It won't work in Idaho! The State is responsible and liaiable for the saftey of its residents. Here in Pennsylvania its the local goverment and countys that make the laws on owning and where to ride an ATV. There is a bill that will be voted on after the election concerning emission laws and the age of any person operating a ATV, it will be illegal to change the fuel and exhaust system causing ozone depleting CO harmful gasses from destroying our enviroment, and make it illegal for anybody to operate an ATV under the age of 16. The state has state approved riding areas thru-out the state that are patroled by state DCNR officers, you only need to show proof of ownership, DCNR plate and registration, ur legal age, and proof of insurance, and dot approved helmet and goggles with proper riding clothes and shoes and gloves, The courses are safe, they take great care to provide straight and level trails to ride on.

 

MotoF150 you've definitely convinced me to be thankful for our riding freedom in the western U.S. The requirements to ride on state sanctioned trails in your area are WAY too demanding! Not saying it won't eventually happen here, but for the present there is much more freedom. I can't fathom prohibiting operators under the age of 16. So much for a family outing. Additionally, to me riding on the "straight and level" is not what it's about with ATV's. Give me the good old "public lands" any day! The BLM may be tightening the screws, but nothing akin to what you have. You/we are being legislated beyond reason. What ever happened to freedom of personal choice? Too many greedy lawyers out there!

 

What I'm interpreting is that in Nevada that anyone can drive ATVs on any public road. Or Nevada may have defined graded dirt roads and paved roads differently? In Pennsylvania, you ride state approved areas that the DCNR officers patrol, does that include any graded dirt roads, paved streets and highways to connect riding trails or open areas?

In Idaho, currently all public funded maintained graded dirt / gravel roads are legally the same as paved city streets and state highways for vehicle requirements. What this legislature is trying to do is separate paved and unpaved standards to allow ATVs to operate on all public funded maintained graded dirt / gravel roads. Basically changing definitions to comply with 49 CFR. This legislature no way affects ATVs use on Forest Service, BLM, or State trails or open areas.

What 99ajax is saying, she has a license plate, horn, mirror, insurance, title, and drivers license for her ATV, meeting what he understands is the street legal requirements to drive city streets and highways. Currently she drives the paved city streets in his town. I believe she could still get a ticket by a ISP trooper for vehicle safety requirements under 49 CFR. 99ajax has Emailed ISP & will be calling ISP to get clarification. Hopefully for 99ajax is correct and I am wrong on vehicle safety requirements for highways.

 

Trailblazer, you're right about the IPR regs concerning highway use by ATVs being ambiguous. However, it seems a little odd that they should specifically mention paved roads if DOT tires are required, but DOT tires for ATVs do not even exist. And I have read through the entire Idaho Statutes Chapter 49 that pertains to motor vehicles and I cannot find any mention of DOT tires being required. The chapter talks about required equipment on motor vehicles, including tire load limitations, studs, etc., but nothing about meeting Federal Safety Standards. Where is this statute that the ISP is supposed to be enforcing? And again, if they are going to enforce that federal code, what about all the other motor vehicle safety standards that would be impractical, if not impossible for an ATV to meet?

It seems to me a better approach to meet this "gray area" of ATV use would be to exempt ATVs, UTVs, etc. from the Federal Safety Standards for motor vehicles and create a separate definition for them for use on roads. Continue to require registration and licensing like they have, but clarify the tire issue....even restrict the speed of these types of vehicles on paved roads if they want to address the safety aspect. Because even if they do ever make DOT approved tires for ATVs, they probably wouldn't be appropriate tires for trail use and who wants to switch out tires just for riding to the trailhead, or for short periods on pavement between trails? I guess another option would be to allow the counties to designate what paved roads licensed ATVs would be allowed to be on. I don't have a problem being banned from the state highways, I wouldn't want to drive at those speeds anyways. But it would be nice to still be able to operate on the county and city roads that just happened to be paved, but have lower speed limits set on them.

My biggest concern if they pass this new legislation is how it will affect my ability to ride locally. There are several NFS trails within a couple miles of my house (one trailhead is only 6 blocks from my house) that I ride to every week. However, at least part of each route is on paved roadway. If they ban ATVs from paved roads, I would have to trailer my ATV just to go a couple miles! There is also one trail system in Madison county that you have to drive a couple miles on pavement to get from the designated parking area to the trail. I will be attending the meeting in Idaho Falls on the 15th to address these concerns and hear what they have to say about the new regs.

BTW, I'm a she [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]

 

First I apologize as stereotyping gender. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-blush.gif[/img] I edited it above.

I don't think you will find 49 CFR in Idaho Statutes. ISP officers were given federal authority to enforce all 49 CFR, because of their specialization in traffic laws. I believe Idaho is planning to move to adopt 49 CFR as the pertain to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The ATV & dirt bike riders, I believe are trying to protect themselves by developing an exemption clause from FMVSS for public maintain dirt roads. Furthermore Idaho is leaving it up to each county highway district or county commissioners to make further exemption for paved roads. I believe this is not the same region for you, but Owyhee County went on record they will open numerous paved roads to ATVs and dirt bikes.
The true question in this whole thing is, can you and fellow ATV & dirt bike riders get the county commissioner, highway district, or city council to exempt the section of paved roads you use in your area.

 

I wouldn't have a problem with the proposed legislation as long as the counties have the option of designating paved roads where ATVs are allowed. I do think our County's governing bodies would be willing to work with local riders to allow them to ride on appropriate paved roadways. Heck, I ride by one of our deputy's houses (on a paved road) a couple times a month on my way to a trail. I'm wondering how other states that allow street legal ATVs have gotten around the CFR49 requirements.

 

I think Montana, Wyoming, & Colorado flex about FMVSS enforcement on rural roads by state police / highway patrol. Up to this point, Idaho has been avoiding the FMVSS enforcement too, with exception of a few officers. Not really knowing what brought this on, guessing that a few officers see laws by absolute. By the book, black or white, no gray areas. Or perhaps there has been a series of ATV accidents on public roadways and lawsuits.

 

No, in Nevada we cannot operate an ATV on just any public road. Yes, paved and unpaved roads are treated differently. Travel on county maintained unpaved roads is up the local law enforcement agency, but generally we have free access. However, recent legislation permits local law enforcement agencies to allow egress/ingress via town roads to trails. This privilege comes with restrictions such as helmet, under age 16 accompanied by an adult on another machine (only while exiting/entering town), and registration certificate (previously Nevada did not require registration.) It is all about liability, as Nevada has no requirement for insurance -yet. As most of Nevada is BLM administered "public land" I see more controls coming from the Feds. They have justification, as irresponsible operators do their best to destroy pristine countrside, not content to remain on existing trails.

 

Nuke, thank you. I apprecriate the info. Interesting how Nevada is changing. Idaho used to be kind of what county sheriff wanted to do. Some areas were as long as a person obey the general rules of the road, i.e. staying on the right side of the road. Some places needed mirrors, horn, license,, title, & proof of insurance. Some areas, were absolutely no way. Then sometimes state police would enforce the laws, getting into the mix too.
Actually you said something else I didn't realize, Nevada now has off highway vehicle registration (off road sticker) program? Could you tell me more about that program in Nevada?

 

LW, here is the link to the legislation enacted last session http://www.leg.state.nv.us/73rd/bills/SB/SB400_EN.pdf Of course they tell us the primary reason for registration is to track thefts, but in my opinion one of the main concerns is to collect sales tax on out of state purchases. In the past purchasing a machine in Utah for example, one could sign a non-resident form and avoid sales tax in that state. As we had no registration, they would only catch up with you if it was financed and a Nevada title was required by the financing entity. However, it is similiar to a license plate in that they can track the owner, or if someone wishes to report operator infractions of the law. Good and bad, as are most such programs. At least now enforcement won't depend on the mood of the officer.

As we are giving some consider to relocating in Idaho upon retirement, do you see any selective restrictions now or coming in regard to side-by-sides (Rhino, Ranger, etc) using ATV trails?