the same position to show ATV riders that Evart (and other trails) is not maintained for ATV use and that they should use that as the guide to know which trails are more appropriate for ATVs.
However, as the map referenced above indicates - the trail is open to ORVs less than 50" in width. It then cites an example of an ORV meeting that criteria which is an off-road motorcycle. Nothing about "cycles-only". By Michigan's legal definition, any ORV (bike/quad/three-wheeler/go kart) less than 50" in width is legal on that trail.
By law, all ORV Trails are open to all ORVs that are less than 50" wide. Of course, that is what this LUOD is trying to address - This new order will make a new legal definition*, or subcategory, of ORV trail recognizing some designated forest trails (ORV trails) as only open to cycles.
* They are not changing the law, just implementing new rules which the law provides for the DNR to do.
The previous map for Evart stuck closer to the law's wording referencing ATVs and Bikes as appropriate for Evart (1999 version) as shown below:
Of course, anyone who rode Evart back in '99 knows that ATVs were not an appropriate rig to be riding that trail with. 10 years later, it's a different story with more than half of the trail easily ATV'able.
PDF of the full '99 Evart map here:
http://www.gldsmc.org/public/evart.pdf
It was nice the DNR updated the language on some of the maps a couple years ago to help Users better understand which trails were more appropriate for their vehicle of choice. I believe they could have done more to help explain it. Of course, the folks making the maps (or approving the languages) probably have never ridden off-road and have little experience/understanding for what was needed to be conveyed.
BadgerMan
Mi. Trail Riders
- Jan 1, 2001
- 2,479
- 10
Yeah, the symbol in the lower right hand corner of the page is a suggestion based on the "and/or" language that you're pointing out.
I love the idea of making the suggestions enforcable rules/laws thus protecting our few remaining challenging trails.
Good work......... :cool:
I love the idea of making the suggestions enforcable rules/laws thus protecting our few remaining challenging trails.
Good work......... :cool:
The beautiful thing about living in Michigan is that if we can get clarification on which vehicle is allowed and is maintained at that width. Good ol' Mother nature will close the trail down over a couple of riding seasons to the width that we maintain it at. All we need is a better definition of what is allowed on that peticular trail.
And to also put my .02 in Thanks T Dunn for all the work that you are doing on our behalf. I know if I was there and trying to deal with the lawmakers, I would more than likely be placing a timber along side of many heads until they learn to listen.. Thanks Again.
And to also put my .02 in Thanks T Dunn for all the work that you are doing on our behalf. I know if I was there and trying to deal with the lawmakers, I would more than likely be placing a timber along side of many heads until they learn to listen.. Thanks Again.
Wolverine423
~SPONSOR~
- Oct 2, 2005
- 2,498
- 0
Apathy
So far, I've been notified of 14 emails to the MDNR supporting this effort to protect Motorcycle Single Track Trails in Michigan.
We only have until next Wednesday to send our comments to Steve Kubisiak at the MDNR.
His email -->[email protected]
It'll be our own fault if the motorcycle user group can't/doesn't show their support for this initiative.
I can tell you that the ATV crowd IS sending their comments in opposition to this.
I, for one, expected more from the single track enthusiasts.
So far, I've been notified of 14 emails to the MDNR supporting this effort to protect Motorcycle Single Track Trails in Michigan.
We only have until next Wednesday to send our comments to Steve Kubisiak at the MDNR.
His email -->[email protected]
It'll be our own fault if the motorcycle user group can't/doesn't show their support for this initiative.
I can tell you that the ATV crowd IS sending their comments in opposition to this.
I, for one, expected more from the single track enthusiasts.
TCTrailrider
Member
- Jan 19, 2004
- 980
- 0
Jeff' I sent him one last week but did not CC anyone.
CR250R@WINTERS
~SPONSOR~
- May 28, 2004
- 286
- 0
Anybody got a good generic response that we can all just copy and send to Steve..............my composinig is not that great. But I will work on one if there is not one that can be copied. Thanks
FWIW this is what I sent, I asked several riding buds to consisder sending something similar
Steve,
I strongly support the motorcycle only designated trail. It is more challenging and safer on tighter trails and they promote slower speeds. Also the tighter trails generally you have less whoops developed in the trail.
Thanks for your consideration on this matter.
Steve,
I strongly support the motorcycle only designated trail. It is more challenging and safer on tighter trails and they promote slower speeds. Also the tighter trails generally you have less whoops developed in the trail.
Thanks for your consideration on this matter.
