You can argue stats and causes all day... The fact is, there is no consistant means of instruction available that will apply to all states. MI is progressive in that it provides a means for a child that is larger in stature to move up if they can demonstrate s certain level of skill. For all the criticism the ASI program has received, it is still the one program that is accepted to be a legitimate attempt to consolidate the sport, and the one that many states model their programs after. Is it perfect, no. Does it need updating, yes. What are you going to do about it? In the time it takes to sit here and complain about it, you could have fired off a few messages to people who could do something about it. The agerestrictions have been a thorn in a lot of peoples sides for years. Mine as well. But I also realize that they were made a long time ago for a good reason. they are not perfect, but they are what we have to work with. Then it boils down to are we going to teach our kids that is is right or wrong to comply with the laws where we live.... That opens a whole new can of worms doesn't it? Next thing we will hear is some guy who wants to ban parents....

 

QUOTE*
For all the criticism the ASI program has received, it is still the one program that is accepted to be a legitimate attempt to consolidate the sport, and the one that many states model their programs after. Is it perfect, no. Does it need updating, yes. What are you going to do about it? In the time it takes to sit here and complain about it, you could have fired off a few messages to people who could do something about it
END OF QUOTE*

Thats hilarious! WHY?
Each year, the ASI and its instructors have one meeting [per State] per year when most of the Instructors of that particular State and their Cheif Instructor congregate to a central location to discuss certain issues regarding the classes. I cant even BEGIN to tell you how MANY times the AGE/CC restrictions were brought up to the Cheif Instructors.

ASI hands are tied up with CPSC AGE/CC guidelines BECAUSE they get their pay checks thru all the manufactures that participate in the ASI program,and if you think the ASI is going to CRY WOLF to the very folks that write them their pay checks, you've got it all wrong. The Consent Decree Agreement was an agreement by the manufactures and the CPSC way back in 1988, and way back than, perhaps it had SOME merit to it. But almost 17yrs later, it has very little merit to it at all IMO.

 

@Muddy4life -

I want to thank you personally for making me go to page one of this thread and read every post in order to better grasp the basic topic of safe operation of ATV by youth as well as adults. After spending hours, a bit at a time, I honestly can not recollect a single post where you offered a single ,constructive suggestion to improve the safety of youths riding ATVs. Every post is argumentative, combative, inaccurate, and unhelpful to someone like myself (not many) who posted here to get some advice on youth atv training.

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>So as you can see, the ASI program actually IMPEDES training of our kids.

When I did the ASI safety courses here in Michigan, I actually QUITE doing the ASI safety course for youth under 16 [sent them to another ASI instructor] because of the AGE/CC restrictions, and recommended that they take the State safety course instead.</end quote></div>

You've given up trying to be helpful. If you want to quit being part of the problem, please unsubscribe from this tread and do not interject your comments in any forum where earnest efforts and dialog are underway to actually improve youth ATV safety riding.

Thanks to EEresQ and others here who provided support, encouragement, and constructive advice and insight into the safety topic. If you would like I'd be happy to offer my own anecdotal commentary after taking the course next month. I remain hopeful that my own objectives are reasonable and will be fully met.

 

Originally posted by: windtrader
"...The problem is he is 12 years old and there seems to be a 90 cc restriction which does not allow him to get trained on his 150. A few calls to the ATV Safety Institute gave me the idea that loaners are available but <u>only</u> for the small kids, <u>none</u> his age. He can't ride his own quad...."

If this is true, then it seems as if the atv community in CA is obviously more concerned with the fact that these courses are indeed subsidized and (cough) "free" to these parents...than they are with the overall quality of said courses or exactly how they are administered. If you have absolutely no chance of ever even receiving a 'loaner' through this training system...then why isn't the community itself embarrased about this fact to begin with...and not out using this information to affect change in the way kids are trained? (ie: doing away with the subsidies; kicking out the non-profits in favor of privitization and allowing all kids to be trained within a sizing guideline that our leadership would have to support with their first gut-check decision in off-road history?).

"...So, here I am, a basic dude trying to do the right thing getting training and feel like the system basically prevents me from getting the necessary training. Maybe I could rent a 90cc for a day so he can take the course. It sure seems like an extra waste of money to have to rent the quad and pay for the training. What options do you folks suggest?..."

Please help me with the 'pay for training' part above; as I'm being told that the ASI provides this youth training for free.
If you have to rent one of these small quads for the day...then I suppose that my question to you would be twofold:...isn't the ASI lining up these rentals at a reasonable rate through (god forbid) the 'evil' for profit people in town(?)...and isn't the cost of said rental basically a 'wash' with 'whoever' providing welfare-like subsidies to non-hardship proven recipients to begin with?
I haven't had the time to read the posts that followed this and it is possible that somebody has already made the the point above also....yet your comment stating that: "the system basically <u>prevents</u> me from getting the necessary training..." is not only wrong...but a great example as to why conservative thinking individuals in this sport are truly in the minority. (although we are talking about California here....with Michigan 'dirt poor' riders feeling no different).

 

<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: Scootergptx
"...I just wish those people would stop and realize that their rants about secret meetings or where this money or that <u>goes</u>, tends to turn away just as many people from possibly joining any type of organization as they may think the may have joining. I mean, if they're all so crooked, why throw the money to them in the first place....
It's nice to see them make a valid point now and then, but nobody wants to wade through the pages and pages of bs just to try to find it.</end quote></div>

If we can't talk about where our money goes or what is happening at our local leadership level and how national off-road leadership condones the complete shutdown of representative protocol (see the Michigan orv advisory board for how many years now?)...then what are we allowed to talk about?

There doesn't seem to be a lot of folks out there willing to dispute the facts surrounding our closed door leadership mess in this community...yet there seems to be plenty out there more than willing to disparage the character of anybody who 'dares' bring those same facts forward in the first place.

Michigan has the largest maintained system in the country, my friend...and if we can't get it right here without literally scaring everybody away trying to do it....then your prophecy above concerning "turning people away" will certainly be fulfilled on a much scale than this forum provides.(compare the atv professional/organizational level of Michigan to any other state of even near it's size...and it gets pretty hard to argue to argue how many good people have been turned away already).

 

QUOTE by WINDTRADER*
I want to thank you personally for making me go to page one of this thread and read every post in order to better grasp the basic topic of safe operation of ATV by youth as well as adults. After spending hours, a bit at a time, I honestly can not recollect a single post where you offered a single ,constructive suggestion to improve the safety of youths riding ATVs. Every post is argumentative, combative, inaccurate, and unhelpful to someone like myself (not many) who posted here to get some advice on youth atv training.END OF QUOTE*

Quote by Muddy*
So as you can see, the ASI program actually IMPEDES training of our kids.

When I did the ASI safety courses here in Michigan, I actually QUITE doing the ASI safety course for youth under 16 [sent them to another ASI instructor] because of the AGE/CC restrictions, and recommended that they take the State safety course instead.
END OF MUDDY QUOTE*

You've given up trying to be helpful. If you want to quit being part of the problem, please unsubscribe from this tread and do not interject your comments in any forum where earnest efforts and dialog are underway to actually improve youth ATV safety riding.

Thanks to EEresQ and others here who provided support, encouragement, and constructive advice and insight into the safety topic. If you would like I'd be happy to offer my own anecdotal commentary after taking the course next month. I remain hopeful that my own objectives are reasonable and will be fully met.
END OF QUOTE*------------------------------------------------------------------

WINDTRADER,
At no time did I ever say that I did not teach the ASI course to youth under the age of 16. I did say that after awhile of doing the ASI course for youth, that I quit doing it after I realized how the AGE/CC restrictions actually Impeded instructing any REAL amount of youth under the age of 16,when compared to the State Program.

And PLEASE,you are a rookie in these forums. I dont need someone with 8 posts coming in here and telling a veteran Instructor who has taught 1000's of FAMILIES thru the years, the SAFE and RESPONSABLE way to operate Off Road Products,that my information is INNACCURATE, and UNHELPFUL...

It is of MY opinion [and MANY other past/present ASI Instructors] that because of the CPSC AGE/CC guidelines, that the ASI safety course actually IMPEDES training of most youth under the age of 16.

And if you cant tell the differance between posting the TRUTH [about certain safety programs] and being UNHELPFUL in this forum, than perhaps you should unsubscribe from this forum until you gain the proper knowledge to hold a meaningful conversation with a veteran Instructor who KNOWS the truth about many safety programs.

I've done more for the State of Michigans ORV safety program [and am STILL fighting] than most any of the ASI Instructors have ever done in their entire lifetime of Instructing youth for the State of Michigan.So until you have enough KNOWLEDGE to converse ACCURATLY with the big dogs,

STAY ON THE PORCH!

 

Originally posted by: Dragginbutt
"...For all the criticism the ASI program has received, it is still the one program that is accepted to be a <u>legitimate</u> <u>attempt</u> to consolidate the sport[/b]...Does it need updating, yes. What are you going to do about it? In the time it takes to sit here and complain about it, [b]you could have fired off a few messages to people who could <u>do</u> something about it[/B].....</end quote></div>

What was a 'legitimate attempt' to consolidate training literally decades ago...hardly translates into effective or even 'stand up like a man' off-road leadership today.

I find it hard to chastise anybody in regards to contacting "people who could <u>do</u> something about it.." when there is absolutely no consensus on what should be done...no national leader whatsoever taking a hard and fast position on the subject itself...nor anybody up here providing a legitimate go-to 'name' representing exactly who that person should contact in the first place.

"..they are not perfect, but they are what we have to work with.."

They are exactly that; as nobody in this community (evidently) posesses the stones required to force our leadership to take a unified position on anything else. Simple for-profit privitization based on individual financial responsibility is the obvious answer here....yet there are far to many parents expecting you and I to pay for their kid's training regardless of their income and far to many "non-profit" employees training kids right now that would be out of a job if anybody dared strap a set on in regards to conservative-based values in the sport.

Again, we can outline the problem 'ad-nauseum' for months on end....or we can discuss (dare I say it) CHANGE in the systen itself...regardless of who may or may not be receiving a non-profit paycheck when that constructive dust settles.

 

BB QUOTE
yet there are far to many parents expecting you and I to pay for their kid's training regardless of their income and far to many "non-profit" employees training kids right now that would be out of a job if anybody dared strap a set on in regards to conservative-based values in the sport
END OF BB QUOTE*

I dont know WHY BB continues to discuss the money that the ''non profits'' are profiting from the safety courses.NO NON-PROFIT INSTRUCTOR IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN HAS MADE ONE PENNY FROM THE ORV GRANT FUNDING PART OF THE ORV SAFETY FUND--PERIOD since the DNR takeover of the program. Under the new DNR/ORV Administration, only LEO's and intermediate school districts are eligible to receive grant funding to instruct ORV safety classes. And these are the very folks that dont have the knowledge or training to teach a Romper Room class.

I dont give a damn what a parents income is.If a parent can afford to buy his/her kid an ATV/ORV, they damn better first be aware of the RESPONSABILITES that are associated with operating one.And part of that responsability is making sure that the kid receives PROPER training from a QUALIFIED instructor, EVEN IF THE PARENT HAS TO PAY FOR THE CLASS!

I dont go to YOUR EMPLOYER and tell him that he pays you TOO MUCH money on your pay check. And who the hell do you think you are trying to tell Professional Instructors what their paycheck should look like when YOU have absolutely no idea what the value of the class is in the first place?

 

OK Muddy. You win. I am a dummy and you are the expert. I still think if you look at the overall issue of ATV safety, a number of other factors have greater influence than just the cc/age restriction.

Thanks again.

 

Im not debating that there are OTHER factors that we need to concider. My only point is that SOME safety classes [ASI in this conversation] does indeed impede the training masses of kids [vs our State program with no AGE/CC restrictions] with the age/cc guidelines that an instructor MUST follow.

And you do not come across to me as any sort of a dummy, by no stretch of the imagination. There are just some issues about certain safety organizations that you lack any suitable amount of knowledge on to make a real assessement on the overall effectiveness of their training program.In this case, it is the ASI.