Legislator Asks DNR for Access Improvements, Economic Study
September 20, 2005
Lynne Boyd, Chief
Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division
Department of Natural Resources
Post Office Box 30452
Lansing, MI 48909-7952
Dear Lynne:
The department recently submitted its Draft ORV Plan for public comment. Many of the points raised in this long range ORV plan have merit. However, room for improvement exists.
My strongest concern with the plan is its position regarding the use of ORVs on the shoulders of county roads. As you are aware, some counties in the state ban ORVs from the shoulders of county roads. Some allow ORVs on certain county roads to access trails. Finally, others allow ORVs on the shoulders of all, or nearly all, county roads.
In each of these counties, the residents through their elected local officials have determined what use of ORVs on county roads is optimal given the regional geography, population density, and the popularity of ORV use. Of the four counties I represent, Ogemaw County has opened all its road shoulders north of M-55, Iosco County will open all its road shoulders beginning in 2006, and a majority of Roscommon County Commissioners support opening the shoulders of their county roads to ORVs.
Since opening the shoulders of its local roads, Ogemaw County has seen a substantial increase in tourism, the effect of which have been appreciated by many local businesses in the Rose City area. The Ogemaw County Sheriffs Department reports that opening county roads to ORVs has not resulted in increased road accidents or other complaints. Many skeptics in the county who originally opposed the ordinance now support it.
The department's Draft ORV Plan recommends that counties target the use of county road shoulders only to allow ORVs to access designated trails/routes/area systems. In doing so, the plan intrudes on the principle of local control and ignores the great success many counties have experienced since opening all of their road shoulders. I suggest that this language be changed to encourage local units of government to study the growing trend of ORV use and adopt and adjust local ordinances to reflect the best use of local road shoulders.
My other major concern with the Draft ORV Plan is the lack of an economic study to determine the financial impact ORVs currently have to Michigan businesses and state tax revenue. The number of ORV licenses issued by the department has more than doubled in the past decade. Retailers indicate that sales of ORVs are increasing at a greater rate than snowmobiles or other recreational vehicles. Consequently, the department should be making an effort to double the miles of trails open to ORVs in the Lower Peninsula. This would not require new trail development, but instead focus on opening lesser used existing trails to ORV traffic.
The department is charged with using sound scientific management to make natural resource policy. In creating policy, the department must remember that economics is as much a part of this sound scientific management as ecology. Governor Granholm and the Legislature's efforts to build Michigan's economy can easily be compromised by departmental staff who are more focused on regulation than helping to facilitate recreational trends such as the expansion of ORV use. Let's Move Michigan Forward by capitalizing on the increasing popularity of recreational ORV use rather than creating roadblocks for riders and local governments.
Sincerely,
Joel Sheltrown
State Representative
103rd House District