2-Up ATVs and Side-by-Side UTVs

Its' unfortunate that I didn't see this earlier and get a few more signatures on the petition, hopefully the second reading today will get support.

Quote:

---

Leeds-Grenville MPP Steve Clark has launched a petition supporting a Private Member’s Bill to update an outdated section of the Highway Traffic Act (HTA) and treat ATVs equally. Bill 58, introduced by Ontario PC MPP Norm Miller (Parry Sound-Muskoka) amends Regulation 316/03 of the HTA to allow side-by-side, four-seat side-by-side and two-up all-terrain vehicles on Ontario roadways under the same conditions as other ATVs.“This is an issue I have been speaking out about and calling for action on since the Legislature unanimously supported a motion to change this regulation more than a year ago,” said Clark.


Last July, in a Member’s Statement on behalf of the many ATV riders from Leeds-Grenville who have contacted him, Clark urged the government to act on the changes to Regulation 316/03, which were supported by all MPPs on November 7, 2013.

“It’s disappointing the minister has failed get it in gear, but I’m pleased my caucus colleague MPP Miller’s bill will be debated next month and I look forward to bringing the support from ATV enthusiasts across Leeds-Grenville to that debate,” said Clark.

Bill 58 is scheduled to have Second Reading debate on Thursday, February 26.

---

http://www.steveclarkmpp.com/wp-cont...on_Bill_58.pdf

be a big step forward for utvs, i would consider one then... have rode 2 up on the atv for many years, receieved 3 warnings, so far no tickets...

couple years ago during the bonfield atv poker run, a couple opp ran there bikes in the poker run, never said nothing to anybody in the bush, just acted like one of the guys, well apparently near the end of it, which was on a public road, they rushed ahead, set up, and charged everybody riding 2 up... dirty buggars lol

I signed that last summer, was on the FB, hunting and gun chat - eastern ontario page. It is my second go to hunting page.

good news !!!

Quote:

---

Second Reading of Bill 58, An Act to amend the Highway Traffic Act with respect to utility task and all-terrain vehicles.


Debate arose.
Carried.

Referred to the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly.

---

So it's passed another hurdle !!

I think this will change eventually, and the cops that charge for it must have nothing better to do, Chicken sheeet charges is what I call that.

2 ups and utv's were never around when the original ATV definition was created for the purposes of the law. They still have not been defined as ATV's to date but they have been working very hard to change the industry. Why did they get charged? Most likely because most people who ride 2 ups ignore the basic rules and ride on the roads. By law, when you have 2 people on the bike the second person must get off and walk when you cross a road. You obviously therefore should not ride along the shoulder of the road either, and look at the very definition of road shoulder, it exist to the treeline and or fence on either side. Keep in mind some private trails like Haliburton forest banned all to ups the were not oem manufactured by the maker. So if your seat was removable at all it was banned. But my old Polaris x2 had a seat that was not removable and was therefore insurable by them. Side x sides came on the scene just as they were about to amend the laws to accommodate 2ups so they held off so they could include a proper definition of each for the laws. Remember each municipality has the right to define it own trail criteria's and by-laws so no matter what the bill comes out to be, the municipalities rules are what dictates your ride. Savage308

Savage, apparently it was amended and now you can cross the road with a passenger. It's a start.

I fell out of the loop Last5oh_302 about 4 years back. A serious falling out between myself and 2 ATV clubs when my wife was nearly killed by a moron with a chainsaw. I love ATV's and so does she but now we only keep one around for carrying game out of the bush or ice fishing. If they changed the laws for the better then that is awesome, I still want to see the clubs supported provincially like OFSC so they can do more for the average riders.Savage308

I'm all for UTV side by sides and waiting for this to pass to buy one.

I might get flamed for this part but i hope that people really use the seat belts or harnesses provided. Too many stories of people being injured/killed by the roll cage. I know of two case where young people were killed by the bars when ejected on flat ground. Not even trails just flat ground. I believe that seat belts would have saved these people lives without a doubt.

Nobody is going to torch your backside for wishing people use common sense! I have seen people do some things to themselves in the simplest acts of forgetfulness. Not wearing a helmet while loading or unloading the atv for instance is a bad idea, I have seen some who never tie off the ramps and then look around to see if anyone saw them fall off as if it was just embarrassing. I have seen people flattened completely as they rush in trying to catch a falling ATV and rider. Better to let them fall and pick them up after. Just common sense applied would have stopped every single one of those. Savage308

I would like to see that laws for snowgos the same for atv lic and insure and away you go same laws for both ,I can drive my sled right in town to gas station but not my atv .some thing has to change Dutch

Unfortunately in this case the province allows the individual municipalities to set whatever by-law suits their own needs. So as far as that goes it would take years of town meetings and hearings before you even have the slightest hope of achieving your goals. I used to love going to those and listen to the people who don't even own ATV's explain how they are such a destructive force and far to loud to be allowed into the town. Unless you customise the exhaust ATV's are a fairly silent machine compared to sleds. However it's a huge undertaking and you won't win. Things like this are exactly the reason the ATV industry is failing to make any headway at a reasonable pace, not to mention the lack of provincial support financially that OFSC enjoys. I have always been a firm believer that the province should force OFATV and OFSC to join and therefore support and enhance the sport equally. Savage308

I would love to see a lot less of the OFSC, give them a little control and they think they own the country. They want you to pay even if you are on your own property. I hope the OFATV never goes down that road. Or if they do, stay out of the North.

An update to what has been posted.

The MTO has a online survey asking for opinions on revising the laws to allow side by sides & 2 up ATVs on roadways (both currently illegal) where ATVs are permitted to be operated.


Please take the time to fill in the survey:


http://www.ontariocanada.com/registr..._campaign=b8h8


(Scroll down to ORV Public Consultation


BTW the UTV bill has passed 2nd reading in the legislature:


http://www.wawa-news.com/index.php?o...156&Itemid=157


[quote]Government Announces Regulatory Review After Unanimous Passage Of Vanthof’s Off-Road Vehicles Bill Written by John Vanthof, MPP Timiskaming-Cochrane Wednesday, 25 February 2015 09:17

One week after Ontario’s Legislative Assembly unanimously passed John Vanthof’s Bill 46 to allow side-by-sides and two-up off-road vehicles on provincial highways, the government today announced a review of the regulations concerning off-road vehicles.

“This is one more step in the long road to get the Liberals to recognize the needs of people in rural and northern Ontario,” said Vanthof. “The government is finally realizing that off-road vehicles have changed, and the rules for off-road vehicles need to change with them.”

Currently, only handlebar-driven All-Terrain Vehicles with one seat can legally be driven on the shoulders of provincial highways, putting Ontario out of step with provinces like Quebec that have long allowed multi-passenger off-road vehicles on highways. This restriction means popular ATV categories like side-by-sides and two-ups face barriers when using recreational trails that cross provincial roads. Similar barriers are faced by workers in side-by-side Utility Task Vehicles who need to use the highway shoulder in order to access their worksites.

Vanthof’s bill would mean multi-passenger off-road vehicles would be regulated in the same way as single-rider ATVs.

“The rules for off-road vehicles need to reflect the reality in northern and rural Ontario, where people now use side-by-sides and two-ups as part of their daily work routine and for leisure,” Vanthof said. “Someone driving their side-by-side from their home to their worksite should not risk being charged just because their machine has room for two passengers.”

“We are closer than ever to victory, but we need to keep the pressure up. I urge all riders of side-by-sides and two-ups to take part in this review, and make sure you’re heard by the government,” said Vanthof.[/b]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savage308

I have always been a firm believer that the province should force OFATV and OFSC to join and therefore support and enhance the sport equally. Savage308

---

I don't think this will ever happen. I looked after the land permissions for the local club in the 90s for 5 years. The landowners were adamant that they didn't want ATVs on their property.

Co-operation may work where the network of trails in on Crown Land, but in portions of southern Ontario where it is mostly private property, I can't see it being viable.

Thanks for the link. I added my comments, and hope others here do as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by delmer

Thanks for the link. I added my comments, and hope others here do as well.

---

Thanks I've sent mine in as well. It would be nice if I could legally ride our Ranger down a back road 4 miles to get to our woodlot. As it is we load it on our trailer. Drive 4 miles, then unload it. Repeat to go home.

The way the ATV laws are written it is legal to ride an ATV from Apsley to the Peterborough/Haliburton line on Hwy 28 (not that I would want to).

This new Bill is great news for ATVers and the UTV folks. I own am 'legal' 2up Polaris with the extended axle length to accommodate the extra passenger. Great riding machine for my wife and I .....very comfortable on the bush roads and trails.....even better now (soon) that I will be able to leave from my house to get to the trails rather than having to trailer to the trails. ATV's are recently legal on municipal roads in my township.
Some great safety tips as well....been there - done that with the ramps.....thanks folks.

Agree with you 150%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woody1948

I would love to see a lot less of the OFSC, give them a little control and they think they own the country. They want you to pay even if you are on your own property. I hope the OFATV never goes down that road. Or if they do, stay out of the North.

---

Regs have been changed:

http://news.ontario.ca/mto/en/2015/0...-vehicles.html

GREAT news!!!

Now watch your insurance increase in price because we can ride along the roads.

That is great news! Finally!

I can't see insurance rates increasing. Every ATV out there (other than 2 riders) could ride along the road, where permitted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loony

Now watch your insurance increase in price because we can ride along the roads.

---

I'm thinking the same thing.

I wonder who is going to pay for the increased maintenance of roads once these machines get the green light to travel along the shoulders. The damage they've caused locally is more than apparent and a regional municipality that is already cash strapped won't have increased funds for the grading that becomes necessary.

North Bay city counsel is proposing bylaw changes to allow more city access to ATV's due to these new provincial laws.


http://www.nugget.ca/2015/06/10/prov...-in-city-bylaw

I don't see an isssue driving these machines around small rural areas. But on the highways or main roads not sure how well that will work. People have been driving ATV's and side by sides and even golf carts in my neighborhood for 20 years now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woody1948

I would love to see a lot less of the OFSC, give them a little control and they think they own the country. They want you to pay even if you are on your own property. I hope the OFATV never goes down that road. Or if they do, stay out of the North.

---

I,too,absolutely agree. I've seen enough false authority abuse from the OFSC nazis to last a lifetime. The time is long overdue to lower the boom on them. We certainly don't need the same foolishness with ATV's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

I wonder who is going to pay for the increased maintenance of roads once these machines get the green light to travel along the shoulders. The damage they've caused locally is more than apparent and a regional municipality that is already cash strapped won't have increased funds for the grading that becomes necessary.

---

I haven't seen the new legislation yet, but, I don't see much changing. Single rider ATV's were permitted on certain roads and now they've just included 2 rider and side by side ATV's. It sounds like some people think this new legislation gives anyone with an ATV carte blanche to ride around downtown Toronto or along the side of the 401. I think the municipal laws that exist now for ATV riders will remain the same (however some places are going to use this to their advantage and open more roads for the benefit of businesses etc) except 2 up and side x sides will now "legally" be able travel down the shoulder.

Here are the details:

http://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/r15135

http://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/r15134

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

I wonder who is going to pay for the increased maintenance of roads once these machines get the green light to travel along the shoulders. The damage they've caused locally is more than apparent and a regional municipality that is already cash strapped won't have increased funds for the grading that becomes necessary.

---

I can't believe the size they're allowing, up to 2.03 M wide and up to around 1700Kg, that's wider than the aver compact car and weighs more..just wait the the shoulders get torn up. Then the trails will have to be widened. Nuts.
7. (1) If the off-road vehicle is a multi-purpose off-highway utility vehicle, it must, (a) weigh 1,814 kilograms or less; and
(b) have an overall width not greater than 2.03 metres, excluding mirrors.
(2) If the off-road vehicle is a recreational off-highway vehicle, it must,
(a) weigh 1,700 kilograms or less; and
(b) have an overall width not greater than 2.03 metres, excluding mirrors.

If you've ever ridden the trails around the Haliburton Highlands (Popular area) you'll see quite a few serious off road Jeeps. I even saw a new or newer Range Rover $$ with mud tires, going through a deep water hole half way up the doors. I guess if he can afford to bash that offroad, he can afford to get it fully cleaned out as well. Haliburton has plenty of trails wide enough for Jeeps, and the communities that are around the trail system should benefit from this, I'd think.

The government is actually unbanning something!:scream:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by last5oh_302

If you've ever ridden the trails around the Haliburton Highlands (Popular area) you'll see quite a few serious off road Jeeps. I even saw a new or newer Range Rover $$ with mud tires, going through a deep water hole half way up the doors. I guess if he can afford to bash that offroad, he can afford to get it fully cleaned out as well. Haliburton has plenty of trails wide enough for Jeeps, and the communities that are around the trail system should benefit from this, I'd think.
The government is actually unbanning something!:scream:

---

I'm more wondering about the roadside damage than the mud flying in Haliburton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherman

I'm more wondering about the roadside damage than the mud flying in Haliburton.

---

I don't see it being a problem if it hasn't been an issue thus far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by last5oh_302

I don't see it being a problem if it hasn't been an issue thus far.

---

There's just a little bit of difference between a quad that weighs 300kg and another weighing up to 17-1800kkg, and width wise most of the single/2 ups aren't that wide that they take more than the road shoulder. Now the side by sides are a lot wider, you can't argue that and that it hasn't been a problem yet, well they were just legalized.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherman

There's just a little bit of difference between a quad that weighs 300kg and another weighing up to 17-1800kkg, and width wise most of the single/2 ups aren't that wide that they take more than the road shoulder. Now the side by sides are a lot wider, you can't argue that and that it hasn't been a problem yet, well they were just legalized.

---

They'll have to make sure the roads that permit off-road vehicle travel have wide enough shoulders then. It's not that big a deal and in my experience the roads that permit travel now have decent, wide enough shoulders. Side x sides have been doing it illegally for a while now.

Wow people whine all day long about the govt banning this and that and when they finally give us some freedom the whining begins again. Can't win I guess.

Nice of the government to download the final decision onto the local Municipalities. They will have a better idea of which roads are suitable for the vehicles.

Anyone concerned about the need to widen shoulders, well it's going to happen anyway with a huge push by the cycling community lobbying for bicycle lanes. In Renfrew County , the county has started to change the standard road allowance from 66 feet to 88. As soon as a new road improvement project circulates for public consultation, the cycling clubs jump on it. Example Hwy 41 from Pembroke to Eganville is being rebuilt this summer and it will have bicycle lanes to satisfy the 21 member cycling club in the area.

i can't see municipalities opening this up to any and all roads.

every time a government gives us a little more freedom to make decisions for ourselves is a good day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by last5oh_302

Wow people whine all day long about the govt banning this and that and when they finally give us some freedom the whining begins again. Can't win I guess.

---

I'm not whining, just bringing forward a point of view.

Here in Marionville we have Golf carts, UTV's and ATV driving along the side of the roads and there has never really been a problem. The only problem I have ever had is the fellas racing around in the bush, last year 2 of them lost control coming around the corner on the wrong side of the forest road they were very lucky that I heard them before they got around. They also seem to have a habit of destroying the paths in some places to the point that even they cannot get through.

The region of Sudbury passed a similar bylaw a few years ago to allow ATV's on certain roads. Of course these guys took advantage of the bylaw and drive just about anywhere they please. The police certainly don't have time to enforce the legislation and by-law officers are usually desk bound anyway.
When you see the ruts along the shoulders of main highways leading in and out of town then you'll understand the damage being caused.

Havelock Belmont & Metheun allows ATVs to use CR 46 where the trail is impassable due to water for a couple of years now. For several years ATVs have been allowed on Hwy 28 from Apsley north to the Hwy 118 jct. I have never seen anyone riding on it. W/ the traffic on it, I don't have any interest to go out on the highway.

Yes there are azzhats that run into Apsley, hit the LCBO then rip back thru the village on their ATVs. I had to give 1 moron hell for riding his ATV into the cemetery across the road from our place. He said he had a cousin buried in there. He didn't stop long enough to look @ a grave just out acting like an $%^&*()

I thought the law was to allow UTVs & SXSs along the roads. Obviously the 1700 kg/3740 lb limit allows vehicles much bigger than that.

A quick "thank you" e-mail to MPP Norm Miller, responsible for this private members bill, might be a nice gesture, a change from always writing to complain to them :)

http://www.muskokaregion.com/news-st...v-legislation/

emai to : [email protected]