undesirable,not need'd what ever you want to call it.It's been beat to death over & over. It's a dead issue.Time to move on.We have pelenty of 72" routes and more coming.24" 50" & 72" is plenty.Get over it already.

 

Listen chief.... I could'nt care less if you've talked it to death, because I really have'nt seen any clear info in this thread on why it was killed in the first place. Point me, or us, to some good info or give us an explanation as to why it was considered undesirable.

 

The widening issue was considered undesireable because the people in Michigan sent a pile of letters to their legislators. It doesn't matter if your dealing with your local towship, Lansing or Washington D.C. Lawmakers pay attention to two things, where the votes are and where the money is. Lawmakers see each letter they get as 1 vote, the bigger the pile of letters the more votes they tend to loose. If they loose their votes they stand a chance at losing their comfy lifestyle. Losing their comfy lifestyle is not desirable. Did the major ORV organizations get the word out to their members about this legislation. Yes they did, that is what they exist for. They also know that their members can think for themselves and can not be forced to send a letter because their Prez told them so. Heck most of the major ORV organizations in Michigan are lucky to get 1/3 of their members to vote in a club election let alone take the time to send a letter to someone they don't even know.

To think that the major ORV clubs in Michigan called the lawmaker and told them that their legislation was undesirable, so then the lawmaker just said ok and pulls the bill was how it worked, you need to think about how things work in Lansing. If it was that easy we would be able to ride where we want. Since we are not riding where we want I'm thinking the Prez of ABC- Off Road and the prez of XYZ - Cycle Club don't have much pull in Lansing.

I hope I was able to explain to you why this bill died. If not, here it is in a nut shell, "a lot of people sent in letters and said they didn't like it".

 

Closer, but still, not really. What was undersirable to people in the bill? People don't just randomly send letters to politicians about bills they know nothing about. What was the deal with the bill that makes everyone against it? Does anyone here get what I'm asking?

 

stunna,

I will try and give you some history on the 60" widening issue. Otherwise called the Argo bill.
With the popularity of side by sides growing the Argo folks desided that they should have the right to put there vehicles on the trails the same as any other ORV. Without doing any research to realize they were already legal to run the routes they enlisted the help of other side by side manufacturers. Polaris being one of them. Their goal was to open up trail widths and gain access for their users. So without research they headed to Lansing and got everyone fired up.

Keep in mind the cost in widening an entire trail system as large as Michigans would break the bank. Once they were educated on the current areas open in Michigan legal for them to ride, a lot of the confusion was cleared and what they though was nessesity turned into a future want.

I believe our trail system needs to remain as diverse as possible. This means keeping the 24", 50", maybe a 60" and the 72"
You purchase your ride for the interest and the feeling it gives you. You ride a sport quad. I'm guessing you like speed, maybe tight twisty trails.
I ride a utility to cruise along and see the senery. Pack a grill and have lunch.

If all trails are the same, then I need to find a new hobby.

I hope you can see that it wasn't that Michigan does not want any 60" trails. It was just the circumstant and the scope of the task.

What I posted above is my understanding on the issue. I am not stating this as fact but from info I received during that time.

 

Bummer...This thread isn't nearly as entertaining without our BB buddy. It was like getting my fix of my favorite soap opera. But now you killed off the star. Man now what am I gonna do for my entertainment.... ;-)

 

You may be the only one.

I dont miss BB at all.

I do miss Muddy, but not while he was in the michigan threads.

 

If you get real bored we could always call each other names, heck that took up at least 40 pages in this thread.

 

Dont tease me......lol

 

Oh dont get me wrong. I cant stand him at all. I would just as soon run him over in the trail than look at him.

But still it was kinda fun to see the inner workings of the mind of a mental patient.....lol