ATV riders will try again on trail funding system

Steve Miller

People on both sides of a failed legislative proposal to change rules for all-terrain vehicles hope to join forces next year on a modified plan that could help fund more off-road trails in South Dakota.

The Senate Transportation Committee last month killed SB175 after some ATV users complained it would take away their licenses and, more importantly, ban them from riding on paved roads and streets.

Backers of the bill, which contained recommendations from a task force named by Gov. Mike Rounds, and opponents, including the South Dakota Automobile Dealers Association, did agree on a provision that would have created a sticker system for ATVs to help fund more trails for the vehicles.

Representatives of those groups said they hope to collaborate on a new bill next year that sets up a funding mechanism for more trails.

“We’ll try to find common ground with all users of ATVs,” said Troy Hall of Rapid City, president of the Black Hills Off-Road Riders Association.

ATV dealer Bill Hearne of Spearfish, who opposed SB175, said it’s important that any trail system established is statewide. Now, said Hearne, the only ATV trails are in the immediate Black Hills area.

“There isn’t a single foot of ATV trail elsewhere in the state,” said Hearne, managing partner of Black Hills Outdoor Sports in Spearfish and a member of the board of the South Dakota Automobile Dealers Association.

Hearne favors some type of voluntary sticker system for ATVs to go on trails, but he said it will be difficult to have stickers until there are some trails started in eastern South Dakota.

“You shouldn’t be required to buy a sticker if you’re not going to ride a trail,” Hearne said. “Requiring it of people who don’t use it is strictly a tax.”

Tom Blair of Deadwood, owner of a campground that caters to ATV riders is an SB175 supporter who promises to be back with another proposal.

“We will try to sit down with the people on the other side and craft a bill that has a funding mechanism. That’s terribly important. If we don’t do that, we send the wrong message to people who come to South Dakota to ride ATVs,” Blair said.

Although he didn’t totally support eliminating license plates for ATVs, Blair said the license requirement poses a problem for ATV riders from other states who come out to ride Black Hills trails that are sometimes interrupted by paved roads. Technically, without a state ATV license, they are breaking the law when they cross a paved road or street, Blair said.

The license issue and paved road ban were the big points of opposition in Pierre.

Blair favored the paved road ban because of safety concerns. He said current state law allows ATVs to drive on all state highways except the interstates. He said SB175 would have allowed cities and towns to set their own rules for ATVs on city streets.

Hearne said, however, that the law would have created confusion about which paved roads and streets would be legal for ATVs.

“How would you know which streets are OK and which are not?”

He also said that his group did a study of state accident records and found that ATVs were no more prone to accidents on paved roads than other vehicles.

Approximately 17,000 ATVs in South Dakota are licensed to drive on roads and streets.

“That’s an awful lot of folks to disregard,” Hearne said.

One of them is Roger Schieman of Sturgis, who bought an ATV last year to plow snow for people in town.

That’s its primary use, although he has ridden trails a bit.

“Ninety to 95 percent of my miles are in town on hard-surface streets,” Schieman said. He said the bill would have put a stop to his snow removal.

Some opponents of SB175 were also concerned that its elimination of ATV licenses would have removed a source of revenue for motorcycle safety training in South Dakota. Because ATVs are licensed as motorcycles, not requiring licenses for them would have reduced funding for motorcycle safety training by 28 percent, Hearne said.

Blair said, however, that the revenue from ATVs doesn’t go toward any safety training for them, just for motorcycles.

But Blair doesn’t oppose ATV license plates. He favors a system that would require riders to get only a sticker if they’re going to use only trails.

“If you’re going to be on trails and other public roads, get the license plate.”

Blair said SB175 would have taken some revenue from state trail stickers and put it to helping the U.S. Forest Service maintain an off-road trail system in the Black Hills, which it is expected to announce soon.

Blair is chairman of the National Forest Advisory Board in the Black Hills, which has worked with forest officials in developing alternatives to manage motorized vehicle travel on the forest.

Part of the impetus for the plan is concern about damage done by irresponsible off-road vehicles.

Now, the Black Hills National Forest is open to all off-road travel, except where expressly prohibited. The new management plan will set up a system of trails open to motorized vehicles. The rest of the forest will be off limits.

The decision on the plan will include funding methods, forest officials said.

Hearne said it will be better to start forming a new legislative proposal after the new federal off-road plan comes out.

“I anticipate the feds will have a sticker system.”

Meanwhile, he said, any state proposal needs to take into account the needs of ATV owners outside of the Black Hills.

“East River has no trails and little public land. Their riding needs are vastly different.”

--

Source: http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_77e4b208-2afb-11df-8076-001cc4c03286.html

---

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites