[The Bottom Line]

B.L., if you want to make an independant point, just do it.

Quoting me, and then twisting it into some contorted "evil cyclist rhetoric" and reading into my quote points that are not there reads badly for you. Not that your point may not have validity to your situation locally, or globally, but trying to tie it to my comments only reduces it's impact.

Actually, I'm enjoying the debate, hope you are as well.

Happy Thanksgiving to you and all TTers and ATVers, I'm off to indulge in holiday excess!

Robert

I certainly would never intentionally try to twist anything you say intentionallty and that is why I post your comments prominently so as to eliminate any questions as to just what was said (which still doesn't mean my interpretation is perfect.

I'd be glad to correct any misconceptions I might have had as to your position; simply do as I do and re-post same, so that we're on the same page (I'm not saying that I'm right....just looking for somebody to intelligently dispute what I've claimed to date).

Hoping your holiday went well also,

John

[The Bottom Line]

[QUOTE=KTM265]"...I just put a post up on the Midwest forum asking for help to clean a local riding area that is really in disrepair...it's open to trucks...all off-road riders...and it needs help...."

I'll check it out, thanks.

"...I don't have any problem sharing trails and hope others will share the work to make the trails nice for all..."

That's our problem here in Michigan.......we've got a big cycle group whose leader has no problem telling you ("off the record", of course)...THAT HIS GROUP IS NOT INTERESTED IN MAINTAINING TRAILS ANY WIDER THAN THEIR HANDLEBARS.

I think a lot of people hear that and say "so what"?.

I guess "I" hear that and say somebody needs either a serious attitude adjustment...'or'... deserves to be exposed for who they really are and what their group is truly all about (considering the trail crisis we now have in our state). I'll have to say that it also upsets me that this group has used the threat of their participation in the maintenance program itself to strongarm our DNR into making decisions that have adversely affected all of us.

[The Bottom Line]

Originally Posted by matte
"They bring it up because it's a perfectly valid analogy. Please explain why you have no problem with turning every inch of motorcycle single track into a double-wide jeep trail you can drive your "Rhino" on..."

Whoaa there big fella! Could you please just post where I ever claimed that my Rhino would require "how wide" a trail? (you've got to stick with factual information or we just can't have a conversation ;) ).

"....yet you seem to consider the distinction between motorized and non-motorized trails to be sacrosanct. One could just as easily characterize the reasons hikers and mountain bikers seek to keep motorcycles off of some trails as matters of "like" and "want", but I don't see that that makes their reasons any less valid......"

(lol)....Just a "FYI" here, my friend.....but the fact that the terms "motorized" and "non-motorized" will always be used for simple classification purposes (which are some times even multi-use in reality; think snowmobiles) has little to do with the comparison you just made between non-motorized users wanting to keep motorized users out of a mixed-use situation. Nice try, but....

".... Why doesn't your 'we all own it so we should all get to use it' philosophy extend to that scenario?...."

I think most of us are under the impression that until the numbers get so out of hand that one group is forced to use an area one day and another the next.....the mixing of these two user groups is just an accident waiting to happen.

"...to me it makes perfect sense to have some trails for non-motorized use, some for motorcyle single track, and some for quad/4x4 access....."

Again, as I've mentioned before...."the rest of us" in the motorized community...see absolutely nothing 'special' about what you ride or really care all that much as to how you want to ride it. We've got divisions within our own (cough) "minority" that would like a lot of different things just for "themselves"....yet have subjugated that desire for the good of ALL the other users in their group. It's called sharing; it's been referered to as "strength in numbers"; yet the concept is really based on the fact that we're all in this together and that we truly need to know where everybody stands before we proceed.

"....Yes, as a member of the public I am entitled to access -all- of those areas, and I DO; when I want to enjoy the non-motorized areas I go there with my mountain bike, when I want to enjoy motorized single track, I bring my dirt bike, etc. but I don't feel the right (or desire) to drive my 4x4 on every hiking trail, mountain bike trail or motorcycle single-track trail......"

What I am saying here has nothing to do with the ovbvious regarding non-motorized trails....it has to do with the fact that one group is very quietly trying to sub-divide itself within the community to grab motorized trails that the vast majority of the motorized AND GENERAL community will never enjoy. Motorized trails give access to public land for those within our community who previously had none. Sorry, but they aren't 'not' going somewhere just because you don't want them to and would just as soon have that place to yourself ;)

"....Further, I see no reason off-road recreationists can't work together to preserve access rights while recognizing the fact that not every vehicle type belongs on every trail...."

You've got to sub-divide big and small, my friend.....after that, it gets into "what's mine and yours".....and the general public, frankly, won't stand for that distinction and shouldn't have to. :naughty:

[2TrakR]

TBL -
Wow, you have some serious issues with the ORV program in Michigan. Perhaps getting more involved would help you better understand just what is and what is not going on with the program. The statements you make about the CCC, their executive director Mr. Chapin, the state of trail grading, the AMA's input, comments about Mr. Ranney (ORV Advisory Board chairman) and so on indicate you've let your feelings and anger about things brew to a point that you no longer see, or are willing to, what is actually going on.
Making unfounded statements to the effect that the CCC/AMA is in bed with the DNR is off base at best. We work with them as much as possible to keep the program alive, very true. To allude to their policies and programs being under our control is very, very wrong. Please provide an example.

There needs to be more trail for motorized recreation. As it stands now, we use up approximately 2 square miles of public land. I believe the most recent figure indicated Michigan has 9000 square miles of public land. Obviously we can use more and the demands of the public indicate it is necessary.

Those motorized recreational opportunities require that the User base be rationally considered. That would include single track trail, ATV trail (50") and ORV Route (72"). That does not provide opportunities for the full size crowd (4x4) nor for the ATV guys who want to use their winch and play in the mud all day. Michigan has a mantra regarding so called protection of it's wet and wild areas, the "so as to not create an erosive condition" which means zero hill climbs, nada mud bogs and zilch for challenging trails. We change that law, we provide opportunities for that last fraction of User base.

Tell me more about this modern trail maintenance equipment we need. You describe a magic bullet that I want to know more about. The 3 graders the CCC employs are very technically advanced and do a fantastic job of whoop removal.
The grader used in the Mio Ranger District, that which you mentioned about Dick chastising them for, is a 60" grader and does a nice job. On 60" trail. Trail that was 50". It's no longer 50", no longer ATV trail. It's now almost, but not quite, ORV Route (72"). Typical of wider trail, speeds will increase along with the dangers associated with it, except now there is less room to get out of the way. Had they graded the trail at 50" they would have gotten nothing but praise.

We do need the ATV community to get involved in a positive way. No doubt about it. Their voice should be focused through key group(s) so they are not just a voice in a crowd taking up valuable meeting time ranting about their own personal agenda.

[The Bottom Line]

Unfortunately, I don't have the time at this moment to respond effectively; but I do want to give you a brief history as to why I started digging up these issues in the first place.

As to "strongarming the DNR"...this phrase came directly from the mounth of a leader who thought our road to salvation would be achieved through an association with the motorcyclists....only to be eventually convinced (the hard way) that this wasn't necessarily the case (when this guy responded to the question of why we shouldn't work TOGETHER with the cyclists; by penning "we should do this at the 'social level' only"...we pretty much knew we had just stumbled into a huge pile of poop :( ).

This unexplained comment led me to asking questions at several DNR field offices in the state (in person) where I was informed of just why the trails have never seen the advent of modern trail maintenance equipment or programs...FROM THE VERY PEOPLE WHO WERE OUT THERE LIVING IT! Like my Mom has always said....."just follow the money!" :rolleyes:

Let's just say that it didn't take long to uncover any local or national organization's role in this mess; or the inability of the average Michigan citizen to break into the stranglehold they had on it. Un-elected and innefective leadership on the atv side made my search just that more difficult; yet I've found that when you simply start asking questions that folks just won't answer in public or on the record?....you're usually on the right track to find just who and what you are looking for. ;) (when you discover arrogance this bad; it'd be almost humorous to experience, if so much weren't at stake).

By the way, referencing individuals is not a game I play. We both know all the players here and using names that may not necessarily be involved in the issues at hand, does a disservice to those mentioned.;)

I'll get back to your comments when I have the time and thanks for being the first motorcyclist (I've certainly experienced) to break the cycle of arrogance, come out from behind the curtain and simply talk to a lowly 4-wheeled enthusiast "one-on-one" (I was beginning to think it would never happen!). Seems pretty ironic "to me"... that a guy can ask pointed questions and go to meetings for 5 years and "suddenly" (after he's about given up) a motorcyclist (at those same meetings) starts complaining that a four wheel enthusiast has been wasting THEIR valuable meeting time and that he now wants to "talk".

And you guys wonder why the rest of this community views you the way we do.......

[ob1quixote]

Geez B.L., I thought I was discussing an issue with you, not as a lowly anything, but as a person interested in trail riding.

Just so you know, when I began riding again, after a long lay-off since my youth, my ride for the first 5 years was an '87 TRX250X. I still ride it, albeit more as a service vehicle for trails that are open to all riders, but not much for enjoyment anymore.

Thats OK, "she" is getting long in the tooth and deserves a break from running trails at speed, and retirement rides pulling sledges, chainsaws, and pulling broken bikes out of the woods at races will keep "her" oil from getting too cold!

Oh, and being the lone [at the time] ATVer didnt stop me from gaining acceptance with the local cycle club, in fact, I have been on the elected board in my 3rd term. I am no longer the lone ATVer. Given, they are few in the club, but they are excellent emissaries from the ATV crowd. Sure, there is some resistance, I would guess no more than if there were a few cyclers in a local ATV club. And yes, there is good-hearted tweaking as well.

Yes I ride a bike, I ride an ATV,and I work on my local trail system MORE than I ride for any pleasure. Believe it or not, we arent as far apart as you may think. We may not be in locked step, but I think there are plenty of issues we are in agreement on.

So when I say I will continue to fight for trails, single as well as dual track, thats where I'm coming from.

Robert

[badassyz250f]

I can ride two wheels three wheels four wheels or your old lady if you must pick three choices which do you prefer? I know lot's of 4 wheel guys that would like to beat your ass bottomlicker! :applause:

[KTM265]

BL...Just so you know, I race quads but I also ride a bike. Like a few of the others on here, there are trails out there that no quad has any business on, it's tight, single track through woods and rocks...running a quad through will destroy a challenging bike trail. I understand and appriciate good challenging single track trail. I'm not sure if you ride a bike or not but I have a pair of them and you are more then welcome to come ride with me in AZ on single track trail, just to experiance it if you haven't already. And dispite the bribes the bike riders are going to be giving me, no I will not take you out into the desert and shoot you...Ha-Ha. Read my opinions about the guns in here and you'll laugh at that... I don't expect a MX track owner to make his track easier for me to race on if I think it's too tight or to many big jumps, I just choose not to ride on it. Same thing can be said for the trails...if it's too tight, too rough...well find another trail because someone out there might like it that way, or choose to ride a different machine that is made for it...basically change your riding style to meet the demands of the trail.

[The Bottom Line]

[QUOTE=ob1quixote]"...Geez B.L., I thought I was discussing an issue with you, not as a lowly anything, but as a person interested in trail riding...".

The reference to MYSELF being a lowly atver has nothing to do with you and refers to the manner in which these arrogant motorcycle groups (and their cronies) have treated the atving public here in Michigan. All of this is simply factual information and is why you won't see 2TRAKKR coming back to dispute my experiences or any of the other facts given earlier which give this thread's title its name.

"...Oh, and being the lone [at the time] ATVer didnt stop me from gaining acceptance with the local cycle club, in fact, I have been on the elected board in my 3rd term....."

I would love to be on the board of my local cycle club....the problem being that when they propose things like our next 100-mile trail here in Michigan be for 'cycles only" and that the DNR should pony up $50,000 to do the initial study....wouldn't I be immediately kicked off the board if I DARED suggest that those 100 miles be...."multi-use". :eek: (this is NOT a hypothetical example; it's the crap they're trying to pull as we speak).

"...I am no longer the lone ATVer. Given, they are few in the club, but they are excellent emissaries from the ATV crowd. Sure, there is some resistance, I would guess no more than if there were a few cyclers in a local ATV club...."

Why should there be ANY resistance....AND NAME ME ONE ATV CLUB IN THIS COUNTRY WHERE THERE IS RESISTANCE TO MOTORCYCLISTS!

Again, we are not the group of "exclusion" or "ill will".....and it is so hilarious (to me) that these guys shoot themselves in the foot every time they seek to explain themselves!!! We love you all and want to work with you.....just quit acting like arrogant pricks in regard to what land you believe that the rest of us should never enjoy! We'll help you build and maintain the trails parallel to us.....just don't assume that if you're not necessarily 'happy" with that....we're stupid enough to NOT call you for what you are!

...so please don't use the "resistance to motorcyclists" line with us....if anything, your comment above simply proves my point as to the attitude of many in leadership positions within your community.


"....Yes I ride a bike, I ride an ATV,and I work on my local trail system MORE than I ride for any pleasure. Believe it or not, we arent as far apart as you may think. We may not be in locked step, but I think there are plenty of issues we are in agreement on......"

The problem is this, Robert....and that is the fact that these motorcyclists are trying to silence people like myself with words like "divisive" and "inflammatory"....when the one group willing to work together on ALL of the trails is already here and causing their membership money to go down the toilet in a big way. We want to build parallel motorcycle trails for their enjoyment and ours.....they want to lock up what they have and close it off forever to everybody but themselves. Let me give you a quick example:

All of the motorcycle trails here in the state of Michigan were once open to atvs if they could get down them being maintained to motorcycle widths. One of our trails turned out to be on private property and the whole trail system had to be re-worked. When it came back on-line...what do you think we discovered?...that the cyclists had convinced the powers that be to erect BARRICADES (and of course change the wording in the ose proposal) to atvs!

How more blatant does your group have to be when you start trying to set precedent on another group's access to the land we all own?

"...So when I say I will continue to fight for trails, single as well as dual track, thats where I'm coming from....".

And I hope you continue to do so, as well as commend you for it. All I have been trying to do here; is shed the light of day on some subjects that I don't see brought up very often (if ever). When you get to the point of people threatening to do you great bodily harm; coupled with the fact that NO ONE has disputed any of the facts (not opinions) put forward here.....I'm thinking that this conversation has been long overdue.

A big thank-you goes out to the owners and moderators of Thumpertalk for allowing it to happen. :thumbsup:

[ob1quixote]

I understood your lowly comment as being towards yourself, not me. And I dont consider any ATVer lowly, until they give me reason to. Frankly, your obvious involvement in the OHV scene puts you in a class far from lowly.

As far as resistance to cyclers in an ATV club, here locally the ATV crowd is so independant and disorganized, there is none. I can speak for any other ATV club, but lets face it. There are issues that some [insert mode of transport here] riders have with some[insert mode of transport here]. You see it here on TT, you see it on other Cycle and ATV boards, why wouldnt you see it in real life. The issues between the groups evidently are so important that they are a major roadblock to cooperation.

While I have to note that theres always 2 sides to a story, and all I have is yours, still it sounds like there are significant troubles in MI.

I'm not saying that your local issues, or my local issues, or anyone's local issues arent important, and have some kind of validity, but that allowing these issues to make cooperation impossible among the majority of both user groups is just plain dumb.

Kinda like arguing with your wife over who gets the last Tic-Tac in the mall parking lot, while your car being stolen just feet away.

What sense does it make to argue {for/against} {single track/double track} when the existence of ANY track is being threatened?

I can see it now......"yup, we won!!! We get our X track trail!!!!........huh, no trails?"

Its all about priorities, and the lack of them. We [offroad users in general] will bicker about our differences that are tiny in the big picture, while the issues important to all are ignored, by all but the very few.

Good luck with your issues in MI, major and minor, from what I hear MI has a lot of trails to keep or lose.

Around here {SC}, I have only 40 miles available without making a long drive, a small cycle club with a few ATV members, no ATV club to join with in our efforts on and for the trails, and a large number of users who feel that the public trail is a free-for-all zone, a federal govt that can be tough to work with, a state govt that almost completely ignores the fact that OHVs exist.

And its getting old........

I agree, thanks to admins and mods, maybe in some small way, this discussion will make a difference.

Robert

[YZ250F_Rider]

Well there goes the neighborhood, ummm races. Dakar is going to have 6 atvs competing this year. I saw that 3 dual drive WR450's are in too.

[2TrakR]

TBL -
I didn't jump up to reply to your previous post you as you indicated more time was needed to craft a reply. I must also admit that I ignored this and the previous thread regarding "quad bashing" as well until I was really bored over the holiday. Let's face it, TT has become overrun with a number of adolescent riders who enjoy name calling and silly statements that while entertaining for them, are not interesting to myself. Since I disagree with your positions and statements regarding alleged actions going on in the great State of Michigan, I feel compelled to refute some of your claims with the real facts and perhaps be able to enlighten you with the information you seem to be after. Of course, I don't have all the answers nor am I personally involved in every action taken related to the CCC and the DNR.

Your reference to Holton Horshoe... That system had several issues. One was that the USFS had designated it cycle only and ATVs were using it, next was the private property issues (that was the final straw) and also was the environmental issues including an endangered butterfly in the area as well as trail density. The CCC did indeed work hard with the USFS to see that the trail system was not closed and we ended up with as many trail miles as possible. We did not push for cycle only trails, at the same time changing the designation of that trail to 50" was never in one of the USFS's proposals. Could it have become 50" trail? Anything is possible and had there been a legitimate ATV presence (ie a club of some substance) it may have become one of the options. You are correct in that the CCC helped cause the USFS to spend some money (was it $50K? don't remember). We caused them to do that because they wanted to simply eliminate that trail system. To do something other than just close the trail required an analysis which cost money. So, yeah, in some way we did cause that to happen.
Your statement about all trails originally being open to ATVs is only half true and very misleading. ORV Trails that are maintained to the 40" spec have always been open to vehicles capable of traversing that trail without leaving the trail (to get around a set of narrow trees) and without causing "environmental damage" which would include running over saplings/brush and related - which any 50" ATV would do while trying to navigate those trails. Know that a 40" trail is 40" at the handlebar and 24" on the ground. Trying to keep all four tires of a quad (or all three of my wife's three wheeler) within an 24" wide strip is pretty difficult in my opinion.
In any case, the Cyclists had nothing to do with erecting barricades or other such items. This was all USFS policy and procedure. I can provide you with name and contact info of the USFS Baldwin Ranger District Recreation Planner (who oversees this stuff). I'm sure Kathy could explain it to you better than I.

As for one ATV club that shows resistance to a motorcycle club.. Easy enough. ATV Offroad Club of Michigan. I would not say resistance because the term implies them going against or fighting with a "cycle" club. Why would you promote infighting among motorized off-road recreation groups who do indeed share a common goal?
As for the example given, the specifics are that ATV OffRoad has opted not to work with the CCC to use their insurance for coverage of trail maintenance and events. Instead, they opted to get their own insurance and/or not participate in some functions.

Yet again you also mentioned trail maintenance equipment and suggested that what is being used in the field is inferior. Please expand on your vision, I cannot discuss that which you do not describe.

If I've not covered all of the "facts" you written about, please provide a synopsis for me. I'm obviously a bit slow.

[The Bottom Line]

[QUOTE=ob1quixote]"...Frankly, your obvious involvement in the OHV scene puts you in a class far from lowly...."

My level of involvement in the OHV scene has not been one of "choice'.

I joined a motorcycle group....my first call to leadership brought an 'off-the-record' statement that their organization was NOT interested in maintaining trails any wider than their handlebars. To me, this tells a LOT about who you are and just what you are all about. I was also informed by state employees that this same group was using their involvement in our trail maintenance program (basically, "do this or we'll quit") to strongarm our Deparment of Natural Resources......needless to say, they didn't get a renewal.

I joined an atv group....among my many questions was why its membership was supporting the notion of parents paying to "watch" their kids take training classes; the fact that normal elections were not allowed/"permission" was required to attend meetings and why somebody seeking a simple business membership in the club was telling its leadership to "stuff it" (and if they sent his membership check back....he'd display it in his office in a less than flattering manner). After the main core of this group got through calling me every name in the book for suggesting that their emperor had no clothes...they all quit in disgust after they received the same treatment I did. :rolleyes:

I joined a "regional" club.....one of the first questions I had, was in regards to "why" there were no apparent safety rules for the local riding area that they worshipped. About the time I started to receive material sprinkled in my newsletter that was (I guess) supposed to look like "anthrax"....I figured that doubling up and going helmet-less was pretty darn important to again, not only the average member who always has the right to their opinion.....but, in this case, the LEADERSHIP of the entire group. More money wasted (they got me for 3 years on this one; payed ahead ;) ).

I joined a NATIONAL group.....first thing I asked was just why the group above didn't have people like "themselves'... breathing down these people's necks to change the same crap they advocated in all of their "safety" propoganda? It's one thing to talk about this stuff...it's quite another when the problem is right in front of your face and going on every day. I was quickly told that the helmet (or doubling up) issue was not deemed as IMPORTANT as other issues they had on their "radar screen". In other words, nobody was going to risk their neck coming out against this kind of specific behavior and especially in a large riding area that might already have members who were supporting HIS INCOME. More money down the drain! :o

I joined another atv group....this time, I got 'smart' and simply asked this new group to simply come out and list what they were all about and just exactly what they would be fighting for in the near future. They took six months to organize enough to even meet...and as of a year later, I have not seen any evidence that this question has ever been answered!!!.....but by god they have gotten together to ride, eat weenies and sell lots of bumper stickers and t-shirts! (I guess my advanced age has left me with some skewed notion on the concept of "prioritization"). One member also threatened me with some of his trail maintenance equipment if I showed up to help them fix trails...I cancelled. :mad:

There are so many other instances (to numerous to list here) that the average person wouldn't truly even believe "half" of them. :( About the only thing I am proud of; is the fact that I attended the meetings and spoke out when few had a thing to say (much to the chagrin of guys like 2TraKR; who have claimed that I was waisting THEIR, the cyclists, time) and that I spent hundreds of dollars hosting our own youth atv training classes (non-age/machine specific) which were a first of a kind for our large area (with a big thank you to Bill Gilbert of the MASA who came to our part of the state when another atv trainer treated us like crap).

"....As far as resistance to cyclers in an ATV club, here locally the ATV crowd is so independant and disorganized, there is none....."

"See above" and believe me, I've even leaned over to a local cycle club member with the following answer to his question regarding why we haven't organized...I told him: "You're right, we couldn't even carry your jockstrap!" :rolleyes:

"...While I have to note that theres always 2 sides to a story, and all I have is yours, still it sounds like there are significant troubles in MI....."

Nah, if you talk to the motorcyclists or go to a state meeting where these things should be being brought up....all you would've heard is little 'ol me (I guess if nobody shows up; there's not a problem :excuseme: ). You'd simply witness their leader sitting there with absolutely nothing to say of consequence...year to year. You see, you don't have to use these mere 'public meetings' as a forum to voice your concerns....when you know everything that is going to be brought forward ahead of time except for what some arsehole like myself is going to surprise you with! (all off-road business in Michigan is done behind closed doors and with a select group of people.....and that is a FACT). We simply show up every 3 months (incredibly, I was the only one who said a word when they cut it down from every 2) and listen to what the motorcyclists have already been 'informed' of. :excuseme:

"...I'm not saying that your local issues, or my local issues, or anyone's local issues arent important, and have some kind of validity, but that allowing these issues to make cooperation impossible among the majority of both user groups is just plain dumb....."

It is the issues themselves that is hindering the cooperation.....and NOT allowing people like myself to point out the root cause of these problems makes it seem as if BOTH groups are not willing to talk about what is simply fair and right. This country is divided over liberal and democratic values....that doesn't mean that one core set of values doesn't triumph over the other in pure NUMBERS alone (which is what scares these motorcyclists to death and causes them to grab all they can... WHILE they can).

"...Kinda like arguing with your wife over who gets the last Tic-Tac in the mall parking lot, while your car being stolen just feet away....."

Not really, it's like being made to feel like you are 'uncooperative'...while access to our trail system ***for our grandchildren*** is being hijacked 'just a few feet away'... by a user group who feels that our trails should be shut off from everybody but themselves.

I'll comment on the rest of your opinion later (as well as 2trakkr's) when I've got the time and certainly appreciate your thoughts in this debate.

Thanks again.

[TheJaspMan]

Quads outsell bikes 4-1. I'm sure with your knowledge you are aware of the 10% rule. You do the math.

I was wondering where you got these numbers from? And I was also wondering if they broke out sport machines compared to farm & industrial used quads? You know, kinda like trail bikes vs. street bike sales?

Could you please provide the documentation for our review?

Thanks

[Ud_Luz]

"...I suppose though that the quantity of beer the side by side atv can carry would cause most of the riders to be passed out at the side of the trails(now highways)......"

Again, I'm just looking for intelligent debate on a subject that rarely (if ever) gets brought up in the community....if that's your view of the situation at hand....I guess I wasted my time replying to the first part. :excuseme:

Sadly this is based on experience and 2 serious accidents with drunken atv riders.

The last one cost one of my friends his ability to ride ever again. :cry: I haven't come across many drunken dirtbikers carrying cases of beer littering the trails and racing around closed areas.

Maybe instead of the bikers dealing with this problem the ATV community should police their own. Our solution has been to stay away from any areas that atvs ride on especially during weekends.

We don't dare speak to law enforcement. Their solution is always "let's close it down".

[justapitperson]

First, I have to say that we are not involved in the trail problems. My son races Mx and that's it. I have been reading all this and you guys sound a lot like the range wars between the cattlemen and the sheepfarmers back in the old West! They tried to kill all the sheep raisers but that didn't work. There are still cattle and sheep. so I guess they figured it out somehow. O,yeah, because of sterotyping in my field of interest, I am now sometimes embarrased to admit to something that has been in my family for 3 generations. :(

[2TrakR]

I was wondering where you got these numbers from?

Those are in line with what I've been hearing from reputable sources. MI is undergoing and update to it's ORV Plan. During a meeting with the project leader, he presented data indicating ATVs were outselling bikes at quite a large percentage. Can't honestly recall that number specifically. I am pretty sure it was based on national dealer sales information. Here's comparable data for 03:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3323/is_12_39/ai_112367691
(sample data below)
Motocross Enduro ATV

Alabama 1,211 1,894 16,998
Alaska 464 1,586 8,917
Arizona 1,703 5,201 20,095
Arkansas 799 1,746 18,347
California 20,359 34,159 57,857
Colorado 2,704 9,345 15,165
Connecticut 995 2,594 4,959
Delaware 181 258 1,237
District of Columbia 32 197 83
Florida 2,427 8,189 24,786
Georgia 2,038 3,799 20,155
Hawaii 360 725 965
Idaho 1,910 4,513 12,809
Illinois 2,489 5,226 21,843
Indiana 1,768 2,963 18,225
Iowa 899 2,115 11,279
Kansas 682 2,275 7,200
Kentucky 1,655 1,537 22,649
Louisiana 984 1,119 17,947
Maine 585 1,328 9,278
Maryland 1,293 2,066 8,262
Massachusetts 1,591 3,369 7,840
Michigan 3,793 7,697 31,078


An interesting bit related to this was the numbers being extrapolated concerning public trail usage (again, data is relevant to Mich). The 1999 survey indicated that ~24% of ATV operators used them on public trails, the remaining did not (farm, ice fishing, whatever). Those numbers did not conform to the respondents with bikes - the number was much greater. Running the data they made available, it would not be off the wall to conclude that while ATV ownership dwarfs that of cycles, their usage of the public trail system is similar in numbers (total riders) but actual rider hours, broke down further in favor of cycles. To sum it up, yes, there are more ATVs, but there are equal or more cycles in terms of usage of the public trail system.

[beer_studd_76]

First, I have to say that we are not involved in the trail problems. My son races Mx and that's it. I have been reading all this and you guys sound a lot like the range wars between the cattlemen and the sheepfarmers back in the old West! They tried to kill all the sheep raisers but that didn't work. There are still cattle and sheep. so I guess they figured it out somehow. O,yeah, because of sterotyping in my field of interest, I am now sometimes embarrased to admit to something that has been in my family for 3 generations. :(

you been quadding for 3 generations? they've only been on the market 20 years or so

[2TrakR]

My level of involvement in the OHV scene has not been one of "choice'.
I joined a motorcycle group...<snip>needless to say, they didn't get a renewal.
I joined an atv group....<snip>...they all quit in disgust after they received the same treatment I did.
I joined a "regional" club.....<snip>...More money wasted
I joined a NATIONAL group.....<snip>...More money down the drain!
I joined another atv group....<snip>...I cancelled.

Let's see here, and please correct me if I'm off-base.
You joined a cycle club and somebody in that organization told you they wanted to maintain trails at handlebar width. You didn't join in any trail maintenance to see if that was the case and took that one person's statement as the defacto standard. Instead of actually verifying that was the case and/or attempting to make a change to some other standard you quit that club.
Next you joined an ATV club & disagreed with their policies and procedures. Soon after you quit.
The following club you joined disliked your antagonizing interrogation so much that they included a powdery substance in items mailed to you. Eventually you quit that organization.
Your membership then was given to yet another group. Yet again you spoke out against their policies and procedures and yet again you quit.
The saga continued to another club. Instead of bitching about something to this club you only gave them an ultimatum. When that ultimatum achieved nothing you quit, but not before some sort of physical harm was offered to you.
I bet there are many reading this thread that didn't realize so many clubs even existed, yet you've managed to join, bitch, piss off and then quit all of them. Very impressive indeed.

There are so many other instances (to numerous to list here) that the average person wouldn't truly even believe "half" of them.

We've all taken up quite a bit of bandwidth with just this thread. Please do take the time to list out these many other numerous instances.

[TheJaspMan]

ORV Trails that are maintained to the 40" spec have always been open to vehicles capable of traversing that trail without leaving the trail (to get around a set of narrow trees) and without causing "environmental damage" which would include running over saplings/brush and related - which any 50" ATV would do while trying to navigate those trails. Know that a 40" trail is 40" at the handlebar and 24" on the ground. Trying to keep all four tires of a quad (or all three of my wife's three wheeler) within an 24" wide strip is pretty difficult in my opinion.

This is a good point. A lot of very irresponsible people do not understand this. Parents who do not ride but purchase quads for their kids are uninformed. And careless adults who are selfish simply do not care. As a quad rider this has always been a factor as to where my family rides.

So it leads me to this question for all the bike only riders. What would you have quads do? Not ride quads, throw them away and buy bikes? Make quad only trail systems? That would be fantastic! (sarcasim). How long would it take for bikes to leave 2' ruts on the up hills shoots, water ruts in the corners and acceleration bumps on the straights? The tables would be turned and this discussion would go the other way.

I grew up in Michigan. I no longer live there now. I have been considering riding there in the near future. But I feel as though this discussion basically says that my family is not welcome to ride our motorsport of choice in our own home state. That's very sad. :naughty:

Not all quad riders, not even the majority (in my opinion) are the ones ruining things. They are just the ones you are paying attention too. I'll be the bigger man and say 'I'm sorry, they are idiots.'.

[SpottedMarley]

I'll be the bigger man and say 'I'm sorry, they are idiots.'

I think we're all pretty sorry that quad riders are idiots.

but if it makes you feel any better, our highways are jam packed with even more idiots on four wheels. and some of them are driving on 16 wheels. they account for a couple thousand deaths every single day. their fossil fuel burning monster suvs are contributing to the destruction of not just riding trails, but the air we breath. they're crazy, unskilled, overpowered, careless and aggressive and endanger everyone.

the average assmunky on the road kinda makes a quad rider seem like an angel, huh?

[2TrakR]

I have been considering riding there in the near future. But I feel as though this discussion basically says that my family is not welcome to ride our motorsport of choice in our own home state.
I'd say your impression of Michigan trails has been incorrectly skewed by TBL who's agenda does not include reducing the minor gap between a few bike/ATV riders. I'm certain my bickering has not helped and I apologize. Guys like TBL who rant but have not dug to find out just why things have happened and then go off to blame good organizations really irritate me. Not that all orgs don't have some problems, but it's not the dismal picture that TBL paints.

Let me assure you that you are welcome to come ride in Michigan long as you have a MI ORV sticker ($16.25) and 94db or less exhaust with spark arrestor. Of the trail systems located in just the lower peninsula, there is 1 system that's bike only, 6 that are mixed and 24 that are ATV. Sure doesn't look like the evil cyclist (as TBL might say) are getting their way with those numbers. There's one system at the 40" rule, 6 have some trail that is 40" and some that are 50" or 72" (that's the mixed item) and 24 that both 50" and 72" but no 40".

My club (GLDS) maintains 2 of the 50" trails - Gladwin & Geels - which are on the east side of the state, more towards the southern area of the trail systems. I'd be happy to show you & your family where to camp as well as the trails themselves. Make it a holiday weekend & you're welcome to camp with my family. Of course you would have to put up with bikes from 50cc to 525cc and 3 wheelers and quads of all sizes (just in my camp).

[TheJaspMan]

I'd say your impression of Michigan trails has been incorrectly skewed by TBL who's agenda does not include reducing the minor gap between a few bike/ATV riders. I'm certain my bickering has not helped and I apologize. Guys like TBL who rant but have not dug to find out just why things have happened and then go off to blame good organizations really irritate me. Not that all orgs don't have some problems, but it's not the dismal picture that TBL paints.

Let me assure you that you are welcome to come ride in Michigan long as you have a MI ORV sticker ($16.25) and 94db or less exhaust with spark arrestor. Of the trail systems located in just the lower peninsula, there is 1 system that's bike only, 6 that are mixed and 24 that are ATV. Sure doesn't look like the evil cyclist (as TBL might say) are getting their way with those numbers. There's one system at the 40" rule, 6 have some trail that is 40" and some that are 50" or 72" (that's the mixed item) and 24 that both 50" and 72" but no 40".

My club (GLDS) maintains 2 of the 50" trails - Gladwin & Geels - which are on the east side of the state, more towards the southern area of the trail systems. I'd be happy to show you & your family where to camp as well as the trails themselves. Make it a holiday weekend & you're welcome to camp with my family. Of course you would have to put up with bikes from 50cc to 525cc and 3 wheelers and quads of all sizes (just in my camp).


I grew up in Battle Creek. So I would definetly like to stay southern. I appreciate the offer. And I'm sure we will venture that way, once that nasty white stuff goes away!

[beer_studd_76]

So it leads me to this question for all the bike only riders. What would you have quads do? Not ride quads, throw them away and buy bikes?

in a perfect world, yes.

Make quad only trail systems?

another good option

How long would it take for bikes to leave 2' ruts on the up hills shoots

not long, but it's easy enough to fix. fixing a single track that quads have turned into double track is not so easy.

water ruts in the corners and acceleration bumps on the straights? it's as wet here as anyplace in america, and i'm not sure what "water ruts" are. i'm sure that with some maintenance it wouldn't be a problem. about "acceleration bumps" (around here they're called "whoops") - quads make them too, and just as bad as bikes

The tables would be turned and this discussion would go the other way

not really. we did just fine for years before quads were invented.

I grew up in Michigan. I no longer live there now. I have been considering riding there in the near future. But I feel as though this discussion basically says that my family is not welcome to ride our motorsport of choice in our own home state. That's very sad.

:cry:


jeremiah

[TopWop]

What really matters here is that ALL ORV user groups gel TOGETHER for the same common cause of reserving our public lands for their use.Today,we have far to many greenies and econo freeks who's MAIN interest in NOT SAFETY,but rather to ELIMINATE all types of motorized use in the forests,they therefore use phony data for their OWN causes.We need not to fight with each other,but FOR each other!

As long as we continue to argue amongst each user group,this will only fuel the fire.

Michigan has about 3100 miles of ORV trails,and currently,cyclist can use ALL 3100 miles of these trails if they choose to.ATVers have access to only about half of these 3100 miles of trails because of width restrictions,and yet,ATVers out number off road cyclist about 3-1 in this State.Dual Sport cyclists also have a 750 mile ride they can enjoy if they are street legal AND off road legal.I'll be damned if I promote any user group in Michigan to their OWN exclusive trails,especially cyclists,they allready can access ALL of it!.

And I wont be strong armed by any user group.I have some pretty strong arms allready :naughty: !

[SpottedMarley]

And I wont be strong armed by any user group.I have some pretty strong arms allready

whew! your breath is pretty strong too! :eek:

buh-dmm-chh!

[2TrakR]

What really matters here is that ALL ORV user groups gel TOGETHER for the same common cause of reserving our public lands for their use.

Top Wop, glad you could make it over to TT.
I too agree we need to work together to accomplish common goals. We also need a larger presence representing ATV interests. I sort of disagree with the "exclusive trails" aspect. Horses need their own trails, having ridden "shared" horse trail I can assure you it is not pleasant on an ATV and dangerous on a bike (like riding down railroad tracks). Hikers need their own as well; snowmobiles need trails too. Some of the snowmobile trail can be shared by other User groups depending terrain and property ownership. To not support snowmobile groups in their trail agenda is to limit our own opportunities.

Your reference to the MCCCT being just for Dual Sport riders is a bit misleading. While a licensed vehicle is required to travel the entire system, much of it is shared with public road and public (ORV) trail, so it is not another 750 mile trail system just to themselves. Since I have almost finished recording (GPS) the trail system in the lower, I have a few numbers to share. The Michigan Cross Country Cycle Trail is 689 miles, not 750, which includes the Cross State Connector. Of those 689 miles:
69 are 40" cycle only trails not shared with other systems
59.6 are 50" trails (mixed with some forest roads so not all can be traversed with just an ORV sticker)
232.2 are public roads and highways which any licensed vehicle (in theory any car) can traverse
The remaining 328 are shared with other marked trail systems, the majority being 50" ATV trails.

Again, I only have current actual data for the lower peninsula and here it is:
Trail Spec...Miles
40"...234
50"...1052.9
72"...326.1
Total...1613

Combined with the trail only sections of the MCCCT:
40"...303
50"...1112.5
72"...326.1
Total...1741.6

I'm short about 100 miles of ORV Route and about 50 miles of 40" trail. I should be receiving the UP data within the next couple of weeks, but it's not here yet and I may end up recording it myself (have some already at least). Some of the trail mileages will be changing next year, for example the 13 miles between St Helen Motorsports and Geels North will become ORV Trail (50") from it's current MCCCT designation.

If you want to see the numbers, I can make the Excel doc available.

This tells me that ATVs have access to more than half of the available trail systems, in fact my math says ATVs have access to 86% of the trail system in the lower (or 83% if including MCCCT only trails).

According to the 1999 ORV Study done by MSU (can't wait to see the 2004 study data, but Dr. Nelson indicated similar trends in his data collection so far):
Those registered in the state qualifying for ORV (I'm leaving out full size stuff):
23% are bikes
57% are ATVs
Of those, they account for days of use on the designated trail system:
450,000 for bikes
528,000 for ATVs

So while ATVs do indeed outnumber cycles (better than 2 to 1) their use of the trail system is slightly greater than that of cycles when counting "use days".

The even more interesting data is that:
"Less than a quarter of the off-road days for ATVs are primarily on the designated trail system" and "conversely, the majority of the cycle ORV use days are on the designated system".
This is backed up with their data indicating:
63% of cycles are used on the trail system
18% of ATVs are used on the trail system

Bikes are driven 493 miles off-road where ATVs are driven 337 miles off road, referencing "use days".

All of that data tells me, and I'm very open to discuss this as well as having my position changed, that cycles use the public trail system more than ATVs. Even though their number of use days are lower, their traveled distance is greater, thus accounting for more "usage".

This position is the counter point to "ATVs only get to access half the trail system yet there are 3 times as many of them". I say, based on the data from 5 years ago, that 44% of the User base (ATVs) can access 86% of the trail system.

[beer_studd_76]

What really matters here is that ALL ORV user groups gel TOGETHER for the same common cause of reserving our public lands for their use.Today,we have far to many greenies and econo freeks who's MAIN interest in NOT SAFETY,but rather to ELIMINATE all types of motorized use in the forests,they therefore use phony data for their OWN causes.We need not to fight with each other,but FOR each other!

As long as we continue to argue amongst each user group,this will only fuel the fire.

Michigan has about 3100 miles of ORV trails,and currently,cyclist can use ALL 3100 miles of these trails if they choose to.ATVers have access to only about half of these 3100 miles of trails because of width restrictions,and yet,ATVers out number off road cyclist about 3-1 in this State.Dual Sport cyclists also have a 750 mile ride they can enjoy if they are street legal AND off road legal.I'll be damned if I promote any user group in Michigan to their OWN exclusive trails,especially cyclists,they allready can access ALL of it!.

And I wont be strong armed by any user group.I have some pretty strong arms allready :naughty: !

another sophisticant pissed off that he isn't allowed to ruin ALL public trails :applause:

[The Bottom Line]

One of the differences in the way (at least) "I" operate...is to answer each distortion of the facts as thery occur and with the quote included.
If you're going to stand up for something...that's one thing....if you decide to distort the record on something I've made it a point to take an interest in?...you had darn well better get your facts straight (here we go again....:rolleyes: ):

[QUOTE=2TrakR]"...TBL -
I didn't jump up to reply to your previous post you as you indicated more time was needed to craft a reply. I must also admit that I ignored this and the previous thread regarding "quad bashing" as well until I was really "bored" over the holiday....."

Note the arrogance and 'feigned interest' here....it only gets worse.... :)

".... Let's face it, TT has become overrun with a number of adolescent riders who enjoy name calling and silly statements that while "entertaining" for them, are not "interesting" to myself......"

In other words, you guys have ruled the roost for so long that anybody who comes along "now"... will be labeled will be labeled "adolescent" and be accused of "calling names and (making) silling statements..." (I'm telling you, these guys really believe this; read on...).

"...Since I disagree with your positions and statements regarding "alleged" actions going on in the great State of Michigan...."

To them, everything is just 'hunky dory' and what should anybody have a problem with? (lol) :)

"...I feel compelled to refute some of your claims with the real facts and perhaps be able to "enlighten you" with the information you seem to be after...."

We're not after any information....we just smelled the stench and followed our nose....all on our own!

"...Of course, I don't have all the answers nor am I personally involved in every action taken related to the CCC and the DNR. Your reference to Holton Horshoe... That system had several issues. One was that the USFS had designated it cycle only and ATVs were using it...."

Whoa there, partner! Who exactly had "issues" with this fact besides yourselves and the people you tried so hard to MAKE IT ONE! ATVs were allowed down those trails and you know it...please don't throw the word "designated" in.....thinking we all should bite on it.

"....next was the private property issues (that was the "final straw")..."

You're acting like there were wholesale 'access' issues with this piece of land... BEFORE they even discovered the property rights issue! and you somehow think that the rtest of us are going to believe your next statement?

"...The CCC did indeed work hard with the USFS to see that the trail system was not closed and we ended up with [U]as many trail miles as possible....."

:) Yeah, "CYCLE ONLY TRAILS!!!" (lol) :rolleyes:

"...We did not push for cycle only trails..."

:D and just what turnip truck was it that you saw us all fall off of?...let's get REAL here, my friend!

"...at the same time changing the designation of that trail to 50" was never in one of the USFS's proposals....."

It was never THERE...because when in the heck has the US Forest Service ever ADVOCATED putting down multi-use trails...in the last 20 years?
"Well, uhhhhhh....they never "suggested" it...."
What 'planet' are you guys from?

"....Could it have become 50" trail? Anything is possible and had there been a legitimate ATV presence (ie a club of some substance) it may have become "one of the options"...."

The only way any atv club would've got involved in that process was even ONE of the parties involved IN IT...would've sought out and welcomed atv leadership's input in same. If you're telling me this happened....oh "pray tell" share with us how the hand was extended forward and then "slapped away".(do you somehow think that we all have bad memories?).

"....You are correct in that the CCC helped cause the USFS to spend some money (was it $50K? don't remember). We caused them to do that because they wanted to simply eliminate that trail system. To do something other than just close the trail required an analysis which cost money. So, yeah, in some way we did cause that to happen....."

You didn't even LISTEN to what I said earlier. This money was in reference to the "last" land grab you motorcyclists attempted in the Huron Forest. Get this...these guys show up at our quarterly orv advisory board meeting and VERY QUIETLY bring up an issue they have with the state of Michigan not spending $50,000 to fund an impact study that would create the largest new trail system in decades! s
The only problem the rest of the state had....THEY WERE THE ONLY ONES WHO WOULD EVER EXPERIENCE THE PLEASURE!
Again, you will not find a more arrogant bunch of enthusiasts than what we experience right here in Michigan. This little guy :worthy: pretty much shows what these people expect you to do when they take the stage and I'm not exaggerating.

"...Your statement about all trails originally being open to ATVs is only half true and very misleading. ORV Trails that are maintained to the 40" spec have always been open to vehicles capable of traversing that trail without leaving the trail (to get around a set of narrow trees) and without causing "environmental damage" which would include running over saplings/brush and related - which any 50" ATV would do while trying to navigate those trails. Know that a 40" trail is 40" at the handlebar and 24" on the ground. Trying to keep all four tires of a quad (or all three of my wife's three wheeler) within an 24" wide strip is pretty difficult in my opinion...."

Maybe this is part of the problem.....our leaders have NEVER given us that interpretation of the law....yet more so, it illustrates just how far you guys are willing to go (claiming "envorinmental damage" just like our enemies) TO DENY ACCESS TO OTHERS WHEN THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO DO SO.

"....In any case, the Cyclists had nothing to do with erecting barricades or other such items. This was all USFS policy and procedure....."

Give us a break! Again, How STUPID do you think we all are?

"....I can provide you with name and contact info of the USFS Baldwin Ranger District Recreation Planner (who oversees this stuff). I'm sure Kathy could explain it to you better than I...."

I'm sure she could! :thumbsup:

"...As for one ATV club that shows resistance to a motorcycle club.. Easy enough. ATV Offroad Club of Michigan. I would not say resistance because the term implies them going against or fighting with a "cycle" club. Why would you promote infighting among motorized off-road recreation groups who do indeed share a common goal?...."

Hey, you just made enemies of these guys, not me. I thought they "occasionally" just allowed users to speak their mind (although I definitely wasn't one of them)....what did they do....not :worthy: to every issue you guys sided on or just simply express an opinion contrary to yours?

"...the specifics are that ATV OffRoad has opted not to work with the CCC to use their insurance for coverage of trail maintenance and events. Instead, they opted to get their own insurance and/or not participate in some functions...."

What "functions" were these guys supposed to be participating in? And do you mean to tell me that since they chose NOT to pay YOUR CLUB a FULL MEMBERSHIP FEE for each trail worker...just to get the insurance you carry....they arte somehow (in your words) "showing resistance" and "promoting infighting"???. What do you want from these guys....their first born?

"....Yet again you also mentioned trail maintenance equipment and suggested that what is being used in the field is inferior. Please expand on your vision, I cannot discuss that which you do not describe...."

I haven't been able to even DISCUSS trail maintenance equipment; with the main reason being that your "AMA" buddy shouted me down at a state meeting with the insistence that "we don't discuss modern trail eqyipment because we've never found anything that would fit down a motorcycle trail..."
Well, by god, I guess that's the end of THAT conversation!!! :worthy:

"....If I've not covered all of the "facts" you written about, please provide a synopsis for me. I'm obviously a bit slow...."

You're not slow one bit, Jeremy....you just ran into somebody who's been watching you guys closely for a long time and who knows exactly how you all operate. ;)

[The Bottom Line]

[QUOTE=Ud_Luz]"...Sadly this is based on experience and 2 serious accidents with drunken atv riders.

The last one cost one of my friends his ability to ride ever again. :cry: I haven't come across many drunken dirtbikers carrying cases of beer littering the trails and racing around closed areas...."

So your friend got drunk and drove....and as sad and trajic as this truly is...now just who should pay the price for this?

"...Maybe instead of the bikers dealing with this problem the ATV community should police their own. Our solution has been to stay away from any areas that atvs ride on especially during weekends...."

So instead of working to solve the problem and having a friend who was a "victim" of it...your solution is to not only simply run away from it...

"...We don't dare speak to law enforcement. Their solution is always "let's close it down"....."

....but to teach your children to be "afraid" of the only people with the power to FIX IT (I just cringe when I see this crap spread around about not cooperating with law enforcement...then sit in disbelief even more when nobody will simply come right out and challenge it... :(