Tickets for having 4 seater Rhino's and Rangers???

Technical Discussion Forum

Moderator: Sitewide Forum Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
GYTR660
1st Gear Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 11:38 am
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: San Diego

Tickets for having 4 seater Rhino's and Rangers???

Post by GYTR660 » Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:22 pm

I have only heard hear say, but is it true??? Is there citations going around for 4 seaters? :?: :?: :?:

NSDuner
4th Gear Member
4th Gear Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2003 8:26 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5

Post by NSDuner » Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:44 am

Please say it aint so! :shock:

I finally find a toy I absolutely love...and its illegal?
Debbie DeRenard
ASA Volunteer/Member
2009 Jerry R. Seaver Award

User avatar
Woodglue
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6312
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:37 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Riverside Co, Ca.

Post by Woodglue » Tue Sep 12, 2006 11:01 am

BLM commented on this in the ASA Board meeting a few weeks ago. In fact, they made a ruling on it.
IIRC, in the ISDRA only [BLM / ICSO did not confirm if it was other areas too], you can have 4 seats, as long as the rear seats are bolted to structure and have safty belts which are also bolted to structure.

Can some one else ring in if I'm wrong, or maybe LoBuck can get it in writting from the BLM?
My Avatar is BLM's DRAMP Proposed OHV Access under Alt #3.
Purple = Closed
Green = Open
IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT?
More here

User avatar
Sloppyduner
CA Event Committee Chair
CA Event Committee Chair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 11:17 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: continually being flung around the Sun

Post by Sloppyduner » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:16 pm

Thats about it Wood. Bolted down and belted.
Image

Image

Image
....and at the end of that light there is another tunnel

Voice
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:56 am

Post by Voice » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:20 pm

While that is indeed what was said by Neil Hamada at the ASA meeting, I was unable to get him to quote codes.
A previous BLM ruling stated that no, you could not place extra seats in the bed of an OHV and legally carry more passengers than the vehicle was originally designed for.

What we are left with is the verbal assurance that the BLM will not ticket you for this but no way to actually read and understand the law reguarding this issue.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in a letter to President Elect Barak Obama
"May God Almighty ... bless the leaders of societies with the courage to learn from the mistakes of predecessors,"
"I hope that you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy."

Image

User avatar
Sloppyduner
CA Event Committee Chair
CA Event Committee Chair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 11:17 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: continually being flung around the Sun

Post by Sloppyduner » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:30 pm

At the Ontario show every Rhino booth had bolt on rear seats for sale. Does that mean ALL the seats they sold are worthless? I hope not. They were getting a pretty penny for them.

Do they offer a 4 seat Rhino? If it's cheaper to "add" the seat your self wouldn't it still be "factory add on" The only difference is you did it yourself. And if I remember right the code basically says what ever the factory occupancy states is good enough. :?
Image

Image

Image
....and at the end of that light there is another tunnel

User avatar
LoBuck
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6786
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 12:48 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Yuma, AZ
Contact:

Post by LoBuck » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:32 pm

I am hearing the same thing, that the BLM/ICSO are saying that as long as it is safely built, they are OK with it. With that said, Rhino and Rangers owners should probably be ready to be checked by LEO's but shouldn't have to worry much about a citation provided the seats and belts are there.

This IS NOT legal advice and should not be taken as such.

Nothing in writing from BLM/ICSO on any exceptions. I would urge you to contact the BLM using the Ask a BLM LE Ranger link for an offical answer.
Glenn Montgomery - KE7BTP
'79 CJ5
http://www.YumaDuners.com - LoBuck's Web Page
DAC ISDRA Sub Group Member - AZ OHV Rep BLM ISDRA DSG webpage

User avatar
Woodglue
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6312
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:37 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Riverside Co, Ca.

Post by Woodglue » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:55 pm

LoBuck wrote:I would urge you to contact the BLM using the Ask a BLM LE Ranger link for an offical answer.
On that site, I found:
Last year, while riding around in a Polaris Ranger with mounted seats and seatbelts in the bed I was both stopped and criticized, though not ticketed, and ignored by Rangers. Am I legal or not?
A Polaris Ranger is classified as an OHV and designed to carry up to three passengers in the passenger compartment (the front bench seat) only. In addition it was not to be operated on any street or highway. Polaris was very adamant about this. Passengers cannot ride in the rear of this type of vehicle under any circumstances, and the vehicle must be registered as an OHV.
This may help some... with a Polaris.
My Avatar is BLM's DRAMP Proposed OHV Access under Alt #3.
Purple = Closed
Green = Open
IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT?
More here

RichB
6th Gear "Wide Open" Member
6th Gear "Wide Open" Member
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 6:32 am
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Lost Wages

Post by RichB » Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:55 pm

This could be a major can of worms. What's the difference between someone adding some seating to their rhino (especially store purchased ones) and someone adding seats to their buggy? I've seen plenty of buggies/trucks/buses out and about that had "customed" seating.
ASA Member

User avatar
LoBuck
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6786
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 12:48 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Yuma, AZ
Contact:

Post by LoBuck » Tue Sep 12, 2006 5:10 pm

The difference between buggies, trucks, Rhinos/Rangers and other ATVs is the manufacturing process. Buggies are normally considered to be "one-off" builds rather than manufactured.

The key to this rule is that seats are not to be placed in a location in the vehicle that the manufacturer did not design it for.

The leeway we're beginning to see with Rhinos/Rangers/Golf Carts regarding this rule has to do with the "one-off" build processes. I believe the BLM & ICSO are seeing the modifications made to these OHVs can be done safely and effectively.

Here is the question & answer on the Ask a BLM LE Ranger web page that deals with this rule.
Can we get an official clarification on this new rule:
RIDING IN PICKUP BEDS AND OTHER UNSAFE ACTIVITIES. No person shall ride in the bed of a pick up truck or any part of a motor vehicle not designed for passengers on or off road.
What is "designed for passengers"? Does that mean that it needs to be a seat? Does the seat require seatbelts? Does it have to be factory installed?
And, what kind of education will be given to the imported Law Enforcement Officers this year concerning this rule?


This means that the area that the passenger(s) are occupying needs to be designed for passengers, some pickups can have seats mounted in the rear, but it must be according to factory specs for that vehicle, and seatbelts are required. The phrase "May not ride anywhere not designed for passengers" is for those people who would put seats on the roof of their car or in the trunk, etc.

We will try to better educate our visiting Ranger staff as to avoid any further problems
Glenn Montgomery - KE7BTP
'79 CJ5
http://www.YumaDuners.com - LoBuck's Web Page
DAC ISDRA Sub Group Member - AZ OHV Rep BLM ISDRA DSG webpage

Voice
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:56 am

Post by Voice » Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:21 pm

Can of worms, indeed...

A bit of history...
The quote above from "Ask a BLM Ranger" was in response to me sending an email question in to the program several years ago.

One is to assume that this was based on the "No riding in backs of pickups" rule... But it is not farfetched to think this is based on the "No double riders" on Quads, rule.

Then, along came Rhinos with seats in the back. Clearly it is against the rules but I think that due to shere numbers, the BLM was forced to "let this one go."

Neil asked a CHP officer and was told that it was legal IF there was a roll cage and seatbelts.

The problem is... Where is this "roll cage and seatbelt" rule so that we can find out the requirements for these roll cages and seatbelts.
Niel said that the belts had to be DOT approved. I'm sure he didn't mean this. SURELY, race belts (which are not DOT approved for many reasons, as I understand) are a better way to go.
Bottom line is that we need to know where this code is WRITTEN so we can adhere to the law properly and not have to rely on word of mouth.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in a letter to President Elect Barak Obama
"May God Almighty ... bless the leaders of societies with the courage to learn from the mistakes of predecessors,"
"I hope that you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy."

Image

User avatar
Sloppyduner
CA Event Committee Chair
CA Event Committee Chair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 11:17 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: continually being flung around the Sun

Post by Sloppyduner » Tue Sep 12, 2006 7:33 pm

Voice wrote: Bottom line is that we need to know where this code is WRITTEN so we can adhere to the law properly and not have to rely on word of mouth.
So your saying IF it's in writing people should adhere to it? And if they don't adhere to the rules that are in writing what do you think should happen? A fine? A slap on the wrist? And should the rules be different for in camps, flats, and Vendors areas as opposed to out in the dunes?

And what should we do about people already breaking LAWS?
Image

Image

Image
....and at the end of that light there is another tunnel

Voice
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:56 am

Post by Voice » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:25 pm

Don't beat around the bush with me. If you want to imply something then come right out and say it. I don't play Jr. High games.

Niel said that it is NOT against the law to ride in the back of a Rhino provided that the Rhino has Seats and Seatbelts and Roll Cage.
I want to know where this is written so I will know the specifications of those items.

I mean hell, Can I glue a seat cushion into the bed of a Rhino, throw a wooden box over my head and tie myself in with a piece of Hemp rope?

Our laws are not "word of mouth". They have to be written down somewhere.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in a letter to President Elect Barak Obama
"May God Almighty ... bless the leaders of societies with the courage to learn from the mistakes of predecessors,"
"I hope that you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy."

Image

User avatar
Sloppyduner
CA Event Committee Chair
CA Event Committee Chair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 11:17 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: continually being flung around the Sun

Post by Sloppyduner » Wed Sep 13, 2006 1:41 pm

Voice wrote:Don't beat around the bush with me. If you want to imply something then come right out and say it. I don't play Jr. High games.
There have been serious violations made by some in the recent past. Why bother getting clarification if there are already people clearly breaking clearly stated laws? Without beating around the bush. What difference does it make if it's written out?

I've seen all kinds of posts about less rules needed, and argued against laws like pallets, and demo fees for example. My point is why do you want it in writing if your going to disagree with it? And like I said there are already laws regarding golf carts that people on this and Glamis Dunes.com think don't apply to them. So why bother getting clarification if it's going to be ignored anyway. Seems like more never ending ](*,)
Image

Image

Image
....and at the end of that light there is another tunnel

RichB
6th Gear "Wide Open" Member
6th Gear "Wide Open" Member
Posts: 1573
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 6:32 am
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Lost Wages

Post by RichB » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:07 pm

There's a lot of laws out there being broken/ignored. I do think generally we should have codified laws/rules however, there's always room for officer discretion and that's a great thing (with seasoned LEOs). A good example is flags, yeah someone might not have a red whip flag but if they've got a big ole' flag up there on the end of the stick then a good LEO, using discretion, will not even think about ticketing the person as it meets the indended purpose of the law (makes your vehicle visible to others).

Drinking and driving is a current law that applies out there right? What about, open container inside/on a vehicle i.e. sitting in a rhino or buggy drinking? Don't you either have to have a helmet on (bikes/quads) or be seat-belted into other ride-in vehicles out there such as buggies & rhinos?

People disregard those laws/rules all the time, not only do they disregard them but many time they glorify the behavior. Just look at many of the commercial videos, sleazy/shady websites pushing "Glamis" merch, and endless personal photo albums showing a ton of illegal/irresponsible behavior.

The $64,000 question is what (if anything) can be done about it other than trying to educate folks. Even then, a good portion of the non-rule-followers just end up insulting you and your position. It's the new selective morality thing. Doesn't matter what a standard of society is, if I want to do "x" then to hell with everyone else.

I just wish we'd follow the ole' "treat others how you'd like to be treated" rule.
ASA Member

User avatar
Sloppyduner
CA Event Committee Chair
CA Event Committee Chair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 11:17 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: continually being flung around the Sun

Post by Sloppyduner » Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:48 pm

Well said Rich.
Image

Image

Image
....and at the end of that light there is another tunnel

User avatar
jhitesma
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 7791
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2000 9:57 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by jhitesma » Wed Sep 13, 2006 4:37 pm

RichB wrote:There's a lot of laws out there being broken/ignored. I do think generally we should have codified laws/rules however, there's always room for officer discretion and that's a great thing (with seasoned LEOs). A good example is flags, yeah someone might not have a red whip flag but if they've got a big ole' flag up there on the end of the stick then a good LEO, using discretion, will not even think about ticketing the person as it meets the indended purpose of the law (makes your vehicle visible to others).
There are a lot of laws being broken out of ignorance.

And a lot of non-discressionary enforcement due to the "Zero Tolerance" enforcement idealogy.

Which results in a lot of people feeling mistreated as they didn't realize what they were doing was illegal when they get stopped for it. Espically if they see a lot of other people similarly out of compliance NOT getting ticketed.

I've personally witnessed a number of people getting ticketed for flag violations that were pretty petty. And not just by sterotypical parties but by people obviously broken down (front wheel riding shotgun) trying to get back to camp...and people from camp seeing them coming to help them without thinking to grab a flag for the tow vehicle since they weren't even heading to the dunes.

They were out of area LEO's but it was still incredibly uncalled for enforcement at what was already a bad time for some friendly out of state duners whos vacation had just taken a hit with a broken vehicle. It was like pouring salt in their wounds! But the LEO's wouldn't even discuss it just handed out the tickets.

I'm all for whip enforcment but in the spirit of safety which the law is only a good start for IMHO. Minimum height of the whip above ground is senseless and unfair to the variety of vehicles, there are trucks and buggies that can have the whip at eye level and be "legal" - and bikes and quads can have flags under the riders head but still be legal. It needs to be height above vehicle's highest point.

Yet I've seen bikers with whips attached to their helmets, making them far more visible than with an axle mount, ticketed for the whip not being attached to the vehicle. While guys with axle mounts and whips below their shoulders pass since they fit the current law.


Discresion IS important. Unfortunatly it's NOT being used, by choice, due to decisions by the ICSO and BLM.

Drinking and driving is a current law that applies out there right? What about, open container inside/on a vehicle i.e. sitting in a rhino or buggy drinking? Don't you either have to have a helmet on (bikes/quads) or be seat-belted into other ride-in vehicles out there such as buggies & rhinos?
The BLM has had a FAQ about this longer than any other. Even sitting on the tire of a buggy or quad with an open container is open container. Don't have to be strapped in or belted or helmeted or anything.

People disregard those laws/rules all the time, not only do they disregard them but many time they glorify the behavior. Just look at many of the commercial videos, sleazy/shady websites pushing "Glamis" merch, and endless personal photo albums showing a ton of illegal/irresponsible behavior.
There's a difference between flagrant disregard for the laws and ticketing someone for helping tow his friend halfway across dune buggy flats because he forgot to stick a whip on his truck first.

A lot of the stuff in the videos I just don't see anymore, though admittedly we stick mainly to Gordon's now for the shorter drive home. We still drive up to Glamis in the buggies from time to time though. The past year I just saw a lot more "by the book" enforcement that did nothing to improve safet, and in some cases actually put the public more at risk, but did fuffill quotas to justify keeping it in place. Just look at the numbers in the UDG's latest flyer about how much the ICSO gets out of the dunes.

The $64,000 question is what (if anything) can be done about it other than trying to educate folks. Even then, a good portion of the non-rule-followers just end up insulting you and your position. It's the new selective morality thing. Doesn't matter what a standard of society is, if I want to do "x" then to hell with everyone else.

I just wish we'd follow the ole' "treat others how you'd like to be treated" rule.
Education is only possilbe if there is something to be taught. If the rules are word of mouth and unwritten....well it's awfull hard to teach it to someone. When the questions really get pointed the BLM's response is almost always the same (See the answer in my signature).

The problem is the rules referenced by that link...aren't available in any kind of compiled form. You've got to search each one out individually in the federal register. And even looking up the ones the BLM quotes on their rules page is tough since they're not always worded the same in writing as the BLM describes them in their pamphlets and website.


Education is extremely important though - and that's why the rules need to be known. So people CAN be educated.

Right now we have the BLM on their website saying you can't bolt a seat and belts into a side by side and be legal under any circumstances. But in a public meeting saying verbally that it's ok to do it that way on a newer side by side.

Has the BLM changed their mind on this? Do they like modified Rhinos but not Rangers? What about Artic cats or other brands?

When the BLM's own answers about what is legal are in conflict with each other it's hardly nit-picking to be requesting the text of the law that's in question.

Voice
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:56 am

Post by Voice » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:34 pm

All, well said, Jason.

Maybe I should clairify my position. (which shouldn't matter, but oh well)

I do NOT think it should be illegal to ride in the back of a side by side.
I DO think that the special laws for side by sides are inconsistant.

Much like the way the fee system has been patchworked together I think the special laws concerning side by sides has been a jumble of made up stuff which is done without much legal consideration.

There are still inconsistant rules regarding golf carts. Does it need a green sticker if it has a plate? Is it a street vehicle? Is it an OHV? etc...

If left unchecked, the rules concerning side by sides will end up being so screwed up that no one will know what is legal and what is not and we'll end up with inconsistant enforcement, incosistant standards and an inability to educate users as to what is right and what is wrong.

I have seen countless instances of issues that the BLM are simply uninformed about. For example: Them saying that if you are caught in the closure area, regardless of circumstances you are on the hook for massive fines, a blatant untruth.

All I want is some kind of consistant ruling on this issue so I can tell my users what they can and cannot do. Being informed by Niel that it is ok to have seats in the back of a Rhino is good but it's not enough. I need to know what those limitations are, exactly.

There are businesses which are based on modifying these vehicles. This ruling is of upmost importance and far too important to leave to a simple assurance given by the BLM manager. I need the code. I need to know what this rule is based upon. I need to know what it's purpose is.
I've seen all kinds of posts about less rules needed, and argued against laws like pallets, and demo fees for example. My point is why do you want it in writing if your going to disagree with it? And like I said there are already laws regarding golf carts that people on this and Glamis Dunes.com think don't apply to them. So why bother getting clarification if it's going to be ignored anyway. Seems like more never ending
I'm not asking for a new rule here. I'm asking to know what rule this is based on. Is this a California Vehicle Code issue? Is it a simple BLM rule? What is it?
I want it in writing so I can know what I can and cannot do. If the rule says you cannot ride in the back of a Rhino then yes, I will disagree with it. If it says you can then no, I won't disagree with it.
I have no clue what you are talking about golf-cart rules being ignored? As far as I know the rules about golf carts are so ambiguous that they are effectivly non-existant.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in a letter to President Elect Barak Obama
"May God Almighty ... bless the leaders of societies with the courage to learn from the mistakes of predecessors,"
"I hope that you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy."

Image

User avatar
HozayKwarvo
ASA Board of Directors • Vice Chairman
ASA Board of Directors • Vice Chairman
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:53 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Murrieta, CA.

Post by HozayKwarvo » Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:41 pm

Voice wrote:Can of worms, indeed...

Neil asked a CHP officer and was told that it was legal IF there was a roll cage and seatbelts.
IIRC, the fact was that OFF ROAD it was LEGAL to ride in the back of a pickup... even without seats. We have a rule at the ISDRA prohibiting this... but it isn't a state law/vehicle code or anything.

IIRC, the problem wasn't with the interpretation of any state law/vehicle code, it was with the clarity and interpretation of whatever additional ordiance/rule we are subject to at the ISDRA.

I too was at the ASA meeting. I heard basically the same thing... if you have a cage, seat and belts you'll be good to go... no cage/seat/belts and or your hanging out of it with a beer in your hand acting the fool then you can expect to get dealt with.
Brian

User avatar
Woodglue
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6312
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:37 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Riverside Co, Ca.

Post by Woodglue » Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:54 am

HozayKwarvo wrote:... if you have a cage, seat and belts you'll be good to go... no cage/seat/belts and or your hanging out of it with a beer in your hand acting the fool then you can expect to get dealt with.
Hozay, you mean like this? [-X
My Avatar is BLM's DRAMP Proposed OHV Access under Alt #3.
Purple = Closed
Green = Open
IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT?
More here

dunernr
4th Gear Member
4th Gear Member
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 12:46 pm

Post by dunernr » Fri Sep 15, 2006 10:41 am

yikes!

Voice
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:56 am

Post by Voice » Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:26 am

God, sometimes you guys are worse than Danny boy himself...

A little context to that pic, maybe?

Or hell, let's just sidetrack the discussion with this out of context picture that looks bad.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in a letter to President Elect Barak Obama
"May God Almighty ... bless the leaders of societies with the courage to learn from the mistakes of predecessors,"
"I hope that you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy."

Image

User avatar
Woodglue
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6312
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:37 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Riverside Co, Ca.

Post by Woodglue » Sat Sep 16, 2006 2:53 pm

Voice wrote: A little context to that pic, maybe?
You're right. Here's the complete context in which your picture was originally shown on this board.
Voice wrote:Yeah, I was testing the hotlinking capabilities of the new Picasa picture hosting program...

They failed.... :(

Here's the album if you want to see it! :D

http://picasaweb.google.com/PastorVor
:wink:
My Avatar is BLM's DRAMP Proposed OHV Access under Alt #3.
Purple = Closed
Green = Open
IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT?
More here

User avatar
Sloppyduner
CA Event Committee Chair
CA Event Committee Chair
Posts: 4012
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 11:17 pm
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: continually being flung around the Sun

Post by Sloppyduner » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:23 am

Happy to report I had a talk with an ISCO, got the code that pertains to this subject and left it at the Glamis Dunes.com booth.

Turns out the same requirements for putting seats in in the back of a pick up applies to Rhinos.
Basically:
"Seats mounted to steel
DOT, or off road belts or harnesses.
and your good to go"

I gave Slappy the only copy of the code. It's on the back of the card of the Sheriff that recited the code. So I think that would put it in stone. If you have it Brian I will look it up and post it, if you don't have the time. I would also suggest keeping the card in a safe place just in case anybody is going to do this based on this advice.
Image

Image

Image
....and at the end of that light there is another tunnel

Voice
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
7th Gear "No Brakes" Member
Posts: 2599
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:56 am

Post by Voice » Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:32 pm

Ok,
According to Sergeant Edward Preciado of the Imperial County Sheriff department the "code" which is in place concerning the issue of seats in the backs of Rhino's is this one:
23116c of the CVC wrote:(c) Subdivisions (a) and (b) do not apply if the person in the back of the truck is secured with a restraint system. The restraint system shall meet or exceed the federal motor vehicle safety standards published in Sections 571.207, 571.209, and 571.210 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
and further:
Those CFR codes represent the standards for on-highway vehicles for seats and belts. (unfortunantly the CFR is too bloated to actually be able to pull those things up but you can try at this link to read them yourself.

So aparantly that when it comes to side-by-sides, at least in reguards to this issue, they are to be classified as "trucks".

This helps considerably...

But it doesn't really explain why I was told and "Ask a Ranger" said that it was NOT legal to do so...
But I guess that's a different issue altogether.
Mahmoud Ahmedinejad in a letter to President Elect Barak Obama
"May God Almighty ... bless the leaders of societies with the courage to learn from the mistakes of predecessors,"
"I hope that you will be able to take fullest advantage of the opportunity to serve and leave behind a positive legacy."

Image

User avatar
LoBuck
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6786
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 12:48 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Yuma, AZ
Contact:

Post by LoBuck » Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:21 pm

Voice wrote:But it doesn't really explain why I was told and "Ask a Ranger" said that it was NOT legal to do so...
But I guess that's a different issue altogether.
Brian, I think more than anything else, at least from what I'm seeing, is there is a concerted effort by the LEO's (BLM & ICSO) to look at what's being used at the ISDRA in a safe and effective manner and adjusting enforcement accordingly.

Over the past 8 months, I have seen an effective difference in the LEO staff that the TRT has dealt with. Some of the people that I attribute this change to are; Lt. DeMorst, Sgt Preciado, and Sheriff-Elect Ray Loera from the ICSO; and BLM ECFO Acting Chief Ranger Clark Beene and (as always) LE Ranger Ted Jones.
Glenn Montgomery - KE7BTP
'79 CJ5
http://www.YumaDuners.com - LoBuck's Web Page
DAC ISDRA Sub Group Member - AZ OHV Rep BLM ISDRA DSG webpage

User avatar
LoBuck
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6786
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 12:48 am
antispam: NO
Please enter the middle number: 7
Location: Yuma, AZ
Contact:

Post by LoBuck » Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:58 pm

Moved from Wide Open Sand to Rhinos • RTVs • Golf Carts

Sorry for the late move. Realized this was in WOS when clean up other topics. :oops:
Glenn Montgomery - KE7BTP
'79 CJ5
http://www.YumaDuners.com - LoBuck's Web Page
DAC ISDRA Sub Group Member - AZ OHV Rep BLM ISDRA DSG webpage

Post Reply

Return to “Rhinos • RTVs • Golf Carts”