Do you own an ATV? Join our Forum!
As a member, you can post in our forums, upload your photos and videos, use and contribute to our downloads, create your own member page, add your ATV events, and even start your own ATV club to host your own club forum and gallery. Registration is fast and you can even login with social network accounts to sync your profiles and content.
Feds to open Utah’s national parks to ATVs; advocates fear damage, noise they may bring
The roar of ATVs could be coming to a Utah national park backcountry road near you under a major policy shift initiated by the National Park Service without public input.
Across the country, off-road vehicles like ATVs and UTVs are generally barred from national parks. For Utah’s famed parks, however, that all changes starting Nov. 1, when these vehicles may be allowed on both main access roads and back roads like Canyonlands National Park’s White Rim and Arches’ entry points from Salt Valley and Willow Springs.
The move was ordered Tuesday by the the National Park Service’s acting regional director, Palmer “Chip” Jenkins, who directed a memo to Utah park superintendents instructing them to align their regulations with Utah law, which allows off-road vehicles to travel state and county roads as long as they are equipped with standard safety equipment and are registered and insured.
“This alignment with state law isn’t carte blanche to take their ATVs off road,” said agency spokeswoman Vanessa Lacayo. “If people [drive] off road, they will be cited. Protection of these resources is paramount.”
Under the rule change, off-highway vehicles could roam Canyonlands’ Maze District and Arches’ Klondike Buffs — as long as they remain on designated routes. In general, ATVs would be allowed to travel roads that are open to trucks and cars.
The directive, which applies only to Utah parks, triggered an immediate backlash from conservation groups, which predicted the move will result in a “management nightmare” for parks already struggling with traffic jams and parking clutter.
Now the park service is inviting a whole new category of vehicle onto park roads, establishing new uses that will disrupt wildlife and other visitors’ enjoyment, warned Kristen Brengel, the National Parks Conservation Association’s vice president of government affairs.
“These are national parks that have incredible resources, cultural resources, natural resources, and so by allowing these vehicles that are tailored to go anywhere, you’re potentially putting these resources at risk,” Brengel said. “The park service should be going through a public process, doing an analysis and making sure they can adequately protect the park and its resources and visitors. They haven’t done that.”
Brengel said her group is conferring with its attorneys to consider its options to block the rule change.
Setting the stage for this change in policy was SB181 enacted by Utah lawmakers in 2008, authorizing any “street-legal” vehicle on all state and county roads. For the past 11 years, the National Park Service has pushed back, closing park roads to these recreational vehicles under the rationale that it is too easy to drive them illegally off the roads.
“The addition of off-road vehicle traffic on park roads will inevitably result in injury and damage to park resources. These specialized vehicles are designed, produced and marketed for the purpose of off-road travel, and they are uniquely capable of easily leaving the road and traveling cross country,” states a 2008 park service memo explaining why Arches and Canyonlands should remain off-limits to ATVs. “No reasonable level of law enforcement presence would be sufficient to prevent ATV and OHV use off roads. Park rangers will have no ability to pursue and apprehend vehicle users off road without adding to the damage they cause to park resources.”
When Utah enacted SB181, all-terrain vehicles, which ride like a four-wheeled motorcycle, were the most used off-road vehicle. UTVs, or so-called utility terrain vehicles, equipped with side-by-side bucket seats, steering wheels, robust suspension and roll cages, have since eclipsed ATVs in popularity, as well as their ability to create impacts. They can be operated at higher speeds and can be so loud that occupants wear ear protection.
Jenkins, who served most recently as the superintendent of Mount Rainier National Park, issued the directive after off-highway groups and Utah lawmakers led by Rep. Phil Lyman, R-Blanding, pressured the Interior Department to lift the prohibition.
In a Sept. 2 letter to Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, Lyman wrote that he is "offended" that the park service discriminates against off-highway vehicle owners, noting than nearly all of Utah's national parks are accessed from state and county roads.
“The owners of street-legal OHVs comply with numerous laws and regulations to be given the privilege to drive on a wide range of state and county roads,” he wrote in the letter, signed by 13 other Utah lawmakers. “They also contribute to the maintenance of the state highway system through gasoline taxes and registration fees.”
Lyman is the former San Juan County commissioner who became a political celebrity after organizing an off-road vehicle protest ride though Recapture Canyon, which resulted in misdemeanor convictions, 10 days in jail and a reputation as a public lands warrior.
Adding pressure were UTV Utah and Utah OHV Advocates. According to the groups, Utah is home to 202,000 registered OHVs, or off-highway vehicles, the broad category that includes UTVs and ATVs.
“Despite being one of the largest groups of public land users, and even though the economic benefit of our community dwarfs most other recreational users combined, we often find ourselves discriminated against by decision-makers that head public land agencies,” the groups’ presidents, Bud Bruening and Brett Stewart, wrote in a joint July 29 letter to Bernhardt. “In Utah, this discrimination is particularly acute when it comes to the National Park Service.”
Many southern Utah county commissioners had lobbied for this change in the hopes of widening riders’ options for roaming Utah’s public lands. Counties maintain many of these back roads, according to Newell Harward, a Wayne County commissioner who welcomed the rule change.
“We are happy with it,” said Harward, whose county includes Capitol Reef National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. “It will increase some tourism issues with folks who want to use some of these roads with street-legal UTVs. I don’t know the difference between those and small Jeeps [which had always been allowed]. I’m hoping people will pay attention to the laws and stay on roads. If they don’t, then this is going to get backed up.”
Glen Canyon had already loosed its rules a few years ago, when it developed a new travel plan allowing ATVs on roads around Circle Cliffs. But that was only after a public process, an environmental review and a final decision that has yet to be formally implemented, according to Neal Clark, staff attorney with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.
“UTVs are built for one reason, which is off-road use. That is the purpose for the existence of these machines,” Clark said. “They’re loud and obnoxious and because of that they’re completely contrary to the reasons that people travel from across the globe and across the country to visit national parks.”
Article Source: https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2019/09/28/feds-open-utahs-national/
View full post
Suzuki LT-F160 Quad Runner does not seem to run long on Reserve
was out riding and when tank got low,it ran funny,so we switched it over to reserve ...it ran for awhile then no more .
pulled it back to parking lot,filled it up started and ran ok.
what do I look at first?
the valve,or is there a separate fuel line leading to the valve?
Similar Tagged Content
Looking forward to the new lifestyle. Bought my son a Blaster a couple of weeks ago. He was bored riding by himself so I picked up a 2004 Sportsman 600. Wow!! What a blast. Tore up the backyard yesterday playing cops and robbers. Got a few new paintball welts today. I am sending out a warning to all ATV riders in Wisconsin. We are new. And are we excited!!! Living the good life has no end.
If you like scenic trails with beautiful views and great places to stop for a snack, lunch or just to gas up then consider central Maine. As most of you probably know Maine has over 6,600 miles of ATV trails!. Canaan is in the heart of it all. With direct trail access from several lodging establishments you can head out and in several directions for a few days of riding or a week of adventures. I'll be posting pictures from some of the rides...( when I figure out how!).
Check out Central Maine Cabins, Pet Friendly, Hike, Kayak, ATV, Bike as a place to stay.
Our local club is currently signing a new access route that will be ready in a few weeks giving us a way to get to the Moosehead lake area, Bingham, Moscow, Harmony and more. Who wouldn't want to get out I95 and get on the trail sooner?
We also have had riders who have done the Translab loop on motorcycle stay and say we are a great last stop before returning home.
See you on the trails
My name is Kendall and I have something that's fairly sensitive to discuss, but if you read my entire post you will see that I, being a frequent forum user myself, fully understand forum etiquette and am fully respecting it.*
I own a tech company which I will not identify here, and so that my intentions are clear, my company's identity can only be seen by the moderators and owner who can see it by the extension on my email address to verify that my statements are legitimate. The benefit of the few users I could try to siphon with this single thread is very minimal to my company. Our intention is to create a long term relationship that we believe will be mutually beneficial for both this forum's owner, the community and ourselves. The only way our platform will be revealed is if the forum owner decides to allow the arrangement.
Now with that said, my company is a completely new kind of social platform that, while not replacing the hobby forum, does dramatically innovate certain aspects of it and therefore appeals to the same audience. Forums are for groups to speak together as a whole. Our platform is for people to create more engaging one-on-one relationships based upon similar activities, passions and interests. Unlike any other company making innovations in social networking, our platform was conceived one-hundred percent with diehard hobbyist in mind and will change the way hobbyists interact online. At the bottom of this post is a link to an anonymous Flickr image of our landing page, with blocked out names, to help explain our platform and so that you can see that this is something new and highly unique.
Over the next year my company will be visiting various conferences and expos for ATVing as well as other hobbies. We will also be advertising on many forums such as this one. The only problem is, our platform is designed for all hobbies, and we currently can only focus our budget towards*the most receptive hobby*communities. So it first needs to be established if the ATV community is one of those communities. If it is, we intend to advertise on this site and if that is all we end up doing, that is fine.*My strongest reason for approaching this forum, though, involves the forum owner and a potential partnership beyond a simple sponsorship of which we are confident will be well received. So if the forum owner will contact me we can discuss the matter further.
Eventually, one way or the other, many people in the ATV community will discover our company. But in the social space, the tone is often set by the earliest adopters, and we know that the forum community is the most upstanding and most knowledgeable kind of user to set the best tone within our own ATV community.*
I hope that this isn't seen as a typical attempt to spam and won't be automatically dismissed as something that should be kicked. I'm requesting that decision to be left to the forum owner after they have heard what we are proposing.*We want to be completely above board in our actions here, and once everything is revealed you will see that we are not a typical company in how radically and controversially pro-user and pro-fairness we are in our policies and practices.*
Ask me any questions other than my company's identity and I will answer as transparently as possible.
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.