Big Pete

Sksman, posted this on FB a couple of weeks ago. This is probably what you saw. Instead of hand signals there is a light system available for snowmobiles from theridelite.com.There are 2 coloured led lights. Yellow- rider approaching. Green- End of group or Rider alone. No more hands off the bars it the turns. And every Yellow light would signal a new group for those cases were a rider is signalling last rider when in fact another group has caught up. Edit: also check www.yamaheater.com for the RAD light. Similar idea but less expensive.

Save The Dates.

Does a groomer count. Here is the list over the last 2 weeks for our 2004 BR180. 1) Electrical short took out all the work lights (down 2 days) 2) frozen fuel filters. (down 1 1/2 days) 3) broken spindle on driver Side walking beam (down 2 days) 4) busted battery causing no start. Down 1 day. this unit has been very reliable for us for many years. Has all the regular maintenance done. Just seems to be a string of almost nuisance repairs. Thankfully they have all been straight forward repairs And hopefully we can put back to back grooming shifts together.

You should report this to the club that looks after that trail or the District Office for investigation

AFAIK the POIs on the map are provided by the club and/or district. Maybe you should let them know.

The OFSC did not change the wording. They did come back and say you (the club and potentially the directors) have been incurring huge risks and potential liability with the agreements you have been signing. If you want to protect yourselves we recommend different liability and indemnity clauses that will limit your exposure to the world of snowmobiling. (Not everybody, all the time). The option to get outside insurance to help offset the exposure was even provided. (Side Note: that insurance is very expensive and is very limited in terms of policy limits). The OFSC can not and will not put its clubs and volunteers at unnecessary risk but they do respect the clubs right to make their own decisions. The club, rightfully so, chose to negotiate more acceptable terms (from their perspective). Those negotiations are on going. And that is where we are today. I will make the same point I made elsewhere. The OFSC does not/can not negotiate land use agreements with landowners. That has always been and will continue to be the clubs domain. They can and do provide guidance to clubs when it comes to liability and indemnity issues but at the end of the day it’s the clubs decision to sign the agreement. I will use this example. You want to buy a house but it has all kinds on conditions attached to the title. You go to your lawyer and they explain the conditions and outline the potential problems and they give you a structure that helps alleviate some/most of the problem. You go back to the seller and they say no. It’s the original deal or no deal. that's exactly were the clubs are today. Hopefully a deal can be reached. If yes, trails can open. If not, it will be no different than if a farmer revokes permission to use their land. The trail(s) will be closed and the process of finding an alternate route will start.

The statements that are made by the gentleman are wrong. And this is big part of the problem. Errors and misinformation are being put out there as fact and it is doing a lot of harm and absolutely no good. First , fact is the OFSChas not changed insurance providers. They have been dealing with the same broker and underwriters for years. Second, there has been no change to the CGL policy coverages for many years. Under the standard landowner agreement every landowner is protected by the OFSC CGL policy for any and all activities related to snowmobiling. Keep in mind that the vast majority of club Land Use Permissions (LUP) are with private landowners. They do not generally have multiple users accessing their property year round. Virtually all the trails in this category are for exclusive use of the snowmobile club. In fact the agreement says that the club can not allow anyone else to use the trail without the written permission of the landowner. Under all the customer agreements I have seen, the landowner is trying to extend the OFSC coverage to cover them for other users regardless of season or activity. Quite frankly, that kind of coverage is either not available or the cost is unmanageable. And on a really basic level why should snowmobilers provide insurance coverage for everybody else. For a club to sign some of these agreements they would be exposing themselves to tremendous liability both corporately and potentially personally. So if anybody wants to step up and put their personal net worth at risk I am sure there are a number of club executives that would hand you the reins immediately. now I also understand the issues from the landowner perspective ( and I am not talking about the private landowner here). They have multiple users on their properties at a given time . Each one represents a potential liability in the event of injury, even despite what the Trespass Act and Occupiers Liability Act say. And even if the bulk of these claims are unsuccessful, the costs to defend are enormous. So how do I as. Land owner shift those costs to someone else? I look to the most organized user group that happens to carry a nice big insurance policy and say if you want access you have to cover us for everything and anything. So now it’s a negotiation to see if there is some middle ground that everybody can live with. If there are new agreements that get signed, trails will open. If a compromise can not be reached the club can not have a trail on land they have no permission to access. Therefore the trail is closed. Hopefully a reroute can be found. now let’s deal with the bs that it’s all a big conspiracy to take permit money and run. As a club/district/provincial volunteer this one hurts the most. I put hundreds of hours in every year helping make sure we have places to ride and enjoy our sport. This whole issue only started to come to light late last spring. So pardon my lazy a$$ if I didn’t spend my whole summer working with lawyers and insurance companies and corporate landowners to come to a resolution. The clubs have always been the ones that arrange land use permission. Trying to do that centrally from Barrie is nonsense. What the OFSC can do is provide guidance and recommendations to club to make sure they are not exposing themselves to significantly risk/liability. And that’s what has happened and will continue to happen. Most clubs go quite for the summer. They restart operations in the fall and there are dozens of things to do with a very limited volunteer work force. Prepping groomers, trail brushing/maintenance, signing, bridge work. If you have ever been a club volunteer you know the work. The list is almost endless. In the fall clubs started to review their non standard land use agreements. That required sending the agreements to the broker/underwriter for review of the liability and indemnity provisions as well as other terms and conditions. If things were good, clubs received the Certificate of Insurance for the land owner. If there were issues (excessive and in some cases unlimited liability) the broker/underwriter provided recommended wording. That now goes back to the landowner (and their legal council and insurance broker) for their consideration. Of course everybody is optimistic that a compromise can be reached. I have heard that some of these agreements have gone back and forth many times. And it all takes time. Some agreements have been resolved. Some are still being negotiated. When negotiations are completed or an impasse is reached, rest assured the clubs will make the appropriate announcements. Until then, keep the rhetoric and misinformation to yourself.

If I recall correctly, the 09-2016 version was an update in response to the Bill 100 blow up. It introduced language clarifying the LUP was not/could not be used to obtain a legal easement. The latest version 2019-05 introduces the "specific to the normal operation of a snowmobile Club" language.I believe the 09 and 05 codes in the version number are the months the documents were published. Common to all versions (including the 2019-05 version) is the Change/Cancellation Clause which requires 60 days written notice of any change or cancellation to the agreement. So until such notice is given the existing agreements remain i full force and effect. The 2016 version also introduced language allowing for a start and end date. The guidance we got at the time was that if you used hard dates ( ie. Commencing Dec 1, 2016 and ending April 15, 2017) would need to obtain a new LUP the following year. As an alternative you could use Commencing December 1 of each year and ending April 15 of each year which would not require a new agreement the next year. So the short answer is that not every Land Owner agreement is renewed every year. And to the best of my knowledge there has been no directive to renew every LUP held (standard or otherwise).

Since you do not have the original permit, you will need to have a police report when filing for the replacement permit. The last time I did this (a couple of seasons ago) I was able to file the report online with OPP. You get an email response with a report number. From there log into your profile, confirm your personal info. The next screen should show your sled and old permit details. Select the Replace option and follow the instructions. If you run into any problems you can send an email to permits@ofsc.on.ca.

Brian, it’s not the technical design issues of a crossing that are problem. Heck those would be easy to solve. Its coming down to liability and indemnity clauses which should not depend on which district is involved. WildBill says they have a great relationship with their regional MTO. Up until this year so did we. Or at least I thought. How can the liability and indemnity clauses be acceptable to both sides in Wild Bills district but not ours. Are they not the same? Is our insurer allowing different clauses in different districts. If yes, why? Why would they not say to us, here are clauses we can live with and are acceptable to MTO in other regions. Somehow, I think different rules are being used in different areas and the only way to bring it to light is with a centralized approach at least on the insurance/liability side.

The directive we are hearing is that any trail that does not have a valid land use agreement can not stay on the ITG. It must be removed. You can not leave it closed status indefinitely.

Go to the District 1 website (www.ucsr.ca) and check the club links. Every club has an active web or FB presence. If you were to attend a club meeting I am sure you can find a bunch of riding partners. and welcome to D-1. Upper Canada Snowmobile Region.

Brian, there is a section of the MSVA (excerpt below) that allows charges to be laid against the registered owner of the machine unless the machine was being used without consent. Could it be that your experienced OPP officer simply did not want to bother chasing the matter. 24. The owner of a motorized snow vehicle may be charged with and convicted of an offence under this Act or the regulations or any municipal by-law regulating, governing or prohibiting the operation of motorized snow vehicles, for which the driver of the motorized snow vehicle is subject to be charged unless, at the time of the offence, the motorized snow vehicle was in the possession of a person other than the owner without the owner’s consent and on conviction the owner is liable to the penalty prescribed for the offence. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.44, s. 24.

Perhaps all those vendors/hotels/restaurants could pick up the phone and call their MPP, the Ministers of Transportation, Tourism and the Premiers Office to voice their concerns. As a sport, we are going to need lots of outside support to resolve the issues.

The ITG which is accessed from a browser (https://ofsc.evtrails.com/#) is updated at least 2 times per week by the District staff. Those update appear almost immediately. If you are access the trail guide from an App on your phone, such as the Go Snowmobiling Ontario app, updates need to be pushed down to the phone when you are connected to a wifi source or use your data privileges. There will be a delay from the time the District updates the ITG and when you see it on your app.

Talk to the Eastern Ontario Snowmobile Club (EOSC) District 1. They have used a tractor on tires (with chains I believe) for years.

Education has a role to play for sure but it will not deal with the segment that simply don’t care. No matter how much you explain the consequences of their actions they won’t change their behaviours because there is no direct impact to them in the moment. to me, you will have to create a significant enough consequence in the moment to effect a change. That means fines (significant fines), impoundment of sleds, suspension of drivers licences and any other significant deterrent you can come up with. If you can have impoundments and suspensions for speeding or for blowing in the warning range, surely we can come up with something in the snowmobile world. enhanced enforcement will come with a cost. Both financial and otherwise. If permit prices go up, so be it. If we lose those riders on the margin that either don’t want to pay or don’t want to comply, so be it. What you have left is a group of riders that respect the rules and that’s something you can work with.

I know the whole liability issue is a hot topic right now. Whether it’s insurance liability on trails or liability as a club/district director or officer, it’s all related. just out of curiosity has there ever been an instance were someone has been held personally liable for fines/settlements as a result of their acting in their capacity for a club or district?

This will be 12 years for me at my club and there is not a job I have not done: director, treasurer, signage, trail work, TP, Groomer operator, fund raiser, permit coordinator (when we handled permits) Have been involved at the district level for 5 years as a board member and committee member, now District Treasurer.. last 2 years am sitting on a provincial committee.. my involvement runs 12 months a year.. i would recommend 2 things. Be aware of “the old boys club” in your club organization. Nothing scares a new volunteer away quicker than feeling not welcome/wanted even if it is unintentional. The othe thing I would recommend to any volunteer is to get involved at your district level or even the provincial level. It brings a whole new perspective to organized snowmobiling and you quickly realize that the world is bigger than just your club.

I agree that grooming hours are not funded until December 1st so the district is funding those hours on their own (reserve funds or part of current year operating budget). I have never heard that groomers are not insured before Dec 1 though. Just checked the groomer insurance certificate and it states a policy period of Nov 1, 2019 through Nov 1, 2020.

Regulation 804 of the MSVA covers the requirements of customer registration numbers. A good graphics shop should be familiar with them but just in case.... (4) A registration number displayed in accordance with clause (1) (b) shall, (a) be painted on, or affixed to, both sides of the cowling with the rear limit of the number being not less than 10 centimetres and not more than 15 centimetres from the rear of the cowling; (b) be in a colour that contrasts with its background; (c) be not less than five centimetres and not more than 7.6 centimetres high; (d) have a stroke width of not less than five millimetres and not more than 13 millimetres; (e) have digits of uniform style and height; and (f) where practicable, have the digits separated by spaces that are not more than five centimetres wide. O. Reg. 145/97, s. 1.

In D1 a few years back CN forced a number of farmers to revoke club access to their private rail crossings. Clubs ended up having to reroute to the nearest public road crossing. I think the logic was that permission for the crossing was granted to the farmer. They could not assign their rights to another user. I would think that anyone that has rail crossing rights to access their own property would be safe. You just can’t let anyone else use it.

MM, just curious. Did you receive the gift card with the confirmation email or are they sending you something separate? on a side note the feedback from one of our dealers is that the Gift Card program is a god send to them as they don’t have customers who are still waiting on Spring orders panicking to get their VIN numbers. Now they are just directing them to the gift card program.

Stop by the Upper Canada Snowmobile Region-District 1 booth and get your “Winter Is For Everyone” lottery ticket. This years prize package is a 2019 SkiDoo Renegade Adrenaline 900 Ace, a 2019 SkiDoo Grand Touring Sport 900 Ace and a 11ft Triton double enclosed trailer. Both sleds come 1 season extended warranty and 2020 Trail Permits. Draw date is Dec 19, 2019. Winner takes all. Proceeds support trail and grooming operations in the region.

Depends on the club and/or district. In our club we have 4 paid operators and 4 volunteer operators. In our district I would estimate it to be 50-60% paid operators. From a H&S perspective the liability is no different for volunteers vs paid employee. All the requirements laid out in the OFSC Groomer Manual apply equally to volunteers and paid employees. Ignoring them puts the district, and its directors, at risk.