# New OHV penalties?



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Granted that there's more involved with preventing illegal OHV use than just imposing legal penalties, but would you support proposed legislation to...

a. Increase the penalty for illegal use of an OHV to a class B misdemeanor with a minimum fine of $500 and community service, combined with restitution for damages.

b. Create a penalty for willful destruction of public or private property, deliberate harassment of wildlife or livestock or for repeat offenses as a class A misdemeanor with a minimum fine of $1,000 and community service, combined with restitution for damages AND possible suspension of driving privileges for one month AND possible impoundment of the OHV.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Everytime I see some go around a trial closure sign I understand why some people hate the ATV crowd.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Sorry I missed the meeting last night. Thanks for being there finn, anything else exciting from last night happen?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

I am an avid ATV rider and I like the sounds of A and B. The problem I still see is this, how to enforce it. Other ATV riders need to report them, but by the time you can get somewhere to report the offender, they will be long gone. I have been on trails in the middle of nowhere where I didn't see another person for most of the day, I could have easily done whatever I wanted to.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

To add to my last post, I believe they need to do the same for vehicles also. Every year during the hunts there are people who take there vehicles off the road to go and retrieve their downed animal. That has got to stop also.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Sorry I missed the meeting last night. Thanks for being there finn, anything else exciting from last night happen?


Please run the proposed legislation for penalties by UBA and see how they feel about it. Also share it with anybody else who might have a vested interest. The proposed penalties are more serious than surrounding states, so we want to get an idea whether we're being realistic and representative of the public's wishes.

We talked about the new laws allowing OHV's to be licensed to be street legal. I think it'll get abused and there'll be a serious spike in resentment and hatred for ATV owners by summer's end. Add a couple wicked wrecks since most ATV's are unstable on asphalt, especially at high speeds. We'll see.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

I understood the street legal law only to be allowed in selceted area's where it was needed to get to an established trail. Similar to marysville and the area's around the piute trail. I don't want to see atv's with cars on state street either.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I would like to see a law in place keeping ATV's ON trails in ALL areas, except for areas designated for off road travel, such as Sand Mountain etc...


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> I would like to see a law in place keeping ATV's ON trails in ALL areas, except for areas designated for off road travel, such as Sand Mountain etc...


Same should go for your old Ford. :wink:  Just cause your road hunting doesn't mean you can chase that buck across that field in yer truck. :wink: Just messing with you Tree, you do man.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> I understood the street legal law only to be allowed in selceted area's where it was needed to get to an established trail. Similar to marysville and the area's around the piute trail. I don't want to see atv's with cars on state street either.


Correct, and all of Salt Lake County is exempt. Other than that exception, each municipality retains control over it's own streets, i.e., which streets will or will not be ATV legal. And any ATV licensed for the street has to have all the equipment that any street motorcycle has as well as insurance.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> I would like to see a law in place keeping ATV's ON trails in ALL areas, except for areas designated for off road travel, such as Sand Mountain etc...


This is already the 'law'. Remember also, this is about ALL off-highway vehicle use(s), not just ATV's. There has been some talk of creating MORE areas like Sand Mountain, the theory being if there are more areas to ride, the abuse on other lands will decrease.

Finn, I'll take this to the next UBA board meeting, which is in May.

For me, I believe the penalties MUST be stiffer, the odds of getting caught MUST go up, and people MUST be better informed about where/what is legal OHV use on public land.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > I would like to see a law in place keeping ATV's ON trails in ALL areas, except for areas designated for off road travel, such as Sand Mountain etc...
> ...


This pains me to say... But pro is 100% spot on with this one. Most people won't follow the regulations because they are in very little danger of getting caught. More places to ride closer to the urban centers would be a good thing.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> This pains me to say... But pro is 100% spot on with this one. Most people won't follow the regulations because they are in very little danger of getting caught. More places to ride closer to the urban centers would be a good thing.


orvis1, this should make you feel better, I didn't come up with the idea of more areas to ride, it came from someone else on the committee. 8) I am on the sub-committee to deter the abuse, we came up with the idea of forming a hot-line similar to the poaching hot-line, where people can call and get a response from the different government agencies in the area. Any/all suggestions on how to best implement such a plan would be appreciated and valued.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

I love the idea of a hot line, but where I go I don't get cellphone reception and there is usually no way to identify a rig because a lot of those that abuse the law don't register and license their rigs. That is something else they need to be stricter on is the unlicensed rigs. They almost need little license plates so it is easier to identify rigs.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

jahan said:


> I love the idea of a hot line, but where I go I don't get cellphone reception and there is usually no way to identify a rig because a lot of those that abuse the law don't register and license their rigs. *That is something else they need to be stricter on is the unlicensed rigs. They almost need little license plates so it is easier to identify rigs*.


We have discussed that as well, and I agree we need a way to get the identity if the vehicle. If you have that and can get a picture showing the vehicle I believe it would greatly increase the chances of being caught/punished. The ideas posted by Finn are important because many abusers don't worry about getting caught because the fine is so small. Increase the odds of getting caught along with stiffer penalties and the abuse should decrease. Good points little man.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

I think a hotline would be good but in a lot of area's there is no cell coverage so not sure how it would work. More riding area's will help dispurse the riders out but if a CO can come by and check registration/insurance and enforece the rules. I think you will find the majority of the ATV riders want to follow the laws. If you need some imput good websites to ask on an open forum are utahatv.com & atvutah.com.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Treehugnhuntr said:
> 
> 
> > I would like to see a law in place keeping ATV's ON trails in ALL areas, except for areas designated for off road travel, such as Sand Mountain etc...
> ...


Good to know. I have been told by a few people that BLM land is open to riding, basically anywhere they want. Where can I get The statute/law in riding to tape to the ATV's I just "tuned up"?

There is a place that I frequent that has motorcycle and ATV tracks everywhere through the trees and sagebrush in the spring time. I've watched on several occasions as they tear up vegetation and unknowingly chase deer and elk.

Is there any kind of statute that says I can lawfully remove them from the gene pool?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > Treehugnhuntr said:
> ...


Need some help with this, I would gladly help. Those scum bags ruin it for everyone.

Pro, see us little people can be good for society also. :mrgreen:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

jahan said:


> Pro, see us little people can be good for society also. :mrgreen:


Even maggots do some useful things, not that you are a maggot, I am just saying............. :twisted:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> jahan said:
> 
> 
> > Pro, see us little people can be good for society also. :mrgreen:
> ...


What about mosquitoes? What are they good for, huh smart guy? :mrgreen: :lol:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

jahan said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > jahan said:
> ...


They are good for ticking me off, how's that? :evil: Everything serves a purpose, little folk are for cheap entertainment. :lol:


----------



## campfire (Sep 9, 2007)

I am an avid ATVer and I try very hard to obey the existing laws as a matter of principle. But I think proposal A is a little too stiff and somewhat ambiguous. It does not provide for the unintentional violation. Example: Particularly in the Uinta Forest there are many ROADS that are closed to ATVs but still open to regular vehicle traffic. These roads are frequently marked only by very small fiber signs with pictures on them. I is not out of the question for a well meaniing ATVer to unintentionally travel on one of these roads in voilation of the letter of the law without creating any environmetal damage. I think it would be unfair to severely punish someone in that situation. A reasonable sitation or warning would be sufficient. On the other hand, porposal B makes provision for "willful" distruction of public property, etc. and "repeated offences". I think I could support B but not A. And I agree that inforcement of proposed or existing laws is a bigger problem than not enough laws. I also agree it is up to the ATVers themselves to make a change. When it is no longer socially acceptable to missuse ATVs then they will be used more responsablly out of principly rather than out of fear of punishment. Like most hunting and fishinig regulations that by simple logistics are nearly impossible to inforce, that will be the only way they can effectively do any good.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Thanks for the input, campfire.

I think you make a valid point about unintentional violation in a case where no real damage is done. Yet there's a good argument that knowing the rules in a particular area is an OHVers responsibility, no different from knowing hunt boundaries or seasons. I mean, free trail maps are available.



campfire said:


> When it is no longer socially acceptable to missuse ATVs then they will be used more responsablly out of principly rather than out of fear of punishment.


One of the things we're scratching our heads about is how to get retailers and manufacturers to "buy in" on the concept of responsible operation. The majority of ATV commercials I've seen on the boob tube show anything but responsible riding. I think ads showing riders tearing up the landscape, harassing wildlife, failing to yield the right of way and such actually promote a culture of abuse. Then again, maybe they're just catering to the market. Still, it would help a lot if we could somehow get the big manufacturers to take a different tack.


----------



## campfire (Sep 9, 2007)

Bigotry and racial prejudice are today socially unacceptable in most circles but I remember a time in my lifetime when that was not the case. It will take time to change the social acceptance of ATV abuse but I think it will happen. I have allready seen some significant change. The phenominal popularity of ATVs has prompted some of this change both in the need for more restrictive regulations but also in the personality of the typical ATVer. Originally, most of those who baught ATVs did so to take them "anywhere" (thus the monicer "all terrain vehicles") but now there is a great number of recreationists that enjoy either the dunes or trail riding. My impression is that the new ATV enthusiests are more conscienteous than those old guard that had the freedom to go anywhere they chose. I think many of them are also changing with the times as well. I am an optomist and I think that 90% of ATVers are conscienteous and it is a small percentrage that give the rest a bad name and tend to spoil things for everyone. I remember when "party hunting" was the accepted norm. If there were 7 deer tags at deer camp everyone packed a gun untill all the tags were filled. This is nor longer the accepted practice and I think the use of ATVs will eventually become largely more responsable. Oh, there will allways be a few who have no respect for regulations or for the enviornment either, but I think the thinking of the great majority will change for the better. One other thought. I have noticed that puplic land administrators have very different philosophies with regards to ATVs. I allready mentioned the Uintah Forest that seems to have an obsession for closing 4x4 roads to ATVs that are still open to full size 4x4 vehicles. Contrast this to the Manti-Lasal Forest that spends time and money to build and maintain vast ATV trail systems and ATV friendly campgrounds, even to the extent of building "practice loops" inside campgrounds for young ATVers to ride on. Now my observations are that there is more ATV abuse in the Uinta Forest than In the Manit-Lasal. Up on Willow Creek Ridge where I hunt elk the hunters who have allways taken their ATVs to thier favorite hunting spots drive right past the "no vehicles" signs to get to where they have allways gone. And I think to some extent people tend to ignore regulations more where some regulations seem nonsensicle. Where the majority of ATV recreatioinists on the Manit-Lasal see the trails that the FS has made to ride on and largely stick to them. These are just my observations, thoughts and hopes. Now Finnegan, don't you wish you hadn't brought the subject up? :wink:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Some good points campfire. But some of the things you see as positives others see as negatives. For example, I grew up at the mouth of 12 mile canyon on the Manti unit. I cut my teeth hunting that unit, I rode fence lines through the summers as a teenager, rounded up cattle every fall for several years, and I looked forward to hunting that mountain every fall. Now, thanks to ATV trails EVERYWHERE, I won't go there on a dare. It is impossible to enjoy 'nature' and peace and quiet, every ridge has an ATV trail, the deer herd has been knocked down to a mere image of what it once once, thanks in large part to these trails and no escapement for the deer during ANY time of the year. While the committee finn is on will NOT be recommending trail closures, it IS an issue and IMHO part of the reason so many ATV users ignore trail closures, they feel 'entitled' to go where ever they wish. There are three sub-committees to the committee finn is on, one is addressing ways to educate users what the rules are, and why they are in place. How do we 'educate' people who disregard how their actions affect others? That is a key issue that MUST be addressed. The sub-committee I am on is looking at ways to deter abuse by making the odds of getting caught abusing public land higher. The other sub-committee is addressing how to make the fines/cost of abuse stiffer, specifically for repeat abusers. Hunters make a SMALL percentage of ATV users, so we MUST get ATV vendors/manufacturers to step up and do the right thing. I notice every ATV add now shows ALL riders wearing helmets, so I see no reason to expect anything less than the right message on where/how to ride ATV's in their adds.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Could this though also have merit? More atv riders than ever + trial closures each and every year + little new riding area's being made available = ATV community getting screwed! What would happen if they constantly closed area's to hunting each year, do you think hunters would hunt them anyway? Don't we already have a ton of poachers that violate the rules even though they know them. Some people are going to be irresponsible no mater what education they recieve. The solution is stiff penalties, enforcement, and more legal riding area's being opened to the public.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

orvis, I must not have made my point as clear as I hoped. We as a committee are NOT looking at any closures of existing trails. In fact, one thing being looked at is creating MORE areas like 5 mile pass where atv use is less restricted. My rant on the Manti is just that, a rant. I strongly believe atv use has had a HUGE negative impact on deer herd numbers, as well as enjoyment by folks wanting to get a way from the noise of the city. Hence, I have found new areas to hunt/camp where that is still possible, because it is NOT possible on the Manti. I see very few trail closures, but I notice MANY 'new' trails every year. If we add more areas like 5 mile pass, are riders willing to concede some trail closures in other areas? Or, is this a one sided give and take? I would hope ALL atv users would work to make improvements, because there are groups out there looking for ways/ammo to close ALL/most atv use on public land.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> Could this though also have merit? More atv riders than ever + trial closures each and every year + little new riding area's being made available = ATV community getting screwed! What would happen if they constantly closed area's to hunting each year, do you think hunters would hunt them anyway? Don't we already have a ton of poachers that violate the rules even though they know them. Some people are going to be irresponsible no mater what education they recieve. The solution is stiff penalties, enforcement, and more legal riding area's being opened to the public.


There's the victim card.

Let me fix your post for you.



 orvis1 said:


> Could this though also have merit? More atv riders than ever + trial closures each and every year + little new riding area's being made available = *ATV community screwing themselves* What would happen if they constantly closed area's to hunting each year, do you think hunters would hunt them anyway? Don't we already have a ton of poachers that violate the rules even though they know them. Some people are going to be irresponsible no mater what education they recieve. The solution is stiff penalties, enforcement, and more legal riding area's being opened to the public.


The penalties for poaching are much stiffer than the relative 'slap on the wrist' that misfit dip-wads on noise making, dirt movers are.

Your are right to lump poachers in with ATV riders who break the law. However, I would speculate in good conscience that the percentage of law breaking ATVer's is mountains higher than poachers and in many cases, the same person.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Your are right to lump poachers in with ATV riders who break the law. However, I would speculate in good conscience that the percentage of law breaking ATVer's is mountains higher than poachers and in many cases, the same person.


 :shock:


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Tree we certianly know how anti-atv you are, so I take about anything you comment on at a discount. Pro, I agree with you that if more open area's like 5 mile were opened the closures wouldn't sting so badly. I agree there needs to be designated trails and riders that want to deviate from them should have much more sever penalties. Right now they do nothing of very little to enforce thre rules. I see tons of unregistered bikes most likely without insurance and kids riding around in shorts with no helmets. I also see people riding wherever they want to starting new trails. This is the kind of behavior we need to stop, plus you do need to admit that a lot of hunters blaze new trials to pick up game and get to areas without hiking. I think everyone in the ATV communtiy would like see more enforcement so the bad eggs don't ruin it for everyone.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> Tree we certianly know how anti-atv you are, so I take about anything you comment on at a discount. Pro, I agree with you that if more open area's like 5 mile were opened the closures wouldn't sting so badly. I agree there needs to be designated trails and riders that want to deviate from them should have much more sever penalties. Right now they do nothing of very little to enforce thre rules. I see tons of unregistered bikes most likely without insurance and kids riding around in shorts with no helmets. I also see people riding wherever they want to starting new trails. This is the kind of behavior we need to stop, plus you do need to admit that a lot of hunters blaze new trials to pick up game and get to areas without hiking. I think everyone in the ATV communtiy would like see more enforcement so the bad eggs don't ruin it for everyone.


No, I'm just anti unconscious people. Of course you should discount those comments, they were over the top and intended to get panties bunched up. Now bunch em up **** it! :mrgreen:

I agree that there need to be places for people to ride for recreation and stricter laws and penalties with more enforcement. I vote for extreme measures with both sides of the argument in mind, even orvis1.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

THUMP........... Sorry let me pick myself off the floor and pull my panties out or my arse.... I pains me to say this but I agree with tree & Pro in the same day. Has hell officially froze over yet?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Not me, I hate Tree. :twisted: He is just mad since they made it illegal to have threesomes with your sister and favorite pet. :twisted: :wink:  Just playing Tree, you all make some very good points. We need stricter enforcement. People need to know that if they get caught it is going to hurt them in some matter, may it be financially or physically ( ten lashes :shock: :wink: :mrgreen: ). 

Orvis, I have long ago learned Tree is almost always the Devils Advocate, which is good if I agree with him :mrgreen: , it sucks if he is on the other side because as much as it hurt me to say it, he is one smart SOB.  

I think the direction Pro, Finn and others are going is the right direction. It would be unwise to just go in and shut down tons of trails that are existing. One particular place I have been riding for over 7 years had over 6 'major' roads shut down in the last few years. Surprised the crap out of me, since they were actual roads. Oh well, stuff happens.  On the other end those beginner loops they are building down in the Manti's are pretty stupid also. It doesn't make sense, they shut down well established roads, then build unnecessary trails everywhere. :? I guess it is good to keep the banshee's off the main roads. Some of those guys are crazy.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

> He is just mad since they made it illegal to have threesomes with your sister and favorite pet.


My dog is 47 in dog years and my sisters are all over 18. What happens between consenting adults should be legal. Friggin useless laws.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

So what you are saying is tree likes to shir the shiz huh.... Never looked at it that way, never thought he was dumb, he alway presents his arguments intelligently, we just tend to have some conflicting opinions on atv's. This is the one and only political subject I will debate, and I am glad they are looking at ways to improve things. I think 10 lashings would be sufficient should we try caining?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> So what you are saying is tree likes to shir the shiz huh.... Never looked at it that way, never thought he was dumb, he alway presents his arguments intelligently, we just tend to have some conflicting opinions on atv's. This is the one and only political subject I will debate, and I am glad they are looking at ways to improve things. I think 10 lashings would be sufficient should we try caining?


I use to go down that road with him, but now I just laugh when he comments about ATV's because I know he is probably going to go riding his ATV this weekend for his "job". -BaHa!- He makes some excellent points about some of the scum out there, but I believe us ATV'ers hate these type of people more than anyone. I disagree with him on how many of these scum bags there are. He thinks most are breaking the law, I tend to think there are more than 75% following trail laws. I will say that I think very few people actually register their rigs and I think that is a good place to start the crack down. It would be easy, get several officers out on a big weekend and have road blocks on the major roads/trails and check for valid registration, it would be scary how many wouldn't have them. For some reason a lot of ATV'ers don't think they need to register them. :? I am all for caining.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

If it costs me 500 bones a year between insurance and registration everyone should be paying that. I agree with you that most follow the laws but the ones who don't sure give the sport a bad name.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

You guys are half right about tree being 'smart', if by smart you mean smart a$$! In reality, his wife has to assist him in anything more technical than velcro shoes before leaving the house.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> You guys are half right about tree being 'smart', if by smart you mean smart ****! In reality, his wife has to assist him in anything more technical than velcro shoes before leaving the house.


Sometimes I just leave barefoot. I don't realize it until someone at works makes a comment or if my feet get cold.

I'm grateful for my wife everyday when she feeds me mush with a spoon.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

> I tend to think there are more than 75% following trail laws.


I am inline with your numbers and 25% of users participating in illegal activities is WAY too much.

I am not a devil's advocate. We are just good friends. :evil:


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> > I tend to think there are more than 75% following trail laws.
> 
> 
> I am inline with your numbers and* 25% of users participating in illegal activities is WAY too much*.
> ...


I completely agree!  Like Orvis said, if us law abiding folks are going to spend money to do things legally, I want those bastards that don't to pay. :evil: There have been times where I seen so many ATV riders not following rules and being dinks that I wished I could have taken them all out. :evil:


----------



## The AntiPETA (Nov 11, 2007)

What are the current penalties?

I'm asking about quantitative amounts (by managing agency, if there are differences), not Goldilocks-opinions like: "not enough", "too much", or "just right." I didn't see that mentioned, but could have missed it.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

The AntiPETA said:


> What are the current penalties?
> 
> At present, violation of the existing laws is a class C misdemeanor. So there is no mandatory penalty and the maximum fine is $500. Repeat offenses are also class C misdemeanors.


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

Situation. A new atv trail has popped up on a favorite roadless hunting area that I've hunted for years. It is located on National Forest coming from a private property owners land. It has not been there for more than a year or two, but from looking at the maps, this area has been desgnated as potential wilderness/roadless areas by the National Forest people. I just hate to see these atv trails keep expanding and encroaching on more undisturbed areas. What would you do? I know for sure the private property owners know they should not be driving atv's on this area. Should I contact the NF? What can they do to a private landowner? or maybe........plant roadside skunk bombs? Seriously though, I'm really ticked off about it.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

flinger said:


> Situation. A new atv trail has popped up on a favorite roadless hunting area that I've hunted for years. It is located on National Forest coming from a private property owners land. It has not been there for more than a year or two, but from looking at the maps, this area has been desgnated as potential wilderness/roadless areas by the National Forest people. I just hate to see these atv trails keep expanding and encroaching on more undisturbed areas. What would you do? I know for sure the private property owners know they should not be driving atv's on this area. Should I contact the NF? What can they do to a private landowner? or maybe........plant roadside skunk bombs? Seriously though, I'm really ticked off about it.


Contact the forest service. Hopefully they would come and block it off and site the landowner for breaking the law. If it is labeled as wilderness area then I don't think it matters if it private property owners doing it, I think? I could be wrong on this.


----------



## campfire (Sep 9, 2007)

One of the problems with "roadless" areas of public land that is adjacent to private land is that private land owners controle that PUBLIC land by virtue of access. This applies to hunting and sometimes grazing as well. I am no expert on law but I am pretty sure the same laws and rules that apply to the public on public land applies to private land owners on public land. If the trail is on Forest Service land and it is not marked and designated on an official travel map as a legal ATV trial, ATV travel on it is not legal whether it is accessed by private land or not. I do not know what recourse the FS has ( whether an ATV trail illegally accessing public land from private land is enough evidence of illegal ATV travel or whether ATV travel must actually be observed before legal action can be taken) but they should be informed of it just the same. The problem for the FS is that there is probably no easy access for them to inforce the laws.


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

Thanks. Maybe I'll set up some trail cams to get some evidence.


----------



## The AntiPETA (Nov 11, 2007)

flinger said:


> Situation. A new atv trail has popped up on a favorite roadless hunting area that I've hunted for years. It is located on National Forest coming from a private property owners land. ...


Where is it -- which National Forest, Ranger District, and approximate location?

The game cameras are a good idea. Without some hard evidence, they (the suspected landowners) will just say someone trespassed across their property and went onto NF lands.

If you show them (the FS) where the illegal trails are, the FS may even be interested in planting cameras. I know an FS employee who, through the use of game/trail cameras, caught a hunter that was illegally using an ATV on a non-motorized trail.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

I like the idea of the penalties getting more severe with multiple transgressions. If they can keep good records and inforce what they observe.

I would like to see noise ordinance with the ATV's also, like was mentioned before the Banshi types that have to have them at full RPM in what ever gear they are in can get way anoying.


----------



## flinger (Nov 19, 2007)

Without getting too detailed, it's the Uinta NF on the Nebo unit. There are no approved atv trails shown on the map on the Uinta NF website in the area I was referring too, so I guess I'll inform the forest rangers. I checked on http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/uinta/maps/mvum_book_uinta.pdf

I found this as well. The fines were pretty hefty.
http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/uinta/maps/travelmap_order_09-22-2003.pdf

Also found this: http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/uinta/local-resources/images/Game-Retreival_poster.jpg I don't think this landowner has a chance at getting out of this one. He can't say he's just retrieving game anymore.


----------



## The AntiPETA (Nov 11, 2007)

flinger said:


> Without getting too detailed, it's the Uinta NF on the Nebo unit. ...


Thanks.



flinger said:


> Also found this: http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/uinta/local-resources/images/Game-Retreival_poster.jpg I don't think this landowner has a chance at getting out of this one. He can't say he's just retrieving game anymore.


I've talked with many self-proclaimed (to the point of bragging about how responsible they were) "responsible" hunters who thought that ATV / jeep game retrieval was generally allowed on management units where it isn't. That's from hunters on several different R4 National Forests.

As NFs update their travel plans per the 2005 Travel Management Rule, cross-country game retrieval will become illegal virtually everywhere (if not everywhere) on all NFs, as it already is on several in this region.

Many people, hunters and otherwise, are also ignorant of the use rules for UTVs (AKA: Side-x-sides, Yamaha Rhinos, Polaris Rangers, ...). All of these except the Polaris RZR are not allowed on designated 50" ATV trails, and the RZR is only allowed if it hasn't been made wider -- stock, they are right at 50" wide. There's been a huge increase in sales of these vehicles in the last year. I wonder how many of the buyers understand that they can only drive them on dirt roads that are also open to jeeps.

Technically, hunters who use a UTV over 50" are self-imposing the rule that Idaho F&G has on some of their hunting units. This rule limits those using OHVs for hunting to roads that are designated open to full-sized vehicles.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Not to get sidecracked or hijack the thread but I had to post about what concerned me this weekend. I spent the weekend at vernon and I just could not stomach seeing 3-4 kids being packed on an atv in front of or behind their parents all riding without helmets. It just made me sick... I also saw tons of riders go around road closure signs and ride on any trail they wished. I even saw one road closure sign sawed down. Plus garbage everywhere don't people realize if they don't take care of the land and follow the rules we will lose it? Not that vernon is the most senic place but do we need to litter it with beer cans, dirty diapers, and trash?


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

I know this may sound harsh to you- but you saw it and you should report it- No different than a fisherman or hunter poaching- you call on them. A lot of the problems and public perception of ATV's and Jet skiis would be better if the users policed their own ranks. Orvis you seem like one of the ATV's users that those on the other side of the issue wish all ATV's users were.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Not harsh at all, two problems... No cell phone reception at the lake, I have personally reported this to the rangers when I have seen them and they take no action. Kinda of sickens me maybe it was just that one ranger but when you see 5 kids under the age of 11 driving a 660 rino around camp all piled in the back none of which had helmets I had to report it....


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

This goes back to what has been stated already, we need better enforcement. Like I have said before when you are on the mountain, it is not like you can just call someone. That is one reason why I think they need little license plates and lots more enforcement to let people know they can't get away with it. 

Several years ago my wife and I were riding our ATV's up Franklin Basin up by the Idaho border when we were passed by a three wheeler and a four wheeler going probably 40 plus mph down a rough, curvy dirt road. We went up a side trail and came back down about 25 minutes later and seen the four wheeler parked in the middle of the trail. At first I was mad, because I thought that it was another inconsiderate person parking in the road to go look at something until I realized it was the four wheeler I seen earlier and that the three wheeler was missing. Well about that time the guy come running up and asked if we could go down to the second camp on the left and get the family because the girl he was riding with lost control and went off into the dry wash with giant boulders. We rushed down and got the family and they rushed off. I never seen the lady, but I know it is easily a 10 to 15 foot drop off with giant rocks and she wasn't wearing a helmet. If she survived I am sure she was messed up for a long time. Just be careful out there.


----------

