I recently been to a dealer and found a flyer for one to sign and mail to the Governor of California voting to recall the red sticker program. Has anybody else heard about this? I for one believe that one shouldn't have to pay a years (or two) worth of registration fees if one is only allowed to ride his quad/bike for 6 mos out of the year not to mention the fact that red sticker bikes are not ridden enough to cause a tremendous amount of pollution. Just my opinion.

California riders, what do you think!?

 

Arnold won't pass that crap (I hope).......

 

Well...if you recall (I assume they mean end) the red sticker program, non-compliant bikes won't be able to ride. The Red Sticker was a compromise to stakeholders when the manufacturers weren't delivering compliant bikes in '97.

And those non-compliant bikes do put out the pollution. That's why they are restricted. There could be a few instances (particular model years of Bomb. Rally) that just were never certified but would probably make it. The Red Sticker has been out for what...6 years now (it actually started in '98, retroactive back to '97). That's enough time for the manufacturers to get their act together. For the most part, they have.

Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

I understand what you're saying, I just don't think Ahnowld will do it........

 

Not sure what you mean by Arnold won't pass it??? We already have it! Go buy a 2-stroke, and you will get a Red Sticker. I think this is a move to repeal something (???), because red sticker folks are paying for a sticker when they can't even ride part of the year (???).

Anybody have a link to some more specific/accurate information????

 

i believe the recall meant to abolish the program entirely since the main contention here is that, with all the bikes that are currently red stickered at this point in time and the average total amount of hours these bikes/quads are ridden annually, there is no conclusive evidence that they generate enough pollution to only allow them to operate for half the year. As quoted in the flyer, the author believes that for a lot of people (including me) atving is a way of life and a definition of ones own identity. Needless to say, the author goes on to say that if we could recall a governor, why couldn't we recall this program which is a restriction to our way of life.

 

About the only information that I can find on this subject is an "article" from Dirt Bike Mag. located here.

Reading that, and from what I've read other places, these guys have no idea what they are going to do to themselves. The Red Sticker Program was a compromise to a CARB rule (or possibly legislation). Some background at this thread on Thumper Talk. Read the post by BRBill at the top of page 2. (The link goes right there.) There is no attribution of an author on the page. I'm not sure if it was editorial or some kind of ad.

The original rules called for the banning of all non-compliant vehicles. The manufacturers were cool with this and said they'd have bikes ready, but they ended up not being there. In 1997 there were only 7 motorcycles that were Green Stickers. (Not sure on the number of ATVs.) The Red Sticker is a pass to allow a non-compliant vehicle to operate in a given area when the pollution is statistically lower. That's why the riding seasons in the north are longer than the south. Or like in Pismo where it's 8 or 9 mos. They get fresh air coming in off the ocean without a valley to hold it in, like LA or the Central Valley.

I take issue with the Dirt Bike article in that they paint the latest rules as closing down areas. In fact, when and where you could ride didn't change. In addition, CARB actually allowed an additional 6 model years to ride year round. They also say, "Presently 80-90% of all 2003 off road vehicles will be issued the 'red.'" I think they've been inhaling too much 2-stroke. I doubt that 80% are non-compliant. I believe ATVs outnumber MCs sold in a given year and most ATVs are green stickers. I guess it could be possible if, and only if, you take the full production of OHVs verses those models certified for sale in CA. Even though a comparable model is sold in CA.

They seem to take issue with the fact that CARB says that not allowing for the operation of a source of pollution will reduce pollution. Unless you have a vehicle that produces ZERO emissions, the non-operation of that vehicle wil have a net reduction in pollution in it's operating location compared to had it been operated.

atvbandit: Do you have a copy of this flyer that you can scan or have scanned and have it posted? I'd like to read exactly what they are saying before I comment too much on it. A plain removal of the Red Sticker Program would park non-compliant vehicles. Whereas a modification to the Green Sticker Program to include non-compliant vehicles would allow them to ride. This has about a snowballs chance in hell of ever happening. I know I personally wouldn't support it. Some areas (the Central Valley and the LA air basin) in California have serious non-attainment issues with regard to pollution. To the point that serious federal sanctions are going to start coming down. Including the loss of highway funds. An about-face on emissions wouldn't look good when the state and local areas get ready to duke it out with Fed EPA.

Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote

 

BlackandRedWarrior, i do not have a copy of this flyer unfortunately although i will try to get one wwhen i make a trip to Hollister. The dealer where i found this flyer is Gilroy Motorcycle Center.

 

BlackandRed is right on with his comments about the red sticker program. I too will try to get info on it. I know our two ohv parks are affected by the red sticker bans. I'm sure more info will come forth on this issue.

I agree though, If you can't ride year round, then you should not have to pay the full fee. However, during restricted times, the bike needs to be off the road entirely, that includes no trips down the roadway to the dealer for work or a friend's house to ride. Because it would not be currently registered for that time period and if it's not registered, it legally cannot be on the roadway which includes the back of a truck or on a trailer.

 

The problem with a reduced fee for reduced riding time is that how do you base the fee? Not all areas are closed the same length of time. Pismo has a short time, while evidentally some areas have no downtime. So someone who rides in an area that never closes gets a sweet deal. It would be too complex and a real PITA. Nobody would be happy. Green sticker owners would be rather upset that we pay full fee, while others pay a reduced fee, but yet have full use of some parks.

Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote