Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

OHVs

Brown’s bill would improve safety without usurping counties’ authority

Off-highway vehicles are a staple in much of rural Colorado, whether for recreational use to traverse the many high-alpine forest roads and four-wheel-drive passes that bring visitors through the highest of the state’s high country, or for more practical purposes in farm, ranch or even extra-suburban settings. While the vehicles are not intended for road use, and can be dangerous in some on-road circumstances, using off-road vehicles on county roads can sometimes be a necessity. As such, regulating them makes sense, and Rep. J. Paul Brown’s bill that would do so should advance in the Colorado Legislature.

The Ignacio Republican is carrying forward the work of his predecessor, former Rep. Mike McLachlan, D-Durango, to allow off-highway vehicle use on county roads – provided the county in question allows it, as well. Brown’s original bill was somewhat too sweeping in that it did not pose age, speed or pavement restrictions, but it was amended to require drivers be at least 16 years old, the vehicles travel 35 mph or slower and be limited to non-paved roads. These changes address critical safety issues associated with off-highway vehicle use. The Consumer Product Safety Commission warns that OHVs are dangerously likely to tip over on paved roads and lack the safety equipment of cars and trucks, though they can travel at highway speeds. By limiting OHVs to licensed drivers on unpaved roads at low speeds, House Bill 1054 adequately addresses these concerns.

The Trails Preservation Alliance estimates that almost 95,000 households – most in Colorado, but about 24,000 visiting families – use off-highway vehicles in the state each year, contributing nearly $860 million to the state’s economy in direct and indirect spending for recreational OHV use alone. While there are abundant public and private locations open to OHV use, accessing these sites is often facilitated by using county roads. By regulating that use, the state will have more leverage to insist that OHVs are registered and therefore enforce compliance with rules governing their use.

More practically, it will allow counties to allow OHV use in areas where it is already prevalent but illegal under state law and therefore difficult for counties to regulate effectively. This is particularly relevant for counties in the San Juan Mountains, where many off-road opportunities exist but are accessible off of county roads. Bringing the de facto county-by-county rules into alignment with an overarching state framework is important. When the latter is more restrictive than the former, it is difficult for counties and OHV users to comply without unnecessary inconvenience.

The difficulty HB 1054 is likely to face has little to do with the measure’s merits. Because it could generate up to $6 million in registration fees, the state’s expenditures would have to be trimmed by a corresponding amount in order to not violate Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights provisions prohibiting excess revenue collection. Because the state’s coffers are heading toward those limits, any extra money triggers unrelated but difficult conversations. For that, the measure is not just a matter of bringing state and county rules into alignment. That is unfortunate because OHV use is prominent in Colorado and regulating it realistically is the appropriate response for the Legislature.



Reader Comments