Snorkel ban Minnesota / stop senator Frederickson's Bill SF2793

  • Thread starter Willem-Jan Markerink
  • Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
W

Willem-Jan Markerink

Guest
[posted and mailed]

For all offroad friends, in particular Minnesotans, time for you to stand up
for your rights.
Speak up now, or be silent on this topic forever.


And while it might seem to affect only Minnesota, please realize that this
could set a nasty precedent for other US-states.


Complete background story, first posted 20 march 2004, been running on
several (Land Cruiser related) mailinglists since:

http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/snorkel-ban_Minnesota_SF2793.txt


Below first the final plea, from Alex Woodmansee, the lady who has spend tons
of hours fighting this bill the polite way, to contact the senator who
created this lunacrous proposition:
(note that the last reactions from his office imply that the senator has NO
interest in changing the current wording at all (despite what he told before,
the bastard!), so the polite game has ended; not only contact his office by
all possible means, but Minnesotans should their own Minnesota senator, to
oppose this bill as strongly as possible)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
Subject: [DTLC] snorkel ban help
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:19:12 -0600

all right, i am starting to get scared now, i am begging everyone, i
don't care where you are, to e-mail Senator Frederickson

[email protected]

or call and leave a voice mail (651) 296-8138

and ask that he do a line item delete on his snorkel ban language in SF
2793

thanks
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




Last & most important message, falsifying the idea that it would affect only
non-road-legal ATV's:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: [80_usa] (Fwd) snorkel ban help / Minnesota
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 11:47:32 -0600

okay, here's the whole deal

http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us

senate file 2793 chief author frederickson in subdivision 1 section c
reads

"A person may not operate an off-highway vehicle off-road on public land
or public waters with an air intake pipe that is more than six inches
above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe"

in MN an off highway vehicle is defined as an ATV (all terrain vehicle
i.e. a three or four wheeler like a Honda Foreman, etc.), an OHM
(off-highway motorcycle), and an ORV (off-road vehicle) which is what a
land cruiser would fall under.

now, the definition of an ORV is a vehicle licensed under MN statute blah
blah blah (which means a vehicle that is highway licensed) that is then
taken off road. so, if there were a toyota corolla that wanted to go on a
"trail" (NOT a forest road) in a state forest say to go berry picking
(yes, in MN this is a reality), that corolla then becomes an ORV.

highway licensed vehicles are NOT exempt from this snorkel ban.

the proposed ban makes it illegal to operate an ATV, OHM, or ORV with a
snorkel while off road on state lands, not just state forests, but any
state lands. there are exemptions for those doing utility, logging, or
farm work and such.

so, i can keep my snorkels on my trucks and be fine as long as i am never
off road on any state lands with them. otherwise, to be in compliance
while off road on state lands, i would have to remove my safari snorkel
from my truck. ya, right, like i can do that.

my three diesel cruisers are daily drivers for me. i put snorkels on for
all the well known on road reasons. and keep in mind water and wetland
crossings are already illegal here! but my trucks are also my trail rigs
and do see trail time anywhere from 5% to 15% of the time. this law would
force me to forgo a furture or undo a current modification that is really
designed and used for on road purposes only on trucks are on road the
majority of the time. most of the trucks in MN that have snorkels are
also mostly road denizens (land rovers). the only trucks that are truly
off road only trailer queens are some of the suzukis with the RPMs club.
so this law is really the biggest punishment to people who have highway
licensed vehicles with snorkels on them for the obvious smart on road
reasons who wish to take those particular trucks off road from time to
time on MN state lands.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


And NO, this is NOT a late April Fool's joke.


--
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand

<[email protected]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
 
Minnesota has too many rules/regs,......quit winning and MOVE out west
and this Zuker aint got NO trailer Queens

The Dirt Weasel
"JEEP..........It's whats fer' Dinner"

 
[email protected] (PR) wrote in news:16679-406F4DA2-102@storefull-
3316.bay.webtv.net:

> Minnesota has too many rules/regs,......quit winning and MOVE out west
> and this Zuker aint got NO trailer Queens
>
> The Dirt Weasel
> "JEEP..........It's whats fer' Dinner"
>


You better fight this bill, wherever you are, because once passed, it sets a
very nasty precedent for all other US-states....



--
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand

<[email protected]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
 
Bra'......here in Az. we don,t even do Hitler's Brainchild "day-lite
savings time".......I drive around in a truck that has more Tubing on it
than truck......tires that stick out 7" from the body......no mud
flaps.......no doors......no bumpers......4 loaded firearms in it at all
times ....another on my hip.....oh yea' and a SNORKEL!!!!......and it's
100% STREET/OFFROAD LEGAL!!!!.......here in Az. a QUAD is able to Lic.
as a Motorcycle and dive right down the road........Im not 2 worried
BTW.........I moved here from Mn. 7 years ago...LOL

The Dirt Weasel
"JEEP..........It's whats fer' Dinner"

 
On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 13:02:46 -0700 (MST), PR wrote:

>Bra'......here in Az. we don,t even do Hitler's Brainchild "day-lite
>savings time".......I drive around in a truck that has more Tubing on it
>than truck......tires that stick out 7" from the body......no mud
>flaps.......no doors......no bumpers......4 loaded firearms in it at all
>times ....another on my hip.....oh yea' and a SNORKEL!!!!......and it's
>100% STREET/OFFROAD LEGAL!!!!.......here in Az. a QUAD is able to Lic.
>as a Motorcycle and dive right down the road........Im not 2 worried
>BTW.........I moved here from Mn. 7 years ago...LOL


Herein Aus we can drop a Chevy big block onto a land yacht chassis and
register it as street legal. You can mount a 20mm cannon on to it
provided you sign a statement promising to use it for SPORTING
purposes only - no blowing up the obnoxious neighbour's Porsche now
y'hear?
We're also allowed to drive on the left side of the road.

--
GW De Lacey... now that's what I call freedom.
 
Down Under .........Free? Not!!
What if your tire's stick out past the body work?
What if ya' wanna take the doors off yer' rig?
What if ya' wanna run around with NO hood?
What if ya' wanna carry a fully-loaded AK-47 with a 30 round clip ?
What if ya' wanna OWN a coupla' guns?
ALL LEGAL here in Az,USA!!!
Sounds 2 me like a country full a Englands Bad lil'
kids.........Subjects I beive they call ya'
Me I'm a Citizen and an armed one at that!!!
Wanna know freedom Kick Englands ASS & send them home...... then yer'
FREE!!

The Dirt Weasel
"JEEP..........It's whats fer' Dinner"

 
[email protected] (PR) wrote in news:20240-40816321-4@storefull-
3318.bay.webtv.net:

> Down Under .........Free? Not!!
> What if your tire's stick out past the body work?
> What if ya' wanna take the doors off yer' rig?
> What if ya' wanna run around with NO hood?
> What if ya' wanna carry a fully-loaded AK-47 with a 30 round clip ?
> What if ya' wanna OWN a coupla' guns?
> ALL LEGAL here in Az,USA!!!
> Sounds 2 me like a country full a Englands Bad lil'
> kids.........Subjects I beive they call ya'
> Me I'm a Citizen and an armed one at that!!!
> Wanna know freedom Kick Englands ASS & send them home...... then yer'
> FREE!!
>
> The Dirt Weasel
> "JEEP..........It's whats fer' Dinner"


But over there, a bare nipple makes men women & children go hiding faster
than when you aim a cannon....;))

Last cute artefact, in case someone missed it: during the visit of an old
sail ship, a class was diverted quickly away from the bow....away from the
lady, with one nude breast....one carved in wood that is....:))

There is something quite odd if you allow your kids to see wounded flesh by
the dozens, but not one inch of naked flesh....:))

--
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand

<[email protected]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
 
"Willem-Jan Markerink" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> [posted and mailed]
>
> For all offroad friends, in particular Minnesotans, time for you to stand

up
> for your rights.
> Speak up now, or be silent on this topic forever.
>
>
> And while it might seem to affect only Minnesota, please realize that

this
> could set a nasty precedent for other US-states.
>
>
> Complete background story, first posted 20 march 2004, been running on
> several (Land Cruiser related) mailinglists since:
>
> http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/snorkel-ban_Minnesota_SF2793.txt
>
>
> Below first the final plea, from Alex Woodmansee, the lady who has spend

tons
> of hours fighting this bill the polite way, to contact the senator who
> created this lunacrous proposition:
> (note that the last reactions from his office imply that the senator has

NO
> interest in changing the current wording at all (despite what he told

before,
> the bastard!), so the polite game has ended; not only contact his office

by
> all possible means, but Minnesotans should their own Minnesota senator,

to
> oppose this bill as strongly as possible)
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
> Subject: [DTLC] snorkel ban help
> Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:19:12 -0600
>
> all right, i am starting to get scared now, i am begging everyone, i
> don't care where you are, to e-mail Senator Frederickson
>
> [email protected]
>
> or call and leave a voice mail (651) 296-8138
>
> and ask that he do a line item delete on his snorkel ban language in SF
> 2793
>
> thanks
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
> Last & most important message, falsifying the idea that it would affect

only
> non-road-legal ATV's:
>
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: [80_usa] (Fwd) snorkel ban help / Minnesota
> Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 11:47:32 -0600
>
> okay, here's the whole deal
>
> http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us
>
> senate file 2793 chief author frederickson in subdivision 1 section c
> reads
>
> "A person may not operate an off-highway vehicle off-road on public land
> or public waters with an air intake pipe that is more than six inches
> above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe"
>
> in MN an off highway vehicle is defined as an ATV (all terrain vehicle
> i.e. a three or four wheeler like a Honda Foreman, etc.), an OHM
> (off-highway motorcycle), and an ORV (off-road vehicle) which is what a
> land cruiser would fall under.
>
> now, the definition of an ORV is a vehicle licensed under MN statute blah
> blah blah (which means a vehicle that is highway licensed) that is then
> taken off road. so, if there were a toyota corolla that wanted to go on

a
> "trail" (NOT a forest road) in a state forest say to go berry picking
> (yes, in MN this is a reality), that corolla then becomes an ORV.
>
> highway licensed vehicles are NOT exempt from this snorkel ban.
>
> the proposed ban makes it illegal to operate an ATV, OHM, or ORV with a
> snorkel while off road on state lands, not just state forests, but any
> state lands. there are exemptions for those doing utility, logging, or
> farm work and such.
>
> so, i can keep my snorkels on my trucks and be fine as long as i am never
> off road on any state lands with them. otherwise, to be in compliance
> while off road on state lands, i would have to remove my safari snorkel
> from my truck. ya, right, like i can do that.
>
> my three diesel cruisers are daily drivers for me. i put snorkels on for
> all the well known on road reasons. and keep in mind water and wetland
> crossings are already illegal here! but my trucks are also my trail rigs
> and do see trail time anywhere from 5% to 15% of the time. this law

would
> force me to forgo a furture or undo a current modification that is really
> designed and used for on road purposes only on trucks are on road the
> majority of the time. most of the trucks in MN that have snorkels are
> also mostly road denizens (land rovers). the only trucks that are truly
> off road only trailer queens are some of the suzukis with the RPMs club.
> so this law is really the biggest punishment to people who have highway
> licensed vehicles with snorkels on them for the obvious smart on road
> reasons who wish to take those particular trucks off road from time to
> time on MN state lands.
> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> And NO, this is NOT a late April Fool's joke.
>
>


Good news!

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx
On 18 May 2004 at 21:32, All American Imports wrote:

> Some good news for a change.
>
> Pushing and pulling here and there has helped a bit.


Reminds me of pigs....;))
(even my own Iron Pig, as that is how its front door operates....:))

> Being a member payed off this time.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Maarten Verschure
>
> Verzonden: dinsdag 18 mei 2004 19:50
> Onderwerp: SEMA Legislative Update: Minnesota Anti-Hobbyist Snorkel Bill
> DIES


Kewl....:))
(in a Dutch newsgroup a few weeks ago, I ended a boring discussion by
stating that I now had better things to do, like interfering with US-
politics, but I gladly share that honor with a fellow Dutchman of
course....;))

Willem
(wishing he had a similar amount of influence on local
politics....;))
Jan


> LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
>
> Anti-Hobbyist Snorkel Bill Dies As Minnesota Legislature Adjourns
>
> Legislation (SF 2793/SF 2831) that would have prohibited
> operation of an off-highway vehicle (OHV) on public land or public
> waters with an air-intake pipe or snorkel that is more than six inches
> above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe died when the
> Minnesota Legislature adjourned. SF 2793 was introduced as a proposal
> for a study on the impact of OHVs on wetlands, but was amended in
> committee to include the proposed ban on snorkel use. We will be on
> alert if and when the bill is introduced again next year!
>
> Congratulations to Those Who Contacted Minnesota State Legislators to
> Oppose this Bill!
>
> SEMA Washington Office
>
> 1317 F Street, N.W., Suite 500
>
> Washington, D.C. 20004-1105
>
> Attention: Steve McDonald
>
> [email protected]




--
Bye,

Willem-Jan Markerink

The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand

<[email protected]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
 
Bill is dead for this session.

Willem-Jan Markerink wrote:
> "Willem-Jan Markerink" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>[posted and mailed]
>>
>>For all offroad friends, in particular Minnesotans, time for you to stand

>
> up
>
>>for your rights.
>>Speak up now, or be silent on this topic forever.
>>
>>
>>And while it might seem to affect only Minnesota, please realize that

>
> this
>
>>could set a nasty precedent for other US-states.
>>
>>
>>Complete background story, first posted 20 march 2004, been running on
>>several (Land Cruiser related) mailinglists since:
>>
>>http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/snorkel-ban_Minnesota_SF2793.txt
>>
>>
>>Below first the final plea, from Alex Woodmansee, the lady who has spend

>
> tons
>
>>of hours fighting this bill the polite way, to contact the senator who
>>created this lunacrous proposition:
>>(note that the last reactions from his office imply that the senator has

>
> NO
>
>>interest in changing the current wording at all (despite what he told

>
> before,
>
>>the bastard!), so the polite game has ended; not only contact his office

>
> by
>
>>all possible means, but Minnesotans should their own Minnesota senator,

>
> to
>
>>oppose this bill as strongly as possible)
>>
>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
>>Subject: [DTLC] snorkel ban help
>>Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:19:12 -0600
>>
>>all right, i am starting to get scared now, i am begging everyone, i
>>don't care where you are, to e-mail Senator Frederickson
>>
>>[email protected]
>>
>>or call and leave a voice mail (651) 296-8138
>>
>>and ask that he do a line item delete on his snorkel ban language in SF
>>2793
>>
>>thanks
>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Last & most important message, falsifying the idea that it would affect

>
> only
>
>>non-road-legal ATV's:
>>
>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
>>Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: [80_usa] (Fwd) snorkel ban help / Minnesota
>>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 11:47:32 -0600
>>
>>okay, here's the whole deal
>>
>>http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us
>>
>>senate file 2793 chief author frederickson in subdivision 1 section c
>>reads
>>
>>"A person may not operate an off-highway vehicle off-road on public land
>>or public waters with an air intake pipe that is more than six inches
>>above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe"
>>
>>in MN an off highway vehicle is defined as an ATV (all terrain vehicle
>>i.e. a three or four wheeler like a Honda Foreman, etc.), an OHM
>>(off-highway motorcycle), and an ORV (off-road vehicle) which is what a
>>land cruiser would fall under.
>>
>>now, the definition of an ORV is a vehicle licensed under MN statute blah
>>blah blah (which means a vehicle that is highway licensed) that is then
>>taken off road. so, if there were a toyota corolla that wanted to go on

>
> a
>
>>"trail" (NOT a forest road) in a state forest say to go berry picking
>>(yes, in MN this is a reality), that corolla then becomes an ORV.
>>
>>highway licensed vehicles are NOT exempt from this snorkel ban.
>>
>>the proposed ban makes it illegal to operate an ATV, OHM, or ORV with a
>>snorkel while off road on state lands, not just state forests, but any
>>state lands. there are exemptions for those doing utility, logging, or
>>farm work and such.
>>
>>so, i can keep my snorkels on my trucks and be fine as long as i am never
>>off road on any state lands with them. otherwise, to be in compliance
>>while off road on state lands, i would have to remove my safari snorkel
>>from my truck. ya, right, like i can do that.
>>
>>my three diesel cruisers are daily drivers for me. i put snorkels on for
>>all the well known on road reasons. and keep in mind water and wetland
>>crossings are already illegal here! but my trucks are also my trail rigs
>>and do see trail time anywhere from 5% to 15% of the time. this law

>
> would
>
>>force me to forgo a furture or undo a current modification that is really
>>designed and used for on road purposes only on trucks are on road the
>>majority of the time. most of the trucks in MN that have snorkels are
>>also mostly road denizens (land rovers). the only trucks that are truly
>>off road only trailer queens are some of the suzukis with the RPMs club.
>>so this law is really the biggest punishment to people who have highway
>>licensed vehicles with snorkels on them for the obvious smart on road
>>reasons who wish to take those particular trucks off road from time to
>>time on MN state lands.
>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>And NO, this is NOT a late April Fool's joke.
>>
>>

>
>
> Good news!
>
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx
> On 18 May 2004 at 21:32, All American Imports wrote:
>
>
>> Some good news for a change.
>>
>>Pushing and pulling here and there has helped a bit.

>
>
> Reminds me of pigs....;))
> (even my own Iron Pig, as that is how its front door operates....:))
>
>
>>Being a member payed off this time.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>
>> Maarten Verschure
>>
>> Verzonden: dinsdag 18 mei 2004 19:50
>>Onderwerp: SEMA Legislative Update: Minnesota Anti-Hobbyist Snorkel Bill
>>DIES

>
>
> Kewl....:))
> (in a Dutch newsgroup a few weeks ago, I ended a boring discussion by
> stating that I now had better things to do, like interfering with US-
> politics, but I gladly share that honor with a fellow Dutchman of
> course....;))
>
> Willem
> (wishing he had a similar amount of influence on local
> politics....;))
> Jan
>
>
>
>>LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
>>
>>Anti-Hobbyist Snorkel Bill Dies As Minnesota Legislature Adjourns
>>
>> Legislation (SF 2793/SF 2831) that would have prohibited
>>operation of an off-highway vehicle (OHV) on public land or public
>>waters with an air-intake pipe or snorkel that is more than six inches
>>above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe died when the
>>Minnesota Legislature adjourned. SF 2793 was introduced as a proposal
>>for a study on the impact of OHVs on wetlands, but was amended in
>>committee to include the proposed ban on snorkel use. We will be on
>>alert if and when the bill is introduced again next year!
>>
>>Congratulations to Those Who Contacted Minnesota State Legislators to
>>Oppose this Bill!
>>
>> SEMA Washington Office
>>
>> 1317 F Street, N.W., Suite 500
>>
>> Washington, D.C. 20004-1105
>>
>> Attention: Steve McDonald
>>
>> [email protected]

>
>
>
>

 
Yeah the MN legislator didn't really get anything passed this session.

"Roy J" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bill is dead for this session.
>
> Willem-Jan Markerink wrote:
>> "Willem-Jan Markerink" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>
>>>[posted and mailed]
>>>
>>>For all offroad friends, in particular Minnesotans, time for you to stand

>>
>> up
>>>for your rights.
>>>Speak up now, or be silent on this topic forever.
>>>
>>>
>>>And while it might seem to affect only Minnesota, please realize that

>>
>> this
>>>could set a nasty precedent for other US-states.
>>>
>>>
>>>Complete background story, first posted 20 march 2004, been running on
>>>several (Land Cruiser related) mailinglists since:
>>>
>>>http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/snorkel-ban_Minnesota_SF2793.txt
>>>
>>>
>>>Below first the final plea, from Alex Woodmansee, the lady who has spend

>>
>> tons
>>>of hours fighting this bill the polite way, to contact the senator who
>>>created this lunacrous proposition:
>>>(note that the last reactions from his office imply that the senator has

>>
>> NO
>>>interest in changing the current wording at all (despite what he told

>>
>> before,
>>>the bastard!), so the polite game has ended; not only contact his office

>>
>> by
>>>all possible means, but Minnesotans should their own Minnesota senator,

>>
>> to
>>>oppose this bill as strongly as possible)
>>>
>>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
>>>Subject: [DTLC] snorkel ban help
>>>Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 08:19:12 -0600
>>>
>>>all right, i am starting to get scared now, i am begging everyone, i
>>>don't care where you are, to e-mail Senator Frederickson
>>>[email protected]
>>>or call and leave a voice mail (651) 296-8138
>>>
>>>and ask that he do a line item delete on his snorkel ban language in SF
>>>2793
>>>
>>>thanks
>>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Last & most important message, falsifying the idea that it would affect

>>
>> only
>>>non-road-legal ATV's:
>>>
>>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>From: "woodmansee" <[email protected]>
>>>Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: [80_usa] (Fwd) snorkel ban help / Minnesota
>>>Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 11:47:32 -0600
>>>
>>>okay, here's the whole deal
>>>
>>>http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us
>>>
>>>senate file 2793 chief author frederickson in subdivision 1 section c
>>>reads
>>>"A person may not operate an off-highway vehicle off-road on public land
>>>or public waters with an air intake pipe that is more than six inches
>>>above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe"
>>>
>>>in MN an off highway vehicle is defined as an ATV (all terrain vehicle
>>>i.e. a three or four wheeler like a Honda Foreman, etc.), an OHM
>>>(off-highway motorcycle), and an ORV (off-road vehicle) which is what a
>>>land cruiser would fall under.
>>>
>>>now, the definition of an ORV is a vehicle licensed under MN statute blah
>>>blah blah (which means a vehicle that is highway licensed) that is then
>>>taken off road. so, if there were a toyota corolla that wanted to go on

>>
>> a
>>
>>>"trail" (NOT a forest road) in a state forest say to go berry picking
>>>(yes, in MN this is a reality), that corolla then becomes an ORV.
>>>
>>>highway licensed vehicles are NOT exempt from this snorkel ban.
>>>
>>>the proposed ban makes it illegal to operate an ATV, OHM, or ORV with a
>>>snorkel while off road on state lands, not just state forests, but any
>>>state lands. there are exemptions for those doing utility, logging, or
>>>farm work and such.
>>>
>>>so, i can keep my snorkels on my trucks and be fine as long as i am never
>>>off road on any state lands with them. otherwise, to be in compliance
>>>while off road on state lands, i would have to remove my safari snorkel
>>>from my truck. ya, right, like i can do that.
>>>
>>>my three diesel cruisers are daily drivers for me. i put snorkels on for
>>>all the well known on road reasons. and keep in mind water and wetland
>>>crossings are already illegal here! but my trucks are also my trail rigs
>>>and do see trail time anywhere from 5% to 15% of the time. this law

>>
>> would
>>
>>>force me to forgo a furture or undo a current modification that is really
>>>designed and used for on road purposes only on trucks are on road the
>>>majority of the time. most of the trucks in MN that have snorkels are
>>>also mostly road denizens (land rovers). the only trucks that are truly
>>>off road only trailer queens are some of the suzukis with the RPMs club.
>>>so this law is really the biggest punishment to people who have highway
>>>licensed vehicles with snorkels on them for the obvious smart on road
>>>reasons who wish to take those particular trucks off road from time to
>>>time on MN state lands.
>>>xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>
>>>And NO, this is NOT a late April Fool's joke.
>>>
>>>

>>
>>
>> Good news!
>>
>> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxx
>> On 18 May 2004 at 21:32, All American Imports wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Some good news for a change.
>>>
>>>Pushing and pulling here and there has helped a bit.

>>
>>
>> Reminds me of pigs....;))
>> (even my own Iron Pig, as that is how its front door operates....:))
>>
>>
>>>Being a member payed off this time.
>>>
>>>Best regards,
>>>
>>> Maarten Verschure
>>>
>>> Verzonden: dinsdag 18 mei 2004 19:50
>>>Onderwerp: SEMA Legislative Update: Minnesota Anti-Hobbyist Snorkel Bill
>>>DIES

>>
>>
>> Kewl....:))
>> (in a Dutch newsgroup a few weeks ago, I ended a boring discussion by
>> stating that I now had better things to do, like interfering with US-
>> politics, but I gladly share that honor with a fellow Dutchman of
>> course....;))
>>
>> Willem
>> (wishing he had a similar amount of influence on local
>> politics....;))
>> Jan
>>
>>
>>
>>>LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
>>>
>>>Anti-Hobbyist Snorkel Bill Dies As Minnesota Legislature Adjourns
>>>
>>> Legislation (SF 2793/SF 2831) that would have prohibited
>>>operation of an off-highway vehicle (OHV) on public land or public
>>>waters with an air-intake pipe or snorkel that is more than six inches
>>>above the manufacturer's original air-intake pipe died when the
>>>Minnesota Legislature adjourned. SF 2793 was introduced as a proposal
>>>for a study on the impact of OHVs on wetlands, but was amended in
>>>committee to include the proposed ban on snorkel use. We will be on
>>>alert if and when the bill is introduced again next year!
>>>Congratulations to Those Who Contacted Minnesota State Legislators to
>>>Oppose this Bill!
>>>
>>> SEMA Washington Office
>>>
>>> 1317 F Street, N.W., Suite 500
>>>
>>> Washington, D.C. 20004-1105
>>>
>>> Attention: Steve McDonald
>>>
>>> [email protected]

>>
>>
>>


 
Back
Top