Ontario Overland Project

[computeruser]

Great thread, please keep it up. If you'd like to turn your research into an organized journey at some point, I would be very interested in joining in.

 

[Petro]

Not trying to be a jerk, just as an FYI, if you get caught doing what you're doing, you'll get fined for trespassing. All the OFSB trails are their domain until after the May 24 weekend. If you're on them before that with your rig, you can get busted. 2nd point, those bridges which are clearly marked OFSB are their property year round, warm months, cold months, doesn't matter. If you are found on them at any time of the year, you will get ticketed. Thirdly, alot of those trails cross private property. Yes, they're clearly defined trails, but then run across private property where the OFSB has arranged land-use agreements with the property owners for the trail, again, if you're found on those sections, you could get charged.

 

[AlexJet]

My understanding that if the trail passes through the private property it has to be gated or at least signed at the border line. It assumed that if someone driving on crown land on any type of a vehicle following the road doesn't ends to gate or note of private property still remains on crown land and free to access. Am I missing something?

 

[Petro]

Will find out for you, but in either case he cited 2 instances where he came upon a gate, opened it, went through and closed it behind him.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

Can you site the act and/or regulations which back up that which you are saying?

I've done research into this, and it seems much liberty has been taken by snowmobilers into the actual content of the law, in order to make up their own rules as they see fit. For example, I've heard of numerous cases where land owners who allowed OFSC trails on their lands were driving a snowmobile on said trail on their own land without a permit, and were threatened with fines, which is completely non-sensical, and not valid in law.

Here are some facts:

http://www.ofsc.on.ca/Permits/ChangesAct.asp

The Ontario Motorized Snow Vehicles Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER M.44 Section 2.1 dictates that *snowmobiles* (and only snowmobiles) are required to possess a trail permit to drive on a OFSC trail.

No person shall drive a motorized snow vehicle upon a prescribed trail except under the authority of, and in accordance with, a trail permit for the motorized snow vehicle issued under subsection

Ontario Regulation 185/01 Section 3 (2) states that OFSC trail permits are valid until May 31st of each year. This is not the same as saying nobody else can use the trail before that date.

(2) A trail permit is valid until the 31st day of May after the date the permit is issued. O. Reg. 185/01, s. 3 (2).

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_010185_e.htm

Ontario Regulation 185/01 Section 4 also lays out a table providing exceptions to the requirement for a trail permit. It includes Aboriginals, Anglers, Hunters, Prospectors and Trappers.

Many/most of these trails use abandoned rail lines, which are still owned by the railway company, or have been turned over to the Ontario or municipal governments. I have yet to find a concrete example where a section of line has been sold to private citizens. There has already been a court case in PEI where a group of farmers attempted to reclaim abandoned rail lines, and lost. I am trying to find out exactly what the situation is where. For example, it appears the City of Belleville may have purchased the rail line from Corbyville to Madoc Station, which explains the EOTA signs I saw, but which did not exist on other sections. I'm still trying to figure out if Belleville actually passed a law banning trucks, or EOTA took that upon themselves.

http://www.canadianit.netfirms.com/ndatvclub/newsletterfor20041.pdf

Here is an example where a rail line is controlled by a municipality and has very specifically banned truck use:

http://www.kawarthaatv.com/2007-107_Consolidated_Trails_By-law.pdf

There is some element of civil disobedience to this. I don't think it's right for public land to be off-limits to certain activities for no good reason. I should have as much right to be on these public lands as anybody else. Banning road vehicles means that families, and the disabled, do not have access to benefit from what these routes have to offer. That's discrimination. Here's just one example of a guy wanting to ride a golf-cart on the Victoria Rail Trail due to back-problems, but technically is not allowed since a golf-cart is not an ATV. Non-sensical.

http://www.atvtime.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=16813&sid=f02fa6c93de894824e7f125b193afa8f

Will find out for you, but in either case he cited 2 instances where he came upon a gate, opened it, went through and closed it behind him.

So what you're saying is, anybody can put up any gate across any trail, and effectively close that trail?

And lets be ABSOLUTELY clear: That was the E108 OFSC trail, which is also listed as the "River Country Trail" on the EOTA trail map. It was a multi-use trail. It was not not posted to deny access to road vehicles, Private Property, or No Tresspassing. It was an unlocked gate.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

I wonder if I'd get very far with the Ontario Human Rights Commision if I filed a complaint that the EOTA's refusal to allow 4WD vehicles is discrimination based on family status, or the disabled, since it bars these people from enjoying the benefits of this trail system on public land.

 

[Root Moose]

I think you'd only get traction if you or someone in your family was actually disabled.

 

[Petro]

Like I said, I'm not trying to be a jerk, just letting you know what I've heard. This is what the OF4WD had to say after speaking with the Ministry of Natural Resources...


I have recently been in contact with the MNR, Parry Sound District, to clarifiy this issue.

What's True:

The OFSC does have exclusive rights to their trails during the snowmobiling season (ends May 31st). This is through land use permits they hold with the MNR. These land use permits vary somewhat depending on which district we're talking about, however the rule-of-thumb is as above. This means that if you are caught on an OFSC trail during the snowmobiling season, you can be charged with trespassing.

The OFSC does have exclusive rights to their bridges all year. This means that if you are caught driving over one of their bridges in the summer, you can be charged with trespassing.

The OFSC does not have exclusive rights to roads or logging trails, that their trails may cross or use. This also depends on the LUP, but the rule-of-thumb here is that if others have to use it all year round, then the OFSC cannot claim exclusive use. An example of this would be Pine Springs Road in Haliburton, it's an OFSC trail, but it's also an access road for landowners and a fire access road, so it's use is not exclusive.

The OFSC does not have exclusive use of their trails after May 31st. After this date, you cannot be charged with trespassing if you are on an OFSC trail.

For your reference, Northern Lights has posted the Motorized Snow Vehicles Act, The ATV Act, and the Highway Traffic Act under the "Links of Interest" page at www.nl4x4.ca

Please note that the above only applies to OFSC trails on Crown Land, if you are found on any private land, it is the right of the landowner to charge you with trespassing.



I've found the farther north you are, the less people care, so going down a clearly cut trail, after May 24, driving responsibly and treading lightly probably won't piss anyone off enough to care, however I would be extra careful with their bridges, I've heard they are quite protective of them. Early spring is also when they take their ATV's out and inspect the bridges with the snow gone to see if they are in need of any summertime repairs/maintenence. Late spring/summer, you probably have a lower chance of someone seeing you crossing.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

I think you'd only get traction if you or someone in your family was actually disabled.

If I was going for the disabled claim. I'd go in under Family Status.

The Ontario Human Rights Code (“the Code”) upholds the inherent dignity and worth of every person and provides for equal rights and opportunities without discrimination or harassment on the basis of family status in the areas of employment, housing, services, facilities, goods, contracts, and membership in trade and vocational associations. The aim is to create a climate of understanding and mutual respect so that each person feels a part of the community and able to contribute to it.

Individuals can face specific or systemic barriers and discrimination in accessing services and facilities because of their family status. Service providers and vendors must recognize and make provisions for the special needs of caregivers and their relationships. This applies to a variety of sectors such as restaurants, shops, hotels, movie theatres, apartment buildings and schools as well as transit, recreation, social service and other providers.

Pedro:

I have recently been in contact with the MNR, Parry Sound District, to clarifiy this issue.

Are you in the OF4WD? I am/was, have to renew this year.

As far as the MNR is concerned, that is only for Crown Land correct? The rights of Anglers, and Prospectors would trump the rights of the OFSC for use of the trails and bridges on Crown land.

But you have raised a good point about Land Use Permits. That needs to be researched more. That type of thing is pretty hard to find.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p43_e.htm

This seems to be the relevant section, but it is a little bit mind-numbingly complicated. How is a person to determine if a road is a Private Forest Road, Public Forest Road

Definitions

48. In this Part,

“private forest road” means a road occupied under the authority of a document issued under this Act or the regulations; (“chemin forestier privé”)

“public forest road” means a road, other than a private forest road, that is designated by the Minister as a public forest road; (“chemin forestier public”)

“road” means a road or part of a road on public lands and includes the bridges, shoulders, ditches and right-of-way thereof, but does not include the King’s Highway or a secondary highway, a tertiary road, a resource road or an industrial road designated under the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, or a road under the jurisdiction of a statute labour board or a local roads board. (“chemin”) R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 48.



Public right of passage

49. Except as otherwise provided in this Act, any person may exercise a public right of passage on a road other than a private forest road. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 49.

No liability for damages

50. (1) No civil action shall be brought against the Crown or any person in respect of misfeasance, non-feasance or negligence in connection with the construction, maintenance, repair or closing of a road. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 50 (1).

Exception

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to an action based on a contract between the parties to the action for the construction, maintenance or use of a road. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 50 (2).

Public forest roads

51. (1) The Minister may designate a road other than a private forest road as a public forest road. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 51 (1).

Application

(2) Part III (Regulations) of the Legislation Act, 2006 does not apply to a designation made under subsection (1). R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 51 (2); 2006, c. 21, Sched. F, s. 136 (1).

Closure of public forest roads

52. (1) The district manager of the administrative district of the Ministry in which a public forest road is situate may, from time to time in his or her discretion and for such period or periods as he or she may determine, close the public forest road or part thereof to travel by the public generally or by any class or classes of the public or by the public generally with the exception of persons operating any class or classes of vehicles used for hauling forest products or other products designated by the regulations. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 52 (1).

Methods of closure

(2) A closing of a public forest road under subsection (1) may be effected by the erection of signs or barricades. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 52 (2).

Barricades

(3) Where a district manager closes a public forest road or part of a public forest road under subsection (1) by the erection of barricades, he or she shall cause to be erected at each end of the public forest road or part so closed and at each intersection thereof with any other road a barricade upon which a red or flashing amber light visible for a distance of 150 metres shall be exposed and kept burning or operating continuously from sunset until sunrise, and at such ends and intersections shall cause to be erected a notice that the public forest road is closed. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 52 (3).

Permits

(4) Despite the closure of a public forest road, the district manager may grant a permit for travel on the public forest road subject to such terms and conditions as he or she considers advisable. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 52 (4).

Offence

(5) Every person who, without lawful authority, travels on a public forest road that has been closed to travel by the person under subsection (1) and who has had a reasonable opportunity of knowing that the road has been so closed or who removes or defaces any barricade, light or notice erected thereon by lawful authority is guilty of an offence and is also liable to the Crown in right of Ontario for any damage or injury occasioned by such wrongful use, removal or defacement. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 52 (5); 2000, c. 26, Sched. L, s. 9 (9).

Partial closure

53. Where the district manager closes a public forest road to the public generally with the exception of persons operating vehicles used for hauling forest products or other products designated by the regulations, sections 80, 108, 109, 110, 111 and 114 of the Highway Traffic Act do not apply to the public forest road or to vehicles operated on the public forest road, as the case may be. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 53.

Private forest roads

54. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a private forest road is not open to travel by the public. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 54 (1).

Agreements

(2) The Minister may enter into an agreement with a person who occupies a private forest road under the authority of a document issued under this Act or the regulations for opening the private forest road or part thereof to travel by the public generally or by any class or classes of the public as may be agreed upon, and thereupon the private forest road is open to travel by the public generally or by the class or classes of the public agreed upon for such time or times and upon such terms and conditions as are set forth in the agreement, provided that a permit has been issued or validated under the Highway Traffic Act or the regulations made thereunder for any vehicle used in such travel. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.43, s. 54 (2).

 

[R_Lefebvre]

Here's an excellent letter written by another group concerned with the way trails on public lands are handled. The most discouraging part is at the bottom.

http://www.algomawildernessriders.com/content.php?ID=7

The forgoing is a copy of a complaint to the Ontario Ombudsman made in early 2002, It took two years and much work with the case officer assigned to investigate our complaint to arrive at a conclusion. During that two years of delay Bill 101 became law. The final answer from the Ombudsman's office stated that they did not deal with complaints derived from legislation that has been passed.

 

[skysix]

The OFSC does have exclusive rights to their bridges all year. This means that if you are caught driving over one of their bridges in the summer, you can be charged with trespassing.

I can only take this with a grain of salt UNLESS the bridge in question was actually bought or built by the OFSC

And since when does an elected minister actually know the in's and out's of the finer technical points of the law anyway - unless he is a lawyer and has prepared a brief or argued a case on the point...

just sayin...

 

[R_Lefebvre]

I can only take this with a grain of salt UNLESS the bridge in question was actually bought or built by the OFSC

Exactly. Now, I don't know, it's possible what he's saying is correct. Still doesn't make it right. If I walk up to your driveway, and plunk down an OFSC sign on your driveway, can I charge you with tresspassing?

The reality is, the OFSC never built those train bridges. I read somewhere that if the OFSC doesn't want people using the bridges, they must remove them.

Anyway, I found some pretty strong evidence that an Angler's license and fishing rod gives you the right to drive on OFSC trails, even in the winter, if you're going fishing. The MNR will back this up. The same is true for prospecting, but the area has to be open for staking, which not a lot of places are in the south. Also hunting, but only in hunting season. There's a whole host of other activities as well.

I think I need to take up fishing.

 

[Scott Brady]

Nicely done Rob. I look forward to seeing more of your travels on the "Ontario Overland"

 

[Root Moose]

Anyway, I found some pretty strong evidence that an Angler's license and fishing rod gives you the right to drive on OFSC trails, even in the winter, if you're going fishing. The MNR will back this up. The same is true for prospecting, but the area has to be open for staking, which not a lot of places are in the south. Also hunting, but only in hunting season. There's a whole host of other activities as well.

This is one of the reasons why I have a OFAH sticker on my truck (or used to - damn body work). It's not much of a stretch to go fishing anyway... my seven year old wants to put his fishing rod in every puddle he sees.

 

[R_Lefebvre]

Yes, especially with trucks, it makes a lot of sense. If you're on an ATV, you have to demonstrate that you are taking the most direct, and shortest route to your fishing destination. It won't hold water if your truck and trailer are parked 100 miles south of you. But if you're in a street legal vehicle, well then, you got on the trail at the nearest road crossing behind you, and your destination is... that river right there.

Not that I'm suggesting any funny business. I love fishing!

Just need to find out if Angling gives you the right to use rail beds that are municipally owned. I certainly crossed a lot of streams that would be good for fishing.