Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Primitive Road

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walker View Post
    I was was surprised to see you posting here... I'm glad you did.
    Hey Steve, glad to see you chime in.
    Admittedly my full size rig* days are more limited to stocker runs through the forest roads; the 38s are still on the old toy, sitting in the yard.
    More importantly, we share a commonality on the use of forest roads, I just run 'em with two wheels for the most part these days.

    I read thru your logic and find I am in full agreement with your premise as you've stated it.
    Glad I was able to articulate the concern adequately.

    1. (simple one) Skip the primitive road addition and change ORV Route to be inclusive of those types of roads:
    (t) "Route" means a forest road, or other road which may require the use of four wheel drive or high clearance vehicles, that is designated for purposes of this part by the department.
    I agree we need to keep it simple.. and your 1st choice keeps it that way...
    your second choice brings it back to interpetation, much like the "Primitive Road" description would. (I say that based on the the new insite you provided)
    I agree that would be the simplest/safest way to ensure continued access to not only more difficult options on a "4x4 Route" but also to prevent loss of access on other "forest roads".

    I believe Pat's sole intention when he inserted the term "primitive road" was seek a better definition then what exists in the DNR's lexicon at the present time.
    Through discussion, that's my interpretation as well. I certainly support the base goal and am positive it can be accomplished via some method. Perhaps the suggestion I put forth is the way, perhaps there's another.


    *
    /Jeramey
    GLDS | AMA | BRC | ATVOC | MSA | GLFWDA | VVMapping

  2. #12
    free market capitalist timbercruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    below da bridge
    Posts
    656

    Default

    I would like to see simplification of the rules and better definitions of roads trails routes etc... I drive on plenty of trails/roads that are questionable in terms of legality (as part of my job) and would like to know if I'm kosher or not.
    93 FZJ 80 Locked!!


    Chainsaws don't kill trees, I DO!!

  3. #13
    GLFWDA Member GLFWDA Member Trail_Fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Muskegon and Oceana Counties
    Posts
    2,170
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    There are some GREAT points here.

    To make a very long and tedious story short, I brought changes to the Forest Road definition forward at the preliminary meetings and was unable to gain any political support for any movement from the current definition. Actually, I had over 2 pages of "suggestions". I was a bit surprised to see Primitive Road slide through and plan to tweak its definition at the next meeting. I'll take what we can get and do my best to work with it unless it's found to be completely untenable.

    I agree that if the DNR is allowed to interpret a poor definition on their own, it will likely result in disaster for access.

    Jeramey, would you be interested in helping with the wording of the new definition? Change is needed. This would be a small step, but, if properly handled, I believe it could be one in the right direction.

    My idea was to give a word to those paths that do not meet the definition of Forest Road at any time of the year.

    Should we go so far as to link it to an average water table year too?
    Of course, whatever we come up with, there's still no guarantee it will make it into the final legislation, but I'll try like hades.
    Pat Brower

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  4. #14
    GLFWDA Member GLFWDA Member DDS4X4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Northwest Ohio
    Posts
    1,763

    Default

    Not sure what you mean by "average water table year" but it should be simpler so the average user figure it out while he is out trail riding, without having to look it up in some reference book.

    My $0.02 and THANKS for your EFFORTS!
    Doug - KD8EDH
    UFWDA http://www.ufwda.org/
    GLFWDA http://www.glfwda.org/
    IFWDA http://www.ifwda.org/

    2000 WJ Grand Laredo V8 QD UC, trail rated & Doug tested
    Kevins Sliders, 265/75R16 Cooper Discoverer STT, Cobra 76XTR,
    ARBw/Warn 9.5XP, EMU lift, JKS Discos, Icom V-8000, Garmin GPS

  5. #15
    GLFWDA Member GLFWDA Member Trail_Fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Muskegon and Oceana Counties
    Posts
    2,170
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DDS4X4 View Post
    Not sure what you mean by "average water table year" but it should be simpler so the average user figure it out while he is out trail riding, without having to look it up in some reference book.

    My $0.02 and THANKS for your EFFORTS!
    I agree with keeping it simple, just worried that the Dept. would use the highest recorded water levels as reasoning that some of the lower lying trails should be closed because they're too wet, when under 'normal' conditions those same trails would meet the Forest Road definition.
    Pat Brower

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  6. #16

    Default

    Jeramey, would you be interested in helping with the wording of the new definition? Change is needed. This would be a small step, but, if properly handled, I believe it could be one in the right direction.
    Absolutely. Should we discuss further off the forum (or take it in the members-section)?
    /Jeramey
    GLDS | AMA | BRC | ATVOC | MSA | GLFWDA | VVMapping

  7. #17
    GLFWDA Member GLFWDA Member Trail_Fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Muskegon and Oceana Counties
    Posts
    2,170
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 2TrakR View Post
    Absolutely. Should we discuss further off the forum (or take it in the members-section)?
    While it's not my intention to 'hide' anything, I'm a HECK of a lot better talker than typer. Could I interest you in PMing me your phone #? Once we think we have an infallable definition, we can post it in the members area for opinions. The more heads on the subject the better.

    THANKS!
    Pat Brower

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
respective-triangle
respective-triangle
respective-triangle
respective-triangle