The Argo Bill is back

Who do we complain to ...(who should we have killed.....) did I just say that out loud?? :laugh:

Got an e-mail adress that we can flood with coments?

Sent my objections to Rep Hildenbrand. Also, I will be contacting my local represntative.


I encourage everyone to voice their opinions.

Trevor

MY letters went out tonight

I am writing regarding:



HB 5343, a bill to amend 1994 Public Act 451 sections 8101 and adding sections 81101a.



As a taxpayer and purchaser of ORV certificates and user of the existing trail system I am appalled at the chance that our Michigan ORV trail system will be destroyed by widening the trails even further by your support of this bill. It just lacks any common sense. The wider any road is the higher the speeds can be obtained. Do you really want to make our trail system more dangerous? We have 72 inch route available for the vehicles that require such a wide path but to take every ORV route, trail in Michigan and widen them all is unbelievable! Our current trail size standards are more than adequate and to be honest the 50 inch trails are already getting dangerous with head on collisions at speeds now. Can you imagine the repercussions if they are all so wide that the high powered off road vehicles can obtain speeds in excess of 60 MPH easily? Our trail systems will turn into the autobahn.



Do you want your name attached to being responsible for all the injury and death resultant of such disrespect for allowing natural barriers and widths of trails to remain such that these speeds are not possible to reach as it is now? I mean you are supporting it and for what? Money? There cannot be any other motivation to support something that lacks such common sense and the safety of the people that elected you to protect them.



I offer you that opportunity to rethink your support for this bill and instead just open up the forest road system to support these vehicles while keeping the motorcyclists and ORV riders safe. I sincerely wouldn’t want to be out there where less than responsible riders can kill me, my family members and my friends while just trying to enjoy on of the recreational activities in this wonderful state.



The active ORV community is aware of your current position and we will be watching how this is handled closely, the supporters of the vehicles behind this are a small part of the overall ORV population and the majority of us will not allow this to proceed with our repercussions. We have organizations watching you and we are members of these organizations, we cannot let our trail system be ruined and become too dangerous to use!



Fred Thompson

Bay City, Michigan

Nice letter Fred! I sent it to all my reps also!

Fred,

Thanks for posting your letter. I too used yours, but altered it to avoid the "cookie cutter" effect. Mine will go out this morning.

2trackR,
I would like to thank you for keeping us informed. Your post alerted me to the issue. Fired off an Email to my Rep. apposing the bill. Many others did the same, looks like it had a positive impact. The early response shut it down before there was a chance to build momentum. Early is critical, thanks for your hard work.
Denny

Thanks Jeremy

I got some emails back today as well like this one:
Dear Fred,



Thank you for your e-mail concerning HB 4353. I have decided not to take this bill up in Committee tomorrow morning. Because of the concerns expressed to me and other members of the Committee, the bill’s sponsor would like additional time to work on the language with interested groups and the DNR.



When the difficulties are resolved, a hearing will be held on HB 4353.



Thank you for your interest in this legislation.



Sincerely,



Tom Casperson

State Representative

108th District

I got a simlar response, here is a copy of what I sent to the sponsor and local representatives.

Re: HB-5343
Mr. Hildenbrand,

The proposal of the subject bill and it’s contents has been brought to my attention. As an avid user of the current ORV trail systems available to the public in Michigan I must voice my concern with the bill being presented. I am opposed to the bill and will make my concerns known to my local representative(s). I feel that the widening of existing ORV trails to accept larger vehicles would endanger me and many others as it would allow for increased speed of current users and permit the use of larger vehicles that should more appropriately be used on forest roads with like sized vehicles. A better solution to the issue at hand would be to open select forest roads to ATVs of specific size or designation and leave the existing trail system regulations in place. This would address the concern for more/improved access for those requesting the change and ensure a continuation of safe and enjoyable recreation for current users. Thank you for taking the time to review my concerns and I appreciate your dedication and public service.



Sincerely,

Trevor Medley

I sent my letter to my rep. yesterday (Stackoe dist44.) I'm glad to hear all the other responses to the bill hopefully In working with the enthusiast groups it will be better for all.

Ah, the Argo Bill rears its ugly head again! :bang: I also fired off an email and got a similar response:

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding House Bill 5343. I appreciate you taking the time to contact my office with your concerns.

As you may know, I have asked that we not take up House Bill 5343 tomorrow in the House Conservation, Forestry and Outdoor Recreation Committee to allow further time to review this bill and make changes as needed.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me with your concerns.

Sincerely,

Dave Hildenbrand
State Representative
District 86

Dear Representative Hildenbrand,

As a tax-paying citizen of Michigan and an avid off-road motorcycle user, I am concerned with the proposed changes introduced in this bill. Specifically, the proposal changes the designated off-road vehicle trails from 50" to 60" in width to allow larger vehicles. A similar bill was introduced in recent years by Representative Valde Garcia to change trail width and was dropped after reviewing the impacts to the safety of off-road users and the economic impacts. Currently, the trail system includes ORV Trails that are maintained and designated for ORVs 50" or less in width and ORV Routes that are maintained at 72" in width and are designated for all other ORVs that are larger in size. This bill would change the designation of some 1500 miles of 50" width trail to 60" in width. The wider trail would increase ORV speeds on this trail, which winds through the State and National Forests, to unacceptable and unsafe levels. Furthermore, the widening of these existing trails would cost the taxpayers greatly. As an alternative to this bill, more 72" ORV route could be created and designated open to ORV use. Another alternative to this bill would be to reopen the forest roads of the lower peninsula to ORV use, as they have been designated "closed unless posted open" since 1991. This would open many thousands of miles of seasonal roads and two-track trails to ORV use, which would accomodate your constituents benifitting from this bill.

Thanks again for the heads-up 2TrakR!

Just some props for my rep. I sent an e-mail to Rep. Stackhoe(dist.44) and he gave me a call today, and we talked a little about the bill and some possible alternatives, I suggested expanding the ORV routes which are already 72" and accessing the snowmobile trails for thes larger ORV's. he said there was quite a bit of public input just this week and that what made them retract the proposal, the initial proposal was thought to be a win,win deal until all the letters and e-mail came in objecting to it.

I have not yet had a chance to send any emails, but another point worth clarifying is that while the big quad and Argo crowd wants WIDE trails, we dont. I suspect many non single track bike riders would assume we would LIKE wide trails - "gee...them skinny trails gotta be tuff to ride, so wider must be better for everyone". So I intend to point out that for a significant segement of the ORV community skinny trails are a good thing! To widen them is then a net loss to the Michigan trail system, not a gain. Also, I think it significant to stress how tiny of a minority the Argo/Rhino type vehicles are in the off road world - so why destroy a decent trail system for a small minority of users. My suggestions would then be as others have noted, to add BOTH skinny trail and more route, and re-open forest roads.

The fact that this bill has already been pulled really shows democracy in action!

A really big THANK YOU, saved our butts.

Excellent letters guys! I'm going to find out why Garcia dropped this bill, and how it got picked up by Hildenbrand.

900cc Rhinos on the trail? :coocoo: