The Great ATV Debate

    An interesting thing happened in the early to late 1980’s which many riders are completely unaware of. The U.S. government came within millimeters of banning the import of three wheelers all together. Anti-ATV (All Terrain Vehicle) opposition convinced almost enough of our elected officials that the machines were unsafe, citing high numbers of injury reports and product safety reviews. The industry was forced to accept the federal government’s “Concent Decree” and phased out the three wheelers, starting with the 1988 model year. Remaining stocks of unsold three wheelers were either dismantled for parts or removed from their crates and crushed! Although four wheelers were developed by Suzuki back in 1984, it wasn’t until the three wheelers were on their way out that modern four wheeled ATVing was born!

    ATV’s have also been refined since their inception to the models we see today. These models include those with automatic transmissions, all wheel drive, traction sensitive differentials, independent suspensions, LCD gauges, fuel injection, you name it and someone makes it. Ever notice all the warning stickers and age limitations placed on ATV’s? That was part of the safety program part of the “Concent Decree” the ATV industry had to put in place to convince our government not to ban ATV’s! Dealers were forced to place hang tags on each model with age restrictions and display giant 4 x 8 ft warning posters on their walls. All the used ATV’s in the country were eligible to receive manufacturer paid for warning stickers that were to be placed on the fenders warning of the dangers of riding an ATV and of its proper use.

    With the increased acceptance of ATV’s in the American market place, many new companies, American and foreign, began manufacturing them. The ATV revolution has begun! In the years from 1979 to the present day, the popularity of the ATV has increased many times over. Farmers buy them to help transport feed, seed, and fertilizer, travel around and mend fences, and any number of chores. The rural home owner plows snow, mows lawn, brush hogs fields, hauls firewood, and much more with these machines. Sportsmen and women haul themselves and all of their gear in and out of the woods as well as transport felled game. The handicapped, disabled, and elderly use them to access remote places which would be impossible for less than an able bodied person. Lastly, there are many models to choose from for the sport rider or racing enthusiast.
   
    So what is the debate? Simply put, ATV’s are the most discriminated against group of trail users in the Country! We pay more to comply with regulations than any other trail user group. We are the only titled, registered (often required to be insured) vehicles in the nation that are not allowed to utilize roadways. We are subjected to more regulations and enforcement than anyone else. We add more tax revenue to support our public lands than any other trail users. We pay liquid fuel tax on the gasoline we burn which adds to the economic base of the state and federal government AND, we have the least amount of trails!

    I have already stated the popularity of ATV riding has increased many times over in the past 20 years. The unfortunate side effect is that anti-ATV opposition has increased proportionately or more. As the numbers of ATV’s have grown and a growing number of trespassing and property damage complaints have arisen, the public land managers have seen no other alternative but to close nearly all of our public property to ATV use.

    Often, state conservation and wildlife agencies, or any number of conservancy groups, purchase private property and immediately begin enforcement for ATV trespassing. When these areas are closed, riders seek new riding opportunities. As often, these riding areas are immediately closed by private landowners due to the increased traffic and property damage. So begins the snowball effect that has created the present volume of ATV related complaints and anti-ATV opposition, and the “great debate.”

    Meanwhile, public land managers have chosen their path to decrease ATV related complaints. Calls for increased enforcement of ATV laws and additional trail closures became the order of the day (or decade as it is). This has added to the “snowball effect” and created another problem that is even more detrimental to landowners and responsible ATV enthusiasts as well.

    This creates yet another circumstance. Riders fleeing enforcement often get injured in crashes while being pursued. The anti-ATV opposition picks right up on this and has begun to cite that ATV’s are dangerous to operate (just like in the days of the ATC). While ATV recreation remains as safe or safer than other forms of recreation, it could be even safer through the education of youthful and inexperienced riders on safety and responsible riding techniques. Here is the problem; The “snowball effect” has spawned an entire generation of riders who have not been afforded the opportunity to receive this training due to the fact the machines they ride are often not compliant with the titling and registration mandates of individual states.

    The ATV Safety Institute was created and funded by ATV manufacturers at the same time of the ATC ban as a further stipulation to allow for the import of ATV’s. Although the ASI courses offer very useful training on safe riding practices, they often exclude the majority of riders due to age limits placed on the operation of ATV’s along with financial considerations. The ASI courses are offered to new ATV buyers for free. There are usually incentives given to the purchaser from the manufacturer for attending these classes in the form of cash or merchandise. This is effective in reaching only a small percentage of riders. Many people buy used machines, no incentives are given, and the cost to attend the class is 5 for adults and for youths age 6 and up. This is very cost prohibitive for some families. Often, one machine is purchased and numerous members of a household ride the machine, along with other friends and family members. If only the owner is afforded the class, you can see that most aren’t.

    Did you know that ATV’s are the only off highway vehicles that have strict age requirements placed on their purchase? The CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commision) has set the minimum age to operate an ATV at 6 years old. Six through eleven year olds may only operate an ATV of no more than 50 cc’s. Twelve through fifteen year olds may not operate and ATV in excess of 90 cc’s. Sixteen year olds may operate any size machines. In other words, if you walked into a dealer with your 15 year old (even if he/she is the size of an adult) the dealer could not sell or even recommend an ATV over 90 cc’s if you mentioned that your 15 year old may be operating it. This was yet another concession given our federal government by the manufacturers to stop the ban of ATV’s. At the same time, you could walk into the same dealer and purchase a 500 cc off highway motorcycle for an 8 year old without opposition (although I am sure any responsible dealer would warn against it).

    Now that I feel I have brought your attention to the lack of riding opportunities and some of the problems associated with ATV use, let’s look at some of the underlying effects of the problems.

    Trails have been closed at an alarming rate. These include previously undesignated trails on public property and trails on private property. The most common reasons cited for these closures are environmental resource damage and concern for liability on the part of the private landowner. As I have stated, Public land managers have adopted a non-motorized policy on all areas of public property except for designated trails. ATV’s were no longer allowed to utilize trails that had been active for years and were pushed into “intensive use areas.” Land managers felt that reducing the number of trails and restricting motorized use to specific areas was the only way to effectively manage the sport while maintaining trails. This caused severe overcrowding of available trails and made riders look for trails less traveled. It also caused previously ridden trails to fall into terrible disrepair since no maintenance or attention was given to them. Although they were closed (a sign was hung at the entrance to the trail) riders continued to utilize them. The responsible riders, now unable to use the trails, could also no longer help to maintenance them. The anti-OHV (Off Highway Vehicle) factions come crawling out of the woodwork citing the “damage” caused by ATV’s. They call in the press and get it splattered across the headlines, which read, “ATV’s Cause Damage to This or That Area.” Politicians and land managers are pressured for more closures and restrictions, they comply, and the problem intensifies.

    Private property owners are now seeing the brunt of ATV recreation moving toward their lands. It starts out small, as their friends and neighbors are allowed to ride tractor paths, field edges, and trails on their property. Soon, riders who have been evicted from their riding areas begin to explore. They see the trail entering the property and the absence of “posted” signs, and assume they are allowed to ride there. As the trail becomes more heavily used, it too begins to fall into disrepair. The landowner is left to deal with the mess and decides to close the trail. Often, landowners resort to drastic measures to stop ATV’s from using the trail. Some of these tactics include stringing unmarked cables across trails, digging pits in the trail, dropping trees across them, or piling dirt in front of the entrance. Along comes a rider who is not aware of the trail closure and he/she gets injured in one of these “booby traps.” The rider consults an attorney citing that he/she was injured due to the landowner intentionally causing the injuries. The landowner is sued, the rider recovers damages, and the word spreads that landowners are responsible for accidents on their property. Landowners, fearing “losing the farm” take even more action to close trails, fueled by stories (most often misstated and exaggerated) of legal suits. The responsible enthusiasts can no longer maintain those trails, irresponsible riders continue to use them, the trail conditions worsen (causing more accidents and injuries) and many times there are aggravated verbal or physical confrontations between ATV riders and landowners.

    These problems and incidents fuel even more anti-OHV opposition. More trails are closed, and the number and severity of confrontations, accidents, and incidents escalate, and so the snowball is now becoming an avalanche!

    There is a growing number of ATV organizations appearing throughout the country. Most of these organizations are in the grass roots stages of development, but all are working hard to reverse the trends of the past two decades. If you do not have an ATV organization near you, maybe its time for you and your riding companions to start one. There are plenty of resources available that furnish instructional materials for starting a club. The National Off Highway Vehicle Conservation Council is one such organization. Look them up at www.NOHVCC.org.

    Opportunities must be created in order to turn the tide of ATV related problems. ATV enthusiasts seek long, challenging, wooded trails which connect many destinations and communities. Riders will continue to seek these opportunities whether or not the trails are designated. We are trying to persuade our opposition that creating these trails is the answer to solving the problems. Non-profit ATV organizations will then be able to utilize volunteer labor and grant funding to maintain the trails. ATVers will be content to stay on marked routes (for the most part), complaints will decrease, allowing for decreased enforcement, and ATV pressure will be lessened in the “intensive use areas.”

    Here is the catch, unless these trails are developed, organizations are hard pressed for membership. Even with ample membership to provide the maintenance, funding from sponsors and fund raising activities, and the support of politicians and land managers, the anti-OHV forces continue to impede the progress of the creation of legal trail systems. They cite irresponsible and disrespectful trail users, environmental resource damage, noise and emission pollution, and past experiences as the criteria for further restrictions. Even when a trail is designated on private property with the consent of the landowner, we are persecuted and any number of tactics are employed to convince the landowner to disallow our activity. In many cases, secondary roads have to be used to connect portions of trails. Although individual Townships are empowered in most states to designate these roads for joint ATV/snowmobile/automobile use, the opposition mounts against the designation and the trails become inaccessible.

    Education is the key to solving the majority of the problems and safety issues. The rest will be cleaned up through peer pressure as responsible enthusiasts express their point of view to the uneducated or irresponsible and demand accountability from them in exchange for allowing them to utilize the trails. Unfortunately, the opportunity to educate others and exert any peer pressure is entirely dependent on the creation of a trail system. Basically the attitude among the ATV population is; “Why should I join an ATV club? They don’t have any trails for me to ride.” Without the trails, no good can come. The absence of the trails has gotten us to this point. How can any rational person not see this? Who is expected to maintain and police trails if no organizations are allowed to flourish?

    So there it is. Those with anti-OHV sentiments want to see a complete and total ban of ATV recreation. ATV enthusiasts want a chance to create more opportunities. Denied the opportunity to create trails, ATV organizations will stagnate and expire, problems will escalate, and the snowball/avalanche becomes a glacier. ATV’s are not going to just go away. In fact, they will only continue to gain numbers. We all need to work toward a solution that makes sense. Did prohibition stop Americans from consuming alcohol? No, it didn’t. Did it create a lawless element? Yes, it did. Did sensible people finally decide it was better to allow it and manage it than continue the prohibition? Yes, they did. Why, then, can’t some common sense be interjected into this dilemma?

    Those who oppose ATV recreation must recognize that their efforts (as well intentioned as they may have been) have created this problem. They must start to concede to the designation of more trails. ATV enthusiasts must become more responsible and respectful. It will take the former before the latter is achieved. Let’s put aside the boxing gloves and work toward a common goal.