If the ATVers are going to turn this trail thing around as an EQUAL ACCESS thing for both cyclist and ATVer use, it is going to take a much larger ATV CLUB membership base than we currently have in the few ATV clubs we have in Michigan. Its difficult for ATV leaders to go to Lansing and tell the representatives that they have 100 active members in their ATV club,compared to that of 1000s more in our local Michigan cycle club,and try to request more ATV trails with such low ATV membership numbers.

The EDUCATED ATVers of this State MUST educate OTHER ATV users with the issues regarding trail use BEFORE they can make any measureable impact statement with regard to trail width issues.

Until such a time occurs, I would recommend that the cyclists AND ATV clubs continue their efforts to achieve more County road openings in every County they can.

Good Day!

 

Originally posted by: 2TrakR
"...I understand that MATVA does not have an elected President; I don't know this for certain and don't know if he was the one who gave input...."

If you "understood" an atv club never did have "elected leadership" for every single year atvers complained about this fact regarding that same leadership's "representative" term on the Michigan orv advisory board (which is no differrent than these SAME PEOPLE today serving on your damn super-secret council)...then don't "blow off" your misrepresentation of this fact like you're the first one to 'inform us' concerning this fact...instead of claiming just the opposite, above!

(2-Trakkr):
"...No ATV clubs have joined any of the cycle clubs to date. I hope both groups continue to work together and join forces in the future...."

Then ask the only "elected" red-headed step-child cycle/atv club out there...to <u>quit</u> publishing reports that they've already applied to do just that. What is the delay here or what are these cycle clubs making these guys do?...go through the same "stab your finger and sign here" ritual that this super-secret-nobody-can-ever-know-who-we-are council evidently requires?

(2-Trakkr):
"....I suppose your response to the questionnaire rants from early were deleted too once you found the very premise your complaint was based on was refuted in black & white in the very same document?...."

My response to your blatant 'attempted' misdirection regarding the above questionnaire is clearly documented above and was never mistakenly deleted.
Again, if you don't want to talk about why the "summation" of said questionnaire does <u>not</u> thoroughly reflect the extremely DIFFICULT questions put forth very clearly on that document...that's your business (we've already witnessed your treatment of such subjects as the need for secret councils; the need for back-door extensions of your motorcycle leader's term; properly fixing trails instead of closing them down for "study"...and a host of other issues far too numerous to list here).

Believe me, I'm trying like all holy heck to get out of this thread, 2-Trakkr...please make this effort a little easier here by simply sticking to the facts instead of buffaloing these people even further.(if you guys had been 'smart' and bailed when BusyRider wisely did...half of the crap that has been revealed concerning you and your cronies since...would have never seen the light of day in my absence).

 

Like I said - I don't know. I've been told by people who are not in MATVA that this is the case, but I'm not a member of MATVA nor have I asked anyone in that club. I also don't know if their President, who may be appointed for life (again, don't have facts to confirm or deny this) was the one who gave input to the MMRC or if it was other members of their elected council. Either way, those people _are_ the representatives for that MATVA.
On the other hand, I do know that any of the elected officials from ATVOC who would have gave input _are_ elected as I am a member of that club.

Can you point out these reports? I've not seen them. There was discussion between the CCC and ATVOC about some sort of joint venture, but nothing has come of it. ATVOC is a chapter of the ATVA, maybe that is where you are (again) mixing your information up from.

Which is where you cried about the questionnaire and then refused to read the previous pages in the same document where the submitted answers were compiled.

You've said this several times before, but haven't been able to stick to it yet.

 

BB Quote*
the need for back-door extensions of your motorcycle leader's term; properly fixing trails instead of closing them down for "study"...and a host of other issues far too numerous to list here. End of BB Quote*

I guess im taking that comment as a personal shot at Dick Reeney. I've heard you state that he is a 'MOTORYCYLE LEADER' far TOO much for my liking. What Dick is, is a hard working ORV leader who actually OWNS a 400cc Bombardier 2-seater and enjoys many miles on it with his wife. He's also the guy who assisted in opening up MANY of the County roadway shoulders up to ATVs and ORVs. Now if you dont know what an ATV/ORV is,let me help you out a little.It means that he did'nt just go and spend 100s of hour fighting for the rights of cyclists to access these County raodway shoulders,it means he spent and fought 100s of hr for the benefit of ATVs and cyclists.

To make the claim that Dick is a 'motorcycle leader' is both deceiving and an outright LIE to the veiwers of this forum.

 

Muddy-I am glad you took your President of ATV Offroad to task. It was unbelievable he would accuse a potential new member of your club of POOR JUDGMENT for asking the clubs position on widening trails to 60 ins. I thought BB was exaggerating when he accused some of these people of being arrogant a****. Perhaps the best way is join the club, and change the policy from within!

 

BIGSAM,
The President of the ATVOC called my house yesterday. We had a long talk about these trail issues. Now let me start out that saying not only are him and I riding friends,we are also the best of friends in real life and respect each other tremedously.

Seems im pissing off a few folks within the organization with MY perception of what is right/wrong with respect to the cyclists trails and ATV trails[like I really give a damn who opposes my perception of right/wrong]. I held firmly to my belief that the cyclists should not have exclusive rights to their own trail widths when everybody puts their $$ into the same ORV trail fund.We further discussed the amount of trails that have confidence markers on them that indicate the trail as being a 24 inch cycle trail,but in reality,the trail is actually 50 inches wide that could have been traveled by an ATV. A trail marked in this manner is very deceiving to the ATVer,especially the new ATVer who is led into thinking that a confidence marker showing a photo of a cyclist,is a 24 inch trail and not wide enough for a ATV. This garbage needs to be changed and I told him so.We did not agree about to much.

We ending our conversation with me having the exact same belief about all this trail BS that I had before he called,he did NOTHING to change my thinking..I do not agree with our Presidents perception of how these trail widths should be maintained and the only way the ATV community will ever get equal access to trails is by the vast amount of ATVers agreeing on the samething within LARGE organized ATV clubs and than taking this to the politicians who support it.

This will mean those that want the same things in their sport will join clubs and associations where the leaderships ideas are the same as the vast amount of the clubs membership..There is no question in my mind that I can find a large amount of ATVers that would support equal access trails,however,why would they support a club where the leadership does not believe in the same? Well, many join ATV clubs for MORE than the politics of what is right/wrong in their sport. Many join for the excellant relationship that is incorporated into the riding atmosphere of the membership.This is all a good thing,but sooner or later,something has to break in favor of trail access for the ATVers in this State because much of the enviro damage that occurs is because of the lack of ACCESS.

Time will tell!

 

Muddy-I believe your club can grow when they consider the needs of other riders. I firmly support you on the safety issue of 60 in trails. it really bothered me for 20% of the club to be considered a majority. I think the ATV market is going to grow considerably, as us baby boomers reach retirement age, and the extra few inches of trail width would be safer for us as well as the younger riders. Thanks for your involvement.

 

I completely agree with you..

There is 2 problems with such a small % of voting. One,is that it does not really indicate what the masses of ATVers want in this State, and two,it shows a huge lack of ATVer involvement with issues that directly concern or affect THEM as user's.

I hope to change some of this thinking and lack of ATV involvement within my ATV safety classes this year.Need to get as many ATVers as I can into the club, and than maybe run for President in the near future.

 

I printed off a copy of a club application, but I don't know if they will accept one from me. They pulled my post about Chuck's comment (Poor Judgement). Bruce said it was too inflammatory. How long do you have to be a member before you can vote? Can the wife vote also, if I pay the extra five dollars? Thanks

 

Sam,
im a moderator in the same forum that Bruce deleted your post from. I dont agree with what he did,however,he is a moderator to and has the right to do what he did. I personally had NO problem with what you said.

As soon as you become a member,you can vote,however,if you look carefully,now they dont even want to talk about the POLITICS of our sport in there.