IDOT to permit transport of hay on interstates

[Lyon Wonder]

Restrictions that ban farmers from transporting hay on interstates in Illinois are lifted for the rest of 2012 until Dec 31.   

http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=10536

SPRINGFIELD — Illinois Transportation Secretary Ann L. Schneider today announced a new policy which allows farmers and other agriculture industry workers to transport hay loads of up to 12 feet in width on all state routes, including interstates. The 2012 summer drought adversely affected the production of hay due to pasture conditions, and this action will significantly improve efficiency in the processing and transportation of hay throughout Illinois. Previously, farmers were permitted to transport hay loads up to 12 feet in width on state roadways, but did not include the use of interstates.

"Coming from a farming community, I understand the severe challenges and unpredictability the weather can have on the overall production demands of the agricultural industry,"  said Secretary Schneider. "This crucial temporary change in policy equips farmers and truck operators with a special opportunity to cut transportation costs and travel times throughout the remaining harvesting season."

A copy of the official authorization must be in possession of the operator as they move hay loads and will need to be available upon request by law enforcement or the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT). In addition, vehicle owners and operators would take responsibility for any damage caused directly or indirectly by the movement. All loads more than 8 feet 6 inches in width, allowed during specific time periods, must display an operable oscillating, rotating, or flashing amber lights. "Oversize load"  signs are mandatory on the front and rear of all vehicles with loads over 10 feet in width.

"The Department of Agriculture appreciates and fully supports efforts such as this to assist our farmers during this prolonged drought and early harvest season,"  Acting Director of Agriculture Bob Flider said.

This authorization is effective immediately and expires December 31, 2012. To access IDOT's official notice or to view additional guidelines of this opportunity, please visit http://www.dot.il.gov/road/overweight.html

[JREwing78]

Interesting that there's apparently a strong safety reason for keeping hay off interstate highways (otherwise, why have such a policy to begin with?), but that the economic conditions dictate temporarily allowing it.

And, it's OK to haul hay on a expressway or non-Interstate freeway at posted speeds, but not an Interstate (which often has the same posted speeds)?

I don't get the purpose of having a temporary change in policy. Either it's safe to do (in which case it should be allowed all the time), or it's not (in which case this is putting highway safety at risk to pander to the farming community).

[hbelkins]

If there is such a prohibition in Kentucky, I am unaware of it. I see trucks hauling hay all the time on all classifications of roads, including interstates.

[kphoger]

So, basically, trucks can be trucks for the rest of the year.  Makes total sense to me.  What was dangerous about hauling hay on the Interstate before, assuming they kept over the 40 mph minimum?

[Brandon]

So, basically, trucks can be trucks for the rest of the year.  Makes total sense to me.  What was dangerous about hauling hay on the Interstate before, assuming they kept over the 40 mph minimum?

45 mph minimum in Illinois.

[NE2]

Perhaps the fact that hay can easily come off, requiring more frequent cleanup?

[kphoger]

45 mph minimum in Illinois.

Really?  Dang, it's been too long.

Perhaps the fact that hay can easily come off, requiring more frequent cleanup?
[img

That's what straps and tarps are for, not prohibitions.

[vdeane]

You still have individual pieces of hay come off.  Bad enough that most trucks pepper my car with debris, but to have some contaminate the pristine road surface with pieces of hay?

[JREwing78]

You still have individual pieces of hay come off.  Bad enough that most trucks pepper my car with debris, but to have some contaminate the pristine road surface with pieces of hay?

You ever been to Illinois?

[Brandon]

You still have individual pieces of hay come off.  Bad enough that most trucks pepper my car with debris, but to have some contaminate the pristine road surface with pieces of hay?

You ever been to Illinois?

The hay and the road surface are the least of your worries with all the FIBs around. 

[NE2]

The hay and the road surface are the least of your worries with all the FIBs around. 

Fucking Illinois... Brandons?

[Alps]

The hay and the road surface are the least of your worries with all the FIBs around. 

Fucking Illinois... Brandons?

Hey, we're trying to cut down on cursing in this forum. The "B" word is right out.

[Special K]

I don't get the purpose of having a temporary change in policy. Either it's safe to do (in which case it should be allowed all the time), or it's not (in which case this is putting highway safety at risk to pander to the farming community).

It's generally not as safe, thus the temporary nature of the policy.  Changes in policy are common in times of emergency.

[agentsteel53]

The hay and the road surface are the least of your worries with all the FIBs around. 

Fucking Illinois... Brandons?

Hey, we're trying to cut down on cursing in this forum. The "B" word is right out.

okay, I'll bite... what's the B word, given the implication that it is so much worse than the F word? 

[kphoger]

You still have individual pieces of hay come off.  Bad enough that most trucks pepper my car with debris, but to have some contaminate the pristine road surface with pieces of hay?

Oh, yeah, that hay is a killer!    I ran over a stalk the other day and had to replace both front tires.     Then, just yesterday, I hit a small pile of dirt and now I need a new tie rod.   

[NE2]

okay, I'll bite... what's the B word, given the implication that it is so much worse than the F word? 

Beetaggers.

[agentsteel53]

Beetaggers.

hey now, you don't have B-word privilege.  you've gotta be a beetagger to be allowed to call other people a beetagger.

[vdeane]

You still have individual pieces of hay come off.  Bad enough that most trucks pepper my car with debris, but to have some contaminate the pristine road surface with pieces of hay?

Oh, yeah, that hay is a killer!    I ran over a stalk the other day and had to replace both front tires.     Then, just yesterday, I hit a small pile of dirt and now I need a new tie rod.   

The problem is that i's not one stalk of hay.  The last time I was behind a truck like that, it was similar to driving in a snow storm.

[kphoger]

Again.....

That's what straps and tarps are for, not prohibitions.

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to require full-surface tarps than to prohibit the turck altogether?

[J N Winkler]

I suspect it's just Kaldor-Hicks efficient to require straps only, not tarps--in other words, the rest of us will have to tolerate the nuisance because the losses to the hay haulers of having to use full tarps would be greater than the sum of the gains accruing to each of us individually from not having to deal with loose hay on the highway.

(I just finished a six-day, 2000-mile drive in Colorado and New Mexico, so the hay nuisance is very fresh in my mind.  A prohibition on hauling hay on Interstates would have been of no benefit to me on this trip, however, because the only two Interstates I used were I-235 and I-25 and I was not on either for more than 30 miles.)

[agentsteel53]

I don't mind hay haulers nearly as much as the gravel haulers out here who can't be bothered to cover their load with a tarp, but apparently have paid off enough senators and lawyers that they have legal immunity if they simply put a sign on the back of the trailer that says "we chip windshields.  fuck you."

[kphoger]

I suspect it's just Kaldor-Hicks efficient to require straps only, not tarps--in other words, the rest of us will have to tolerate the nuisance because the losses to the hay haulers of having to use full tarps would be greater than the sum of the gains accruing to each of us individually from not having to deal with loose hay on the highway.

(I just finished a six-day, 2000-mile drive in Colorado and New Mexico, so the hay nuisance is very fresh in my mind.  A prohibition on hauling hay on Interstates would have been of no benefit to me on this trip, however, because the only two Interstates I used were I-235 and I-25 and I was not on either for more than 30 miles.)

But the prohibition stands as a general rule, only with the current exception.  Surely (using your favorite word) the losses to any given hay hauler would be amortized over time?

[Scott5114]

I don't mind hay haulers nearly as much as the gravel haulers out here who can't be bothered to cover their load with a tarp, but apparently have paid off enough senators and lawyers that they have legal immunity if they simply put a sign on the back of the trailer that says "we chip windshields.  fuck you."

"Not responsible for vehicle damage" isn't legally true. They just put that there to try to get you to stay back to limit their liability.

[kphoger]

I don't mind hay haulers nearly as much as the gravel haulers out here who can't be bothered to cover their load with a tarp, but apparently have paid off enough senators and lawyers that they have legal immunity if they simply put a sign on the back of the trailer that says "we chip windshields.  fuck you."

"Not responsible for vehicle damage" isn't legally true. They just put that there to try to get you to stay back to limit their liability.

Kind of like parents signing that they agree not to sue the school if their kid dies on a field trip.
"Well, sorry, but you DID sign this piece of paper here."

[J N Winkler]

But the prohibition stands as a general rule, only with the current exception.  Surely (using your favorite word) the losses to any given hay hauler would be amortized over time?

If the scenario you are talking about is one in which hay haulers are banned from Interstates unless they use tarps, then I am not sure how amortization would happen, since putting on and taking off a tarp are recurrent costs.  I am not even sure that the typical length of haul for a hay load is long enough for the cumulative annoyance of drivers (which we can estimate to be proportional to the hay that is lost, say a set mass per mile due to wind buffeting) to exceed the time and motion costs of laying and then removing a tarp.

As Jake points out, hay is intrinsically less troublesome than gravel and other heavy materials which can do actual damage to vehicle bodies.