Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Atv Registration Width topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ATV groups and manufacturers ask Senate panel to raise legal width limit from 64 to 72 inches
Summary
The Vermont ATV Sportsman's Association told the Senate Transportation Committee manufacturers are shifting ATV designs wider for stability and safety, and asked the committee to raise the statutory registration width from 64 inches to 72 inches so new machines can be registered.
Tommy O'Connor, executive director of the Vermont ATV Sportsman's Association (VASA), told the Senate Transportation Committee that manufacturers have increased the practical width of many all-terrain vehicles and that state statute should be updated to avoid leaving new machines unregistrable.
"Currently, as the title reads, 64 inches in width is the maximum for the ATV registration for the state of Vermont," O'Connor said. "These 3 primary manufacturers are changing to go between 65 and 72 at the max, and they're labeling 3 reasons. Stability and safety is their primary." (Tommy O'Connor, Vermont ATV Sportsman's Association)
Why it matters: without a statutory change, dealers in Vermont are buying and selling machines that may not meet the state's existing registration width limit, which can produce unregistered and uninsured vehicles that cannot be used legally on authorized trails.
Manufacturer rationale and trail impact
O'Connor said producers — cited in testimony as Can-Am, Polaris and Yamaha — have shifted machine widths to improve stability, distribute weight to reduce trail wear, and improve rider comfort. VASA said its review with manufacturers and a sites visit to Polaris indicated the wider designs reduce tip-over risk and lessen maintenance pressure on trails.
State and trail considerations
O'Connor said he spoke with DMV and Agency of Natural Resources staff; neither agency said the modest width increase would, by itself, require trail widening. VASA stressed it would not support substantially wider designs (machines with 90-inch widths were mentioned as beyond Vermont trail needs) and asked the committee to preserve existing dry-weight limits; O'Connor told lawmakers the dry weight used for registration calculations remains at about 2,500 pounds and the association wants that unchanged.
Process and next steps
Committee members asked DMV whether a statutory maximum is needed at all and noted that if manufacturers continue to change designs, lawmakers will face repeated requests to update the code. DMV had indicated informal support for the modest increase but favored reviewing whether a fixed statutory cap remains the best long‑term approach.
Ending
The committee accepted the association's testimony and asked staff and DMV to follow up with technical language that would allow registration of machines up to the proposed width — while keeping weight and trail-impact protections in place — and to return with a drafting recommendation for statutory change to Title 23, chapter 31.
