Updating the 1979 Michigan ORV Plan Dr. Chuck Nelson Dept. Community, Agriculture, Recreation and Resource Studies MI State University

MI’s First and Only ORV Plan Mandated by PA 319 of 1975 Approved by NRC in 1978 Part of the 1979 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan Key Initiatives Sought to separate ORV activity and other uses where conflict occurred ORV riding allowed on Designated ORV trails, routes and areas Forest road system open to ORVs Develop designated riding opportunities in S. MI Protect the resources of the state from pollution or impairment

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations 1980 DNR promulgates administrative rules Close state forest land to ORV use except for forest roads and designated trails, routes and areas Need 1,500 miles designated trail on the ground DNR unsuccessful in creating S MI ORV areas 1989 statewide ORV study ORV has risen dramatically from the 1976 study ATVs are the most common ORV No major apportionment of gasoline sales tax money for ORVs as the PA 319 of 1975 recommended 1990 DNR finishes 1,500 miles/rules effective ORV Trail Improvement Fund authorized 1991 NRC approves the system of ORV trails, routes, areas

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations 1991 Public Act 17 On Lower Peninsula state forest lands Forest roads, trails, routes and areas closed unless posted open Huron-Manistee National Forests adopted same rules UP state forests stay open for use on forest roads and designated trails/areas/routes unless posted closed Task force of citizens/DNR critical in decision 1992 ORV season rules in effect for first time ORV Trail Improvement Fund distribution authorized Forest Recreation 2000 (approved 1995) Strategic Plan for MI state forest recreation system Goal is a high quality forest recreation program as part of a working, multiple use state forest system Campgrounds, trails (motorized and non-motorized) and areas with forest recreation as the key value

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations Public Act 58 of 1995 Use annual licensing to provide ORV program funding Residents and non-residents pay Eliminates MI registration, now use titling Re-Create ORV Trail Improvement Fund, modify distribution formula Restricted fund with carry-over authority Grants to governmental agencies, non-profits for: > 50% revenues for trail, area, route construction, maintenance, acquisition >31.125% for trail, route and area enforcement > % for ORV damage restoration on public lands < 3.125% for administration

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations 1997 ORV Trail/Route Assessment System of 2,531 miles (not including MCCCT) 86% on MI state forest land 14% on National forest land DNR System condition (not including MCCCT) Of 2,097 miles rated by DNR 61% good (trail/route in compliance with trail standards over 95% of trail mileage) 27% fair (trail/route in compliance with trail standards 75%-95% of trail mileage) 11% poor (trail/route in compliance with trail standards for less than 75% of trail mileage)

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations 1997 Trail Maintenance Costs/Reimbursement Rates Workshop with cooperators Out of pocket costs (gasoline, equipment, etc.)/mile $29.04 ORV trails $21.69 ORV routes If labor is considered a reimbursable cost/mile labor costs $6/hour) $ for ORV trails $ for ORV routes DNR used the following rates In 1998 $45/mile, raised to $54 in 2002 In 1998 $34/mile, raised to $40 in 2002

Since 1979: Changes in Technology, Recreation, Facilities and Regulations 1998 Public Act 418 Forest Recreation Act Mandates DNR to “develop, operate, maintain and promote an integrated system that provides opportunities for hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, snowmobiling, ORV use,…w/in each state forest” 2000 ORV licensee use and user study First study to use ORV license info Key trends ORV use has shifted northward Proportional and absolute use of the designated system has increased Trail system has been created, grown, matured

2000 State-wide ORV Use and User Study Continued Key 2000 findings 57% licenses ATV, 23% MC, 19% SUV 21% from UP, 21% from NLP, 58% from SLP 4.2 million ORV days per year 44% private land ride, 31% public land ride, 25% hunt/ice fish In average ORV household 2/3 family members ride 71% aged kids operate ORV, 1/3 riders completed ORV safety course 57% aged kids operate ORV, 1/6 riders completed ORV safety course 54% of licensees used the designated trail system 46% did not use the designated system 29% of licensees used a designated ORV area Key changes desired in response to open-end ques. More riding opportunities, better signage, legal on road shoulders, reduce fee for non-trail users

AuSable Pilot Project Value of more law enforcement and better signage to improve ORV rule compliance Clare, Gladwin, Roscommon and Ogemaw Cos. Improved signage appreciated by riders Area with improved signage and additional enforcement had a 30% decline in ORV violations per contact by DNR enforcement personnel Signage had relatively few apparent vandalism problems Strong support for linking MCCCT loops with designated ORV trail/route connectors

An Updated Plan for Tomorrow Key issues for updated plan Meet legal mandates Provide adequate riding opportunity Minimize social conflict Maintain environmental integrity Maximize rider safety Make most efficient use of ORV funds Recent new wrinkle – New FS rules “Closed unless posted open” on all NF Not just the Huron-Manistee Forest certification

Who will be involved? ORV Trails Advisory Board Plan involvement is an important charge ORV riders Significant input through existing statewide surveys Public information meetings, written comments ORV Trail Improvement Fund grant sponsors Trail maintenance grant sponsors Law enforcement community Environmental restoration interests County road commissions ORV organizations and dealers Trail managing agencies General public Public information meetings, written comments DNR 8/26 Supervisors, 10/14 NLP, 10/15 UP

Timeline March 2004 – May 2005 Assemble and review background data License trends Grant programs Trail maintenance Law enforcement Environmental restoration ORV user surveys 1976, 1989, 2000, 2002 Listen to interested stakeholders Stakeholder workshops 9/16 Restoration grant recipients 9/21 Trail maintenance grant recipients 10/11 Oscoda Co. local gov./citizens Public information meetings 10/12 Lansing 10/13 Grayling 10/14 Marquette

Maintenance and Restoration Grant Workshop Input Maintenance Support for improved signage Yellow backers from AuSable Pilot Project Sign plan removing discretion for sponsors Significant concern about liability associated with maintenance activities Growing trail use = more trail maintenance Costs higher than reimbursement for most Support gas sales tax money to ORV program Restoration Engineering requirements are challenging Need better ID of ORV damage sites off trails Need more restoration interests involved

Public Information Meetings S. Michigan (Lansing 10/12) Attendance about 100 Three distinct user groups represented Motorcycles, ATV, full size truck/dune buggy Non-trail oriented users not well represented Want separate trails to meet differing user needs More trails in total Parallel trails,“play” areas for large trucks Many want NLP forest roads open to MC/ATV Stated need for trail restoration, relocation Want direct access from trails to goods/services Support using gas sales tax $ from ORV for ORV Support hands on & written youth ORV safety ed.

Grayling Public Info Meeting Attendance about 85 on 10/13 Again three distinct groups plus 56” width ATV Gator, Mule, etc. Non-trail oriented users not well represented Want separate trails to meet differing user needs More trails in total Parallel trails,“play” areas for large trucks Many want NLP forest roads open to MC/ATV Stated need for trail restoration, relocation Want direct access from trails to goods/services Support using gas sales tax $ from ORV for ORV Support hands on & written youth ORV safety ed

Marquette (UP) Public Meet Attendance 135 (10/14) Different character than previous meetings Three ORV vehicle types represented Also had vocal non-ORV riders concerned about trespass, property and environmental damage, cross-country use & beach riding Also had hunt/fish/pick non-trail riders Keep state/national forest roads open to ORV Support county road shoulders open to ORV ORV riders seen as major component of tourism Want more designated trails for tourists Support for ORV education focused on written to reach more youth, work through sheriffs Want sign compatibility with snowmobile prog.

Timeline March 2004 – May 2005 Design and administer new surveys Trail managers nationwide and in MI How do others plan/manage ORV program MI trail managers update MI trail condition info County road commissioners Willingness/concern with providing ORV opportunity Law enforcement community Experiences with ORV enforcement grant program and interest in education program ORV organizations/dealers Concerns, needs

Timeline March 2004 – May 2005 Reports on all surveys (December 2004) Draft plan to DNR (January 2004) Public draft plan presentation to MI ORV Trails Advisory Board Draft plan out for public review (January – March 2005) Revisions based on input (April 2005) Final plan May 2005