Link to Michigan House Bill 5343, redefining the term "ATV" and "Forest Road" - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Land Use > Rules, Regulations, Trail, and ORV Park Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 13th, 2005, 08:28 AM   #1
clarkstoncracker
lol
 
clarkstoncracker's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-03-05
Location: OC - MI
Posts: 42,441
iTrader: (40)
Mentioned: 96 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to clarkstoncracker
Default Link to Michigan House Bill 5343, redefining the term "ATV and ORV" and "Forest Road"

Complete bill as it goes before the house:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...5-HIB-5343.htm


Leg. Review of the bill:

REVISE ALL TERRAIN VEHICLE (ATV) AND

OFF-ROAD VEHICLE (ORV) DEFINITIONS

House Bill 5343

Sponsor: Rep. Dave Hildenbrand

Committee: Conservation, Forestry, and Outdoor Recreation

Complete to 10-25-05

A SUMMARY OF HOUSE BILL 5343 AS INTRODUCED 10-20-05

House Bill 5343 would amend the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (MCL 324.81101 and 324.81101a) to revise the definitions for all-terrain and off-road vehicles, in order to include larger and more powerful models. The bill also would re-define the term "forest trail" to mean a designated path or way capable of travel only by a vehicle 60 inches or less in width. Currently the standard is less than 50 inches in width.

Currently under the law, "ATV" means a three- or four-wheeled vehicle designed for off-road use that has low-pressure tires, has a seat designed to be straddled by the rider, and is powered by a 50cc to 500cc gasoline engine or an engine of comparable size using other fuels. House Bill 5343 would amend the definition so that "ATV" would mean a three-, four- or six-wheel vehicle designed for off-road use that has low-pressure tires, a bench seat or a seat designed to be straddled by the rider, and is powered by a 50cc to 900cc gasoline engine, or an engine of comparable size using other fuels.

Further, the law currently defines "ORV" to mean a motor-driven off-road recreation vehicle capable of cross-country travel without benefit of a road or trail, on or immediately over land, snow, ice, marsh, swampland, or other natural terrain. ORV or vehicle includes, but is not limited to, a multi-track or multi-wheel drive vehicle, an ATV, a motorcycle or related two-wheel, three-wheel, or 4-wheel vehicle, or other means of transportation deriving motive power from a source other than muscle or wing. ORV or vehicle does not include a registered snowmobile, a farm vehicle being used for farming, a vehicle used for military, fire, emergency, or law enforcement purposes, a vehicle owned and operated by a utility company or an oil or gas company when performing maintenance on its facilities or on property over which it has an easement, a construction or logging vehicle using in performance of its common function, or a registered aircraft. House Bill 5343 would retain these provisions, but expand the definition to include a six-wheel vehicle.

The bill also would add to Part 811 a new Section 81101a, which would only take effect if House Joint Resolution Z becomes part of the State Constitution as a result of voter approval in November 2006. That resolution would put a new Michigan Conservation and Recreation Legacy Fund, along with two existing funds, the Game and Fish Protection Trust Fund and the Nongame Fish and Wildlife Trust Fund, within the State Constitution. The new section contains definitions currently found in Section 81101. Section 81101 would be repealed if the constitutional amendment is approved. The new section also contains an additional definition ("off road vehicle account") not found in current law that would apply if the new constitutional funds are created.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The bill would have no fiscal impact.

Legislative Analyst: J. Hunault

Fiscal Analyst: Kirk Lindquist
__________________

Last edited by clarkstoncracker; November 13th, 2005 at 08:34 AM.
clarkstoncracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old November 13th, 2005, 11:27 AM   #2
Yetti
Buy a Fiat! Save the UAW!
 
Yetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 20 minutes south of Hell...
Posts: 14,384
iTrader: (10)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Yetti wrote:
Quote:
well if you all haven't read the Bill is off the table as of now. and the sensous at the meeting is that it will stay off.
as for the up graded trails and the future of the 25% more trails by 2008 could be anyones guess. but I think you will see lots of forest rd redesignated to become forest trail & route. I don't think the USFS or the state is going to give up any land for trails very easy. just my .02
http://www.atvoffroad.net/forums/sho...?t=1900&page=4
__________________
Yetti
Yetti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2005, 08:55 AM   #3
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,460
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

This changes the definition of "forest trail", it does nothing to the definition of "forest road".

My impression of this bill is that it would require the spending of large amounts of money to benefit a reletivly small number of users. It would od nothing for "full size users". I think what we need to push for is the creation of a new type of trail, a "full size trail" that will accomodate the Argos, John Deere Gator and Kawisaki Mule type vehicles, as well as Jeeps and other small to mid sized "SUV" type vehicles.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2005, 12:58 PM   #4
GreaseMonkey
Senior Member
 
GreaseMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: Madison Heights, MI
Posts: 17,975
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn
This changes the definition of "forest trail", it does nothing to the definition of "forest road".

My impression of this bill is that it would require the spending of large amounts of money to benefit a reletivly small number of users. It would od nothing for "full size users". I think what we need to push for is the creation of a new type of trail, a "full size trail" that will accomodate the Argos, John Deere Gator and Kawisaki Mule type vehicles, as well as Jeeps and other small to mid sized "SUV" type vehicles.
x2
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I am not a lesbian but if I was I would do her.
GreaseMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2005, 03:49 PM   #5
Yetti
Buy a Fiat! Save the UAW!
 
Yetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 20 minutes south of Hell...
Posts: 14,384
iTrader: (10)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Brewmenn wrote:
Quote:
House Bill 5343: This is the so called "Argo bill" since it was introduced specifically with Argos in mind. From what we've been told this bill is all but dead. The problem with this bill is that it would require the spending of large amount of money to benifit reletivly few users.
Given the bill is all but dead, I think we should all consider getting behind something like the Ohio HB286 it has the potential for the most gain with the least amount of cost.
__________________
Yetti
Yetti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2005, 06:44 AM   #6
noodles
give 'er sh*t ay?
 
noodles's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: holland Mi
Posts: 1,029
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to noodles Send a message via MSN to noodles Send a message via Yahoo to noodles
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn
This changes the definition of "forest trail", it does nothing to the definition of "forest road".

My impression of this bill is that it would require the spending of large amounts of money to benefit a reletivly small number of users. It would od nothing for "full size users". I think what we need to push for is the creation of a new type of trail, a "full size trail" that will accomodate the Argos, John Deere Gator and Kawisaki Mule type vehicles, as well as Jeeps and other small to mid sized "SUV" type vehicles.

what about fullsize trucks?? i want a place to wheel... and if the made trails accesiable to a fullsize anything else would be albe to go on it,sdo it could/should cut down on the trial maintance
noodles is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > 4x4 Land Use > Rules, Regulations, Trail, and ORV Park Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:49 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.12594 seconds with 38 queries