define "unfair". ORV's aren't allowed on highways because they don't meet the hundreds of rules that would allow them to do so. What is unfair about a licenced dual sport using OHV facilities (paying a fee for trail maintenance, if required)?
On Sunday, I rode 20 miles from my house to the ORV park, bought a trail pass and rode the charity offroad event, ate a burger and rode home......that's why I have a dual purpose motorcycle. If I couldn't leave the gravel roads, I'd have kept my Versys.
I have backtracked through the posts and believe I have your answer.
The discussion giving rise to the comment you question related to OHVs of which there are many types. With respect to the Florida and Idaho prohibition to allowing FHVs on designated OHV areas a member said, “No, that is a stupid regulation. A vehicle that is capable of both on-road (meets all DOT and licensing requirements) and off-road travel should be allowed to run both on and off road with proper licensing, registering or stickering. I made up stickering.”
My interpretation was that the member inferred opening up the 2.7 million miles of paved and 1.4 million miles of unpaved roadways (U.S. Road Network) to some OHVs….specifically, a vehicle that is capable of both on road and off road travel should be allowed to run both. My response was essentially along the lines of, if 4.1 million miles of paved an unpaved highway is opened up to these certain OHVs that are capable of both road and offroad, such as my Arctic Cat HDX Side-by-Side, then that would be a truly equitable arrangement/exchange...in fact, more than equitable. Heck, just open up the forest roads in State Forests would be great. If you want to change Law over OHV facilities, then change the Law over highway usage. Want something? Give something?
Apparently though, the member wasn't interested in anything other than what he/she wants. The member responded to me that he presumably didn’t care if OHVs were on highways if they met Department of Transportation Guidelines (Highway Usage Law). Since OHVs generally do not meet such guidelines, as my Cat does not, I was left to reinterpret the response that he believed FHVs should be allowed to invade OHV dedicated facilities and…well, **** the OHVs. Yeah! **** ‘em. **** the people that purchased their OHVs under presumptions that facilities would be available and uncrowed by vehicles that don't belong there. **** all the kids, especially the city kids, that can only ride in OHV facilities and learn how to ride in those same facilities. Ehh…**** ‘em. Same selfish attitude as the long, long line of other “non-power” sports interests (e.g. equestrians) in those facilities.
The member never responded. The "sub-discussion" was over.
So on to the question. I’ve been riding motorcycles for 48 years. Between 1977 and 1984 (for 7 years) and 2009 to today (for 10 years) my motorcycles had license plates…i.e. 17 of 48 years. I was in the OHV facilities for the other 31. I have a lot of experience in this space and a lot of frustration. So, in response to the question, "unfair" means selfishly invading the few postage-stamp sized OHV facilities that are left and used mainly by children and families with FHVs, some potentially dangerous, with nothing in return to the “real” OHV owners other that a great big **** you!