Newer ATV Regulation in WI

Found out last week that you can no longer have 2 people on an ATV that was not designed by the manufacturer for 2 people. This went into effect in March of 2020 and includes not only trail riding, riding on roads, but also ice fishing (or any other type of use)

I dont recall seeing any type of notice about this and only heard thru hear-say then went and confirmed it on the DNR website. I see a lot of people getting warnings (at best) this winter. It’s very common to see more than 1 person on an ATV on the ice while pulling all of their gear out.

I would think that any major change like this should require notices to be sent out to those with registered machines?

Posting this for those that dont know about this already.

I guess now someone will have to sit on the sled with all the gear to get pulled out to fishing spot.

gimp wrote:

I guess now someone will have to sit on the sled with all the gear to get pulled out to fishing spot.

Pretty much so, same way in Iowa. What I’d like to know is, how is having the passenger ride behind on top of the gear, better/safer, than having them in the seat with you?

Huntindave wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimp wrote:</div>
I guess now someone will have to sit on the sled with all the gear to get pulled out to fishing spot.

Pretty much so, same way in Iowa. What I’d like to know is, how is having the passenger ride behind on top of the gear, better/safer, than having them in the seat with you?

I think there more concerned about summer time use with a passenger and making them more top heavy and the possibility of rolling them is my guess.

Coletrain27 wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Huntindave wrote:</div>

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>gimp wrote:</div>
I guess now someone will have to sit on the sled with all the gear to get pulled out to fishing spot.

Pretty much so, same way in Iowa. What I’d like to know is, how is having the passenger ride behind on top of the gear, better/safer, than having them in the seat with you?

I think there more concerned about summer time use with a passenger and making them more top heavy and the possibility of rolling them is my guess.

Oh I understand that part of it. Seems like the regs COULD be written to allow an extra person during low speed operation. Yes enforcement would be a bit harder with a “speed limit” not really much different than enforcing a no wake speed limit on soft water.

gimp wrote:

I guess now someone will have to sit on the sled with all the gear to get pulled out to the fishing spot.

I would be a bit nervous about having someone sit in my flip over shack with their added weight while I pull it all out, down want to wreck the sled/tub of my flip over. Maybe they can hold a rope behind like a water skier, sounds safe enough to me……

bigstorm wrote:

Maybe they can hold a rope behind like a water skier, sounds safe enough to me……

I read or heard it somewhere that it was always a law and that they’re just going to start enforcing it this year. $260 fine.

This was talked about in/on other forums. Plenty of upset people over this, mostly ice fishermen.
As far as I know it is a new law/regulation this year.

just wait until the rollbar requirement law goes into effect sometime in the future, some places like Australia already have it on their books (I think they start enforcing it next year)…Yamaha and other Manufacturers have fought hard against it as it will increase the sales price substantially.

I can obviously see the safety reason, but it’s ugly as sin and the added $$

Here’s a couple of different designs:

Attachments:

1. 

   atv2.jpg
   

2. 

   atv.jpg
   

What good does a rollbar do if the driver isn’t harnessed in?

you have to pull others in a sled or a trailer – it is a crazy rule considering adding a back seat is a bit safer than pulling someone in a sled, especially if you have a larger 4 wheeler that can take the load easily. Also consider there’s a 10 mph speed limit when operating within XXX feet of a shack or person but no speed limit when not near a person on ice and dragging passengers in a sled.

When I spoke with the DNR about this in July they said the new law was in response to summer trail riding concerns and accidents that involved multiple riders. Apparently Wisconsin has an ATV rider advisory group that lobbied for the change.

$260 fine.

A law that pretends to protect you from yourself is no law. It’s revenue for the armed thugs that enforce it.

Snap wrote:

$260 fine.

A law that pretends to protect you from yourself is no law. It’s revenue for the armed thugs that enforce it.

and leverage for atv dealers to sell more 2 ups

gimp wrote:

I guess now someone will have to sit on the sled with all the gear to get pulled out to fishing spot.

Isn’t the sled required to have a rigid hitch/towbar and not a rope?Seen lot’s of good entertainment with sleds/rope ending with passengers and gear dumped.

Pretty sure its always been that way. Wont stop me from occasionally doing it there.

I support it completely for public trails (as the law is likely targeting). My biggest concern is the number of kids you see on back of ATV’s on busy trails. If the manufacturer did not create the vehicle for 2 people, it should be illegal to ride on public trails with 2 people.

My truck can legally seat 5 people. If I had 6 or more in it on a public road and a police officer stopped me, it’d be fair to expect a ticket/fine. This is no different.

That’s really irritating, glad you posted it though. I’d likely get a ticket riding around town with my wife on the throne I installed for her on the back of the brute force. Foot rests and everything, it’s actually very comfy.

Snap wrote:

$260 fine.

A law that pretends to protect you from yourself is no law. It’s revenue for the armed thugs that enforce it.

I couldn’t agree with this more. Anyone who ever goes 2-up knows damn well it’s a low speed activity. I fail to see how a factory mounted 2-up seat will somehow be “safer” when riding 2-up is inherently less stable. Maybe these side by side manufacturers are sweating because so many people who pissed away their covid monopoly money as a down payment will be defaulting within the year and they need to force more people into them.

Not to mention the second seat is usually higher raising the center of gravity. I was on a big ride once and the only accident was a 2-up atv rolling. I also agree that 2 on a single atv is a slow speed activity and usually related to transportation from point a to b.

Snap wrote:

$260 fine.

A law that pretends to protect you from yourself is no law. It’s revenue for the armed thugs that enforce it.

I don’t agree that the enforcement officers are armed thugs. Most of them deserve to be respected. JMO

My biggest complaint is that when ice fishing and pulling out all of your gear, nobody is going fast anyway. Maybe put a speed limit on ATVs if you are riding 2 up? Law enforcement has radar guns already.

bigstorm wrote:

My biggest complaint is that when <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>ice fishing and pulling out all of your gear, nobody is going fast anyway. Maybe put a speed limit on ATVs if you are riding 2 up? Law enforcement has radar guns already.

I wouldn’t worry about it. The chances of it being an issue slow rolling out to ice fish is practically nill. Your passenger could always sit on the ice house your pulling out too.

KPE wrote:

That’s really irritating, glad you posted it though. I’d likely get a ticket riding around town with my wife on the throne I installed for her on the back of the brute force. Foot rests and everything, it’s actually very comfy.

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Snap wrote:</div>

$260 fine.

A law that pretends to protect you from yourself is no law. It’s revenue for the armed thugs that enforce it.

I couldn’t agree with this more. Anyone who ever goes 2-up knows damn well it’s a low speed activity. I fail to see how a factory mounted 2-up seat will somehow be “safer” when riding 2-up is inherently less stable. Maybe these side by side manufacturers are sweating because so many people who pissed away their covid monopoly money as a down payment will be defaulting within the year and they need to force more people into them.

im pretty sure this is mostly geared towards younger drivers and riders. every year you see a few deaths on the news from kids driving with a passenger and rolling over so i can understand the new law.

mxskeeter wrote:

I don’t agree that the enforcement officers are armed thugs. Most of them deserve to be respected. JMO

A guy straps up, confronts you while you’re minding your own business, tells you that you now owe him $260 with an implied threat that if you don’t pay you’re going to get thrown in a cage, assaulted, or killed. This is no one that deserves any sort of respect.

He’s an armed thug wearing a shiny piece of metal on his chest.

Snap, You are way out of line and an embarrassment to most outdoors people. None of what you say is anywhere near the truth. Most likely you’re the typical law breaker that does as he pleases and damn everyone else.

People can disagree with the law, even dont follow it if they dont want to, but dont complain if you end up with a ticket. The warden isnt the one making the law, he is the one that has to enforce it. Even if some wardens will give a written warning on a first offence, they will likely check you for other violations and depending upon how you treat them, they may check for anything and everything

A warden will see more than 1 rider on an ATV from miles away on the ice, its just an invitation for them to come over and check you

luckydave wrote:

Snap, You are way out of line and an embarrassment to most outdoors people. None of what you say is anywhere near the truth. Most likely you’re the typical law breaker that does as he pleases and damn everyone else.

Agree with you luckydave 1000%

Buffalo Fishhead

I see snaps point. I commit a lot of victimless crimes and there’s not a one of you out there that doesn’t. I am my fathers son. A Patriot with a little bit of rebel mixed in. But respect for all unless they prove otherwise.

bigstorm wrote:

The warden isnt the one making the law, he is the one that has to enforce it.

I struggle to understand this point of view. Because he’s getting paid that somehow makes him not responsible for his own actions? Does he not have his own free will? Does he not have his own brain?

People don’t seem to understand the difference between moral and lawful. The two have almost nothing to do with one another. A quick review of history might tell you that the mindless order follower is responsible for the most egregious atrocities known to man. It use to be illegal for black people to sit in the front of the bus. The people who “just followed orders” and enforced those laws were mindless thugs. Don’t be mindless. Use your own brain. Think for yourself. Do what’s right, not what’s legal.

Snap wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>bigstorm wrote:</div>
The warden isnt the one making the law, he is the one that has to enforce it.

I struggle to understand this point of view. Because he’s getting paid that somehow makes him not responsible for his own actions? Does he not have his own free will? Does he not have his own brain?

People don’t seem to understand the difference between moral and lawful. The two have almost nothing to do with one another. A quick review of history might tell you that the mindless order follower is responsible for the most egregious atrocities known to man. It use to be illegal for black people to sit in the front of the bus. The people who “just followed orders” and enforced those laws were mindless thugs. Don’t be mindless. Use your own brain. Think for yourself. Do what’s right, not what’s legal.

I brought the subject up for people to be aware, not to debate the new law. I generally dont share my opinion for this very reason or to be referred to as “mindless”. Good luck arguing any tickets you get in the future