PDA

View Full Version : Need info about ORV permit on Drummond - Sorta urgent



Mr-S
May 8th, 2009, 08:43 PM
Ok, I was wunderin.:lmao:

Why is it that we need a ORV permit for drummond island?

brewmenn
May 9th, 2009, 12:17 AM
They seem to have slipped in a slight rule change. Previous to opening the 4WD only route on Drummond all ORV routes were also forest roads that you could have driven down anyways, so no permit was required. Now they have rewritten the rule to say:


Vehicles that are licensed under the Motor Vehicle Code as "street vehicles" require an ORV license only when they are being used as an ORV. A street-licensed ORV does not need an ORV license to use forest roads, but it will need an ORV license if it is used on designated trails or in areas designated for cross-country use.

http://www.offroad-ed.com/mi/handbook/registration.htm

So if what your on does not qualify as a forest road i.e. something you can drive an ordinary car down, you need an ORV permit to drive down it.

WhiteRhino
May 9th, 2009, 06:48 AM
I also gathered from this week's ORV advisory meeting that ANY vehicle on an ORV designated path requires a sticker. This would also include a motorcyle on an MCCCT trail where the trail co-travels an ORV trail.

rentalrider
May 9th, 2009, 10:11 AM
I also gathered from this week's ORV advisory meeting that ANY vehicle on an ORV designated path requires a sticker. This would also include a motorcyle on an MCCCT trail where the trail co-travels an ORV trail.


Well, whether I like that ruling or not, at least it's finally some solid information potentially keeping me/us from getting caught with our pants down.

Mr-S
May 10th, 2009, 10:26 AM
Well, whether I like that ruling or not, at least it's finally some solid information potentially keeping me/us from getting caught with our pants down.

Except look at what the signs we just put up say. The sign on the ORV Route tells me I do not need a ORV sticker.

http://wwww.timstrader.com/web/wheelin/drummond-signs-5-9-09/DSC02112.JPG

timbercruiser
May 10th, 2009, 01:58 PM
Except look at what the signs we just put up say. The sign on the ORV Route tells me I do not need a ORV sticker.

http://wwww.timstrader.com/web/wheelin/drummond-signs-5-9-09/DSC02112.JPG

If I were to get a ticket, I would bring that sign into court.
That being said, I have no problem buying a sticker IF the money goes to trail maintenance/building etc...

brewmenn
May 10th, 2009, 02:38 PM
Except look at what the signs we just put up say. The sign on the ORV Route tells me I do not need a ORV sticker.

http://wwww.timstrader.com/web/wheelin/drummond-signs-5-9-09/DSC02112.JPG

oops. They are planning on replacing all the signs with something completely different. Too bad they aren't ready.

Mr-S
May 10th, 2009, 05:09 PM
They will have a hard time enforcing that then. With about a billion of these signs out there.

phittie1100
May 11th, 2009, 09:04 AM
If I were to get a ticket, I would bring that sign into court.
That being said, I have no problem buying a sticker IF the money goes to trail maintenance/building etc...

Our ORV permit dollars stay in the ORV program, so at least you can rest assured it isn't going to pay for cable TV at Jackson State Prison.

sumpter1
May 11th, 2009, 09:42 AM
I am glad I saw this thread because I was unaware an ORV sticker would now be required.

Walker
May 12th, 2009, 03:39 PM
The shineny new route sticker is indeed another inidcator of how the ORV environment is changing. There is no doubt various aspects of the law and the recreational ORV activities do not reflect current conditions.

We (The core group if you will) have an initial meeting with the DNR later this month.. of one of the departments is the Law group. As Mr-S has shown with the ORV confidence marker, we have a few topics to discuss.

I don't expect any immediate changes.. but I believe if we (users and the DNR) can continue to work together we can work to bring about some positive results.

timbercruiser
May 12th, 2009, 05:20 PM
Those who go to this meeting:ask them if they can change the name of the full-size routes. ORV routes and trails are kind of confusing as to who can use them.
Call'em jeep routes or 4x4 routes.

Jarhead
May 15th, 2009, 08:27 AM
Those who go to this meeting:ask them if they can change the name of the full-size routes. ORV routes and trails are kind of confusing as to who can use them.
Call'em jeep routes or 4x4 routes.

The recommended/proposed (new) confidence markers with pictures will help eliminate the confusion. The recommended/proposed confidence markers will have a picture of each vehicle that is able to travel any given Trail/Route.

MCCT = Motorctycle Only
ATV Trail = ATV and Motorcycle
ATV Route = Jeep, ATV and Motorcycle
ATV Route (May also include) = Car, Jeep, ATV and Motorcycle

You get the idea?

Trail_Fanatic
May 15th, 2009, 10:38 AM
Those who go to this meeting:ask them if they can change the name of the full-size routes. ORV routes and trails are kind of confusing as to who can use them.
Call'em jeep routes or 4x4 routes.

These terms are defined in section 811 of Public Act 451 of 1994.
If would take a change in the law to establish "4x4 Routes", although that's EXACTLY what I have suggested in the MMRC meetings on the subject, as well as, at my meetings with Hansen and Sheltrown.

811 will be coming up for review again very soon.
When it does, this will be one of the first things on my list (right after a better definition - or series of definitions- to correct the current "Forest Road" / G-ma's Buick issue.

WhiteRhino
May 15th, 2009, 11:11 AM
Because Drummond is a State Park. That is the way it has been explained to me.

Oh but it is not, it is state land. If that were the case, you would need a state park sticker.

phazer42
May 15th, 2009, 11:24 AM
The recommended/proposed (new) confidence markers with pictures will help eliminate the confusion. The recommended/proposed confidence markers will have a picture of each vehicle that is able to travel any given Trail/Route.

MCCT = Motorctycle Only
ATV Trail = ATV and Motorcycle
ATV Route = Jeep, ATV and Motorcycle
ATV Route (May also include) = Car, Jeep, ATV and Motorcycle

You get the idea?

I think you mean:

MCCT = Motorctycle Only
ORV Trail = ATV and Motorcycle
ORV Route = Jeep, ATV and Motorcycle
ORV Route (May also include) = Car, Jeep, ATV and Motorcycle

:thumb:

Jarhead
May 15th, 2009, 12:36 PM
Oh but it is not, it is state land. If that were the case, you would need a state park sticker.

Ding, Ding, Ding - Jim you are correct.

The ORV Permit was required in the past by the DNR each time we requested a Land Use Permit for an Event. With the newly designated ORV Route on the Island, an ORV Route Permit is required.

timbercruiser
May 15th, 2009, 03:06 PM
These terms are defined in section 811 of Public Act 451 of 1994.
If would take a change in the law to establish "4x4 Routes", although that's EXACTLY what I have suggested in the MMRC meetings on the subject, as well as, at my meetings with Hansen and Sheltrown.

811 will be coming up for review again very soon.
When it does, this will be one of the first things on my list (right after a better definition - or series of definitions- to correct the current "Forest Road" / G-ma's Buick issue.

Thanks Pat.
I like the idea of pictures on the signs, too.

hemrides
May 15th, 2009, 05:00 PM
So bottom line...for $16 bucks just buy the ORV sticker and save yourself getting stopped and a much larger ticket.

T-way
May 30th, 2009, 04:23 PM
I do not believe that an ORV sticker is required for a full-size to use these trails. If it is, then the State law needs to be changed.

As has been stated (and is clearly on all of the DNR signs and in the ORV handbooks).....an ORV Route requires a DNR permit (ORV sticker) unless licensed by the Secretary of State. Your vehicles license plate is your Secretary of State license.

An ORV permit has NEVER been required to travel on ORV Routes ANYWHERE else in this State. Only in the scramble areas. The State law has NOT been changed.

I was on Drummond on May 23 with my Jeep, with NO ORV sticker, and the local CO rode right past my Jeep (from back to front) on a quad (where he could easily see that I was sans sticker), and there was no issue.

The DNR can not simply tell us that "an ORV sticker is now required on Drummond Island" without having ANY legal authority to do so. Until I see the law in writing with my own eyes that says I need one.......no sticker!

signman
May 30th, 2009, 07:15 PM
This is a confusing issue to say the least, but here is what my stand has been. First the dept has had the ability to make routes that are not forest rds from the beginning, they chose to or would not do that, so all routes were on forest rds(well sorta) in reality some of the routes (portions off) were not passable by a two wheel drive car. The dept just didn,t want to deal with us other than the use areas, the law says forest rds or other rds designated by the dept. What has happened at Drummond is that they have designated a other rd as a route and it does not have to pass the litmus test of two wheel drive which is a big victory for us, now we have to clearly mark these routes as there are some on drummond that are forest rds and some that are other rds. Bottom line is we win as we get 4x4 routes, now to get more in the state. Best advice I can give is that on Drummond have a sticker to show support to the program, rest of the state is your call, but it makes what we have been asking for for a long time come true, a challenging 4x4 route.

WhiteRhino
May 31st, 2009, 06:43 AM
What Tim says makes more sense to me. I can't see where the DNR can suddenly make a change in one portion of the state without effecting the rest of the state. If the trails on Drummond are labeled as ORV Routes, Tim is right until a law is written differently. If they fall into a different catagory, then they need to be labeled as such. I don't support the "suck up" theory since that has no bearing in court when dealing with a ticket before a judge.

T-way
May 31st, 2009, 11:43 AM
Thanks to both Paul and Jim for your input and insight.

I should clarify......those that know me know that I FULLY support all of the work that has been done on DI to give us access. It is definitely a HUGE victory for the full-size users, and helps to make things easier for all of the off-road enthusiasts (cycle, ATV, etc) that visit the island. And I do not mean to come across as "bucking the system" or trying to make trouble. Believe me....I lectured some careless ATVers on the Marblehead cliff just last weekend as to how much work went into access on the island, and how their carelessness could affect everyone's ability to enjoy the resource.

That being said....what Jim paraphrased is correct. The State does NOT have the authority to just all of a sudden require an ORV permit to run on an ORV Route, when that is NOT the State law. As someone who enforces State law DAILY to earn my paycheck, I know a thing or two about how these things work. Short of ammending the current ORV Law, and changing EVERY ORV Route sign in the State, the DNR can NOT require the full-size user with a license plate to have an ORV sticker on their rig to be on these trails. And like Jim said....we shouldn't be spending money to buy a sticker that we DON'T need, just to show that we support and appreciate the DNR opening up trails on our public land.

'Nuff said for now. If someone can prove to me that I'm wrong (based on actual State law), I'll eat my words and retract my statements!!

:soap:

Trail_Fanatic
May 31st, 2009, 01:07 PM
Section 324.81102

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 451 of 1994

324.81102 Vehicles exempt from licensure provisions.

Sec. 81102.

(1) A vehicle registered under the code or a vehicle registered under part 801 is exempt from the licensure provisions of this part, unless the vehicle is operated as an ORV off highways, roadways, streets, and forest roads.

(2) An ORV operated solely on private property by the owner of the property, a family member of the owner, or an invited guest of the owner is exempt from the licensure provisions of this part.


History: Add. 1995, Act 58, Imd. Eff. May 24, 1995
Popular Name: Act 451
Popular Name: NREPA
Popular Name: Off-Road Vehicle Act
Popular Name: ORV


2009 Legislative Council, State of Michigan

Trail_Fanatic
May 31st, 2009, 01:15 PM
An ORV Sticker IS required, BUT only on PORTIONS of the new Route. The portions for which it is needed are any of those colored yellow, orange or red on the Drummond map.

The above section of the ORV Law states that when we operate off the "Road" system, we're operating as an orv. Since we already know that all Forest Roads must be passable in 2WD (minus weather or maintenance related issues) any time we're in 4WD, we're operating "off highways, roadways, streets, and forest roads".



We NEED to get new definitions put into Part 811 of PA451 of 1994.
Until then, they have us.

Trail_Fanatic
May 31st, 2009, 01:20 PM
If someone can prove to me that I'm wrong (based on actual State law), I'll eat my words and retract my statements!!

:soap:

:laughing2:
Sorry T-Way.
I'm just trying to make sure we're all clear on the do's, don'ts and whys.
You're statement had nothing to do with my posting . . . really.

WhiteRhino
May 31st, 2009, 02:03 PM
And I'm OK with it in that context. But......... does the law enforcement on the island understand that an orv is only required on the orange and red? How subjective is this?

Trail_Fanatic
May 31st, 2009, 03:17 PM
And I'm OK with it in that context. But......... does the law enforcement on the island understand that an orv is only required on the orange and red? How subjective is this?

I need to correct myself:
Yellow would also need a sticker as it's only passable by a 2wd high clearance vehicle (truck) and not a 2wd passenger sedan (Grandma's Buick).

The main point is that, yes LED does understand and agree. :thumb:

This was the topic of discussion at a meeting last week between GLFWDA, DITA, DIORC, FMFM, and LED. ALL of the groups involved wanted to make absolutely SURE that we were all on the same page.

Three things came out of the meeting:

1) ORV Stickers are only required of SOS licensed vehicles on those portions not passable by a 2wd passenger sedan (off "Forest Roads")

2) ANYONE caught anywhere else on the Island in 4wd will be ticketed. (Be extra careful on the other "Non-ORV Route" two tracks. Be sure that they are passable by Grandma's Buick)

3) We ALL need a clarification from the A.G.'s office on whether or not a Non-SOS licensed, OVER 60" (exempt from PA 240) wide vehicle would or would not be legal on the portions of the ORV Route system that are also County Roads if they only have an ORV Sticker. I referenced all of the ORV Trails and Routes in the LP that were placed on CRC Roads in counties without local shoulder riding ordinances for years as a strongly suspected reason that it would be Ok, but everyone wants it to be crystal clear and in writing.

Trail_Fanatic
May 31st, 2009, 05:16 PM
The more I look at the wording, the more I think CRC Unimproved Roads would be exempt from both the Forest Road (2WD) Rule AND the ORV Sticker requirement.

Here's my logic:
A CRC Road in ANY condition is defined in PA451 as:

Section 324.81101

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 451 of 1994

324.81101 Definitions.
Sec. 81101.

As used in this part:

(g) "Highway" means the entire width between the boundary lines of a way publicly maintained when any part of the way is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel.

(s) "Roadway" means that portion of a highway improved, designated, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel. If a highway includes 2 or more separate roadways, the term roadway refers to a roadway separately, but not to all roadways collectively.

******************************

For (g), the 'way' has been "maintained" as a public easement by keeping it on the map and under the CRC's jurisdiction (Not necessarily bladed or plowed).

For (s), because "designated" is listed separately from "maintained" it is a separate condition that can be met to qualify a road.

A CRC's claim of a road that shows on their map, even if it's "unimproved" would "designate" it as a "roadway".

Because a person is on a designated roadway and not a State Forest Road, they would NOT be confined to the State Forest Road's 2WD Clause, nor would they be required to have an ORV Permit because they're not on any part of the ORV System.

It's never been supported with a court case, but it seems logical to me.
Thoughts?


Section 324.81102

NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT (EXCERPT)
Act 451 of 1994

324.81102 Vehicles exempt from licensure provisions.

Sec. 81102.

(1) A vehicle registered under the code or a vehicle registered under part 801 is exempt from the licensure provisions of this part, unless the vehicle is operated as an ORV off highways, roadways, streets, and forest roads.

T-way
May 31st, 2009, 07:23 PM
I understand what Pat's saying, and I can read the law that he provided (thanks Pat! :thumb:)

BUT......

1. I can run the island in 2WD thanks to my Detroit Locker in my rear axle. True 2WD. The only reason I ever use 4WD is to go slow (low range), and on the Marblehead steps. How does that measure up in court?

2. The ORV Route signs, as shown in the ORV handbook (and earlier in a post by Mr. S) clearly state that a permit is NOT required if you are licensed by the SOS. This seems to be in direct conflict with the wording in the law that Pat posted, and also would mean that ALL of the signs are wrong, since they say something opposite of the law.

Hmmmmmmmmmm................................

I can go buy my $16.25 ORV sticker if it's REALLY required (I've got that kind of cash! :lmao:), but I refuse to do it if even the DNR doesn't know what's REALLY required of the full-size user. I'm not going to buy one just because it's a "good idea" or to smooch hiney!!

:bootyshake::soap:

T-way
May 31st, 2009, 07:25 PM
And I think it's painfully obvious, even from the direct text of the law that Pat posted, that 10 different people could reasonable draw 10 different opinions of just what the law means!

Man......I'm glad that the laws I enforce are much clearer than these!!

Trail_Fanatic
May 31st, 2009, 09:49 PM
T-Way,

For #1, it's not a measure of your vehicle. It's measured by the 'average' 2WD passenger sedan; ie. Grandma's Buick.

For #2, you are absolutely correct. They are all wrong. The DNR is coming up with new signs as we speak, so-to-speak.

Jarhead
June 1st, 2009, 07:54 AM
Drummond Island and the use of the term "other road" was an arduous process. Having been successful on Drummond, it is our intent to carry the term forward and apply it to other areas so we may actually develop an ORV Route System we will utilize. Drummond is currently unique for a number of reasons, one of which will necessitate a change in the current language and signage.

Several of the stakeholders that worked to achieve the ORV Routes on Drummond sat down with officers from the DNR Law Enforcement Division to address issues such as this resulting from concerns of enforcement and the confusion which is obvious because of the current signs a couple of weeks ago on the Island. Changes are forth coming but will have to be approved in Lansing prior to implementation.

T-way
June 2nd, 2009, 12:34 AM
Thanks Bob. I know that a lot of work has gone into this issue on Drummond, on a lot of different issues!

Those that know me know that, once the law is clear, I will follow it fully!!

:thumb: