DRAWS CROWD - It was standing room only last week for the public hearing on an ordinance to allow ORVs to use county roads. Standing, the Iosco County Sheriff Department’s ORV and snowmobile enforcement officer, Pete Malette, discusses the issue of law enforcement. - Photo by Holly Nelson

ORVs may now use most county roads
by Holly Nelson

TAWAS CITY - Effective immediately, off-road vehicles (ORVs) may be operated on most Iosco County roads, the result of the Iosco County Board of Commissioners unanimously adopting the ORV road ordinance on Wednesday, Jan. 7.

Action followed a public hearing, which drew about 30 interested persons, resulting in an overflow which forced some to stand in an outer office.
The ordinance was given immediate effect and allows ORVs to operate on the far right of the maintained portion of county roads, except those which townships, cities or the Iosco County Road Commission have designated as closed (see boxed list).

County road is defined as a county primary or county local road and does not include roads claimed by the U.S. Forest Service.

National forest roads remain closed unless posted as open. State forest roads remain closed unless part of a designated ORV trail system, according to state and federal officials.

ORVs are also not allowed on federal or state highways and right-of-ways, according to the ordinance and state law. Iosco County has one federal and two state highways: US-23, M-65 and M-55.

The ordinance, which is based on a state law passed last year, limits the speed of ORVs using roadways to 25 miles per hour or less if so posted. The machines may use roads at any time; however, those without headlights and taillights are limited to daylight travel. Travel must be in single file, with the flow of traffic and in a manner which does not interfere with other traffic. Road travel is restricted to persons 12 years old and older. Those younger than 16 may only ride on roads if under the visual supervision of an adult and in possession of an ORV safety card. If an ORV is street licensed, the operator must possess a driver’s license to operate on the roads.

Anyone who violates the ordinance may be found guilty of a civil infraction and will be subject to a fine of not more than $500, along with restitution for environmental, road and property damage.

Although the ordinance contains no expiration date, it is enabled by a state law which sunsets in five years.

There were a few comments prior to the vote, which seemed split between supporters and opponents. However, based on crowd reaction to the various comments, it appeared most present favored the proposal.

Baldwin Township Supervisor Jim Svoboda and Plainfield Township Supervisor Fred Lewis were among the supporters. Lewis talked about the negative impacts on Plainfield tourism when the last ordinance was voided by state legislation, ending ORV road travel there.

Both he and Svoboda called on local, state and federal law enforcement officers to give ORV riders a break if they find them in a closed area. Turn them in the right direction, Svoboda said.

Although the ordinance contains no expiration date, it is enabled by a state law which sunsets in five years.

There were a few comments prior to the vote, which seemed split between supporters and opponents. However, based on crowd reaction to the various comments, it appeared most present favored the proposal.

Baldwin Township Supervisor Jim Svoboda and Plainfield Township Supervisor Fred Lewis were among the supporters. Lewis talked about the negative impacts on Plainfield tourism when the last ordinance was voided by state legislation, ending ORV road travel there.

Both he and Svoboda called on local, state and federal law enforcement officers to give ORV riders a break if they find them in a closed area. Turn them in the right direction, Svoboda said.

Lewis added that he does not expect the ordinance will result in increased environmental damage. People want to ride, he said; they are not coming here to damage things.

Gary Blazer asked how an ORV operator will know what roads are open, telling the commissioners roads should be expli-citly marked.

Commissioner Jeff Matthews, who spearheaded the ordinance, said a map is being developed by the Iosco County Road Commission (ICRC) and, he suspects, additional maps will probably be developed and sold by others. He added that there likely will be some signs erected.

“This will be a learn-as-you-go thing,” he said. “There needs to be some user responsibility too.”

ICRC Manager Fred Timlick was in the audience and said the general county map is nearly complete, but will not show smaller roads.

Reno Township resident Terry Belleville was worried about enforcement of ORV use on roads and who was going to do it. He was also concerned about conflicts between farm equipment and ORVs using narrow county roads and asked if the road commission had considered closing these.

Timlick said the road commission has tried to address such concerns.

As for enforcement, Matthews contended, any law enforcement officer can enforce the ordinance.

Pete Malette, a former Department of Natural Resources conservation officer and the new Iosco County Sheriff Department ORV/snowmobile safety officer, said a grant recently obtained by the ICSD is exclusively for enforcement on state trails; however, it may have recently been liberalized to be used anywhere. He was planning to look into it.

Dick Ranney, who is on a state committee on ORVs, said persons hired under the grant will be able to respond to specific complaints.

Paul Bruce of Oscoda, president of the Indian Mission Conservation Club, contended there will be damage and that he knows because he has been working to fix it since 1991. A couple of years ago, he said, a $53,000 state grant was used to restore the damage around a brook trout stream, Coppler Creek, in the area known as Bultaco Hill. Within a few days of completing the project - which included erection of barriers, the ORVs were back and did more damage.

“Sure, you’ll say a few bad apples. But where are the good apples? Are any ORV clubs doing restoration?” he asked. “When are they going to step up to the plate?”

He called the ORV law an unfunded mandate and also asked if the county and resource agencies have money for enforcement.

Dave Hanson, a member of the AuSable Valley Trailriders board of directors, responded that the Oscoda-based snowmobile club has expanded to include ORVs so it can address some of the issues raised by Bruce.

He personally teaches ORV safety courses and said the club last year did work on ORV trails, picking up trash, and is working with the Iosco County Parks and Recreation Commission to do even more.

Larry Bovine of Plainfield Township said he belongs to the ORV Riders of Michigan, which, last year, did two projects in the Lupton area.

He also gave a brief overview of the Ogemaw County volunteer ORV enforcement program, suggesting something similar be established in Iosco.

Holly Nelson of Oscoda called for ORVs to be banned on Rea Road near the river, contending the road is not safe enough for ORV use and that machines were responsible for prior erosion, which negatively impacted the AuSable River and its fishery.

Timlick agreed with this and said it was discussed, with the outcome being that the road commission will apply for a grant to hard surface the narrow shoulder.

Charles Shaver of East Tawas, a member of the Saginaw Valley Steelheaders, contended Rea Road is a major bottleneck and seemed to indicate that this will help it. He also contended erosion won’t hurt the fishery.

Huron Shores District Ranger Sue Kocis asked that the ordinance make it clear it does not apply to forest service roads.

“Our policy is closed, except where posted open, so it will be confusing,” she said.

She also wanted a wording change for clarity from “roads in the county” to “county roads,” the latter defined as a county primary or county local road under state law.

Matthews told her there had been discussion on adding an exclusion for forest service roads, but it was not done because there is some controversy as to what is and is not a forest service road.

Kocis said there is a difference between a county maintained road and the county having a right-of-way and told Matthews she has a map.

“If I could, I’d request a legal opinion from the forest service,” Matthews said.

Gordon Haase, also with the forest service, said he thinks the recently adopted motor vehicle use map is the legal opinion, adding that there may be an issue on some of the major roads.

“This is a county ordinance and doesn’t apply to the forest service,” Haase said. “The national forest and state and county have moved in different directions.”

Retired Conservation Officer Peggy Ebert of Oscoda County said that county has not opened all its roads, but did open up connectors to get riders from the 250 miles of trail and designated scramble areas to businesses. She suggested Iosco follow suit and spoke of the environmental damage she saw ORVs do during her years as a CO.

These machines are not built for road use and can be very dangerous on roads. Thirty percent of accidents involve children younger than 16, she added.

The final comment came from Dale Ballentine of Oscoda. He supported the ordinance and said it is lack of the ability to get to services which cause drivers to go where they don’t belong. Bultaco Hill is not an issue in this context, he contended.

“We will still have people do that. This ordinance is for access,” Ballentine added.

There was one written comment provided to the commissioners, although not entered into the record.

Susan Thiel, the DNR forest unit manager for this area, addressed several concerns with the ordinance at length: safety and liability, lack of differentiation between county roads and state forest trail roads, increased damage to state lands and increased cost to the community. She recommended a system of connectors, such as developed by Oscoda County.

Commission Chairman Bob Cudney asked if the board could make changes in the future. Matthews said it can, although he believes changes should be made by the townships and cities. The townships can open or close any county road at will after July 17, he added.

After 45 minutes, the board voted to adopt the ordinance, amending the presented language to change “roads in the county” to “county roads.”

This was at the request of Commissioner Patricia Schmidt, who also wanted to add “roads under the jurisdiction of the forest service” to the list of closed roads. This was not done, after Matthews objected. He said roads under the jurisdiction of the forest service needs to first be defined.

Schmidt said she would like to pursue this for possible inclusion in the future.

Later in the meeting, there was an additional comment from Burleigh Township Supervisor Randy McQuiston. He asked that the next time the commissioners have a hearing such as this, that they hold it at a larger meeting place.