Sap Truck Registration

[markcasper]

I have a 2500 gallon former milk truck that I'd like to put into use for hauling sap. It has no title. It currently needs a little work to get it running. The question is does this have to be licensed, etc.... with the state. It would be 100% used for hauling sap and not more than a couple miles away.

Currently in Wisconsin, truck mounted manure spreaders, exclusive potatoe trucks, truck mounted feed mixers, etc.. require no license/registration as they are considered an "implement of husbandry". Why could the same not apply here?? Maple sap is defined as "farm", "raw commodities", as it is not recognized when the state does the food safety inspection.

The other option is removing the tank and mounting it on a running gear of some sort and pull it with the tractor. Any ideas or suggestions appreciated.

[Maple Man 85]

We had to licenses ours, I tried the angle of the potato trucks and was shot down by the DMV. Obviously in the spring of the year you've got road weight restrictions as well.

[markcasper]

We had to licenses ours, I tried the angle of the potato trucks and was shot down by the DMV. Obviously in the spring of the year you've got road weight restrictions as well.

I am not sure your dmv agent was correct? From my understanding the road weight restrictions are going to be relaxed for sap tanks, the same as milk trucks. Guess I'll be mounting it on a gear if I have to license it, therefore the dmv can then go bother other people.

I know of a guy locally that has a truck with a TMR mixer and hauls 40 miles one way daily.....no license or registration.

[S.S.S]

Maybe check with state patrol. We have a tri-axle grain truck that we haul grain from field to our bins that is not licensed, there is just a slow moving vehicle sign on back.

[OGDENS SUGAR BUSH]

lots of answers here but you know where to get the right answer dont you. your sec. of state

[markcasper]

lots of answers here but you know where to get the right answer dont you. your sec. of state
please explain....no, don't know b/c it seems everyone is different who you talk to.

I know a guy that has a gravity box mounted on a 2 ton truck, no license there either.

Its pretty cut and dried in my opinion.....if it COULD be used for hire then the answer would be pretty obvious.

[BAP]

In New Hampshire, you would throw a $20 Agriculture Plate on it and a $30 inspection sticker and be good to go. No insurance required unless you have lost your license due to drunk driving. No CDL required on AG or Farm plates no matter the truck size.

[BreezyHill]

I would suggest talking to motor vehical dept in your state and have them highlite in the book the answer they give you.

This way when you get stopped you have the book to show the rookie cop what you were told.

In NY you need plates, ins and inspection if it is on the road and not a tractor. If they want to push it you need a tank endorsement. Feed in a tank truck or trailer is the only current exclusion.

Exced your reg weight and you are screwed.

There are so many that get away for a while but when they get caught or have an accident it gets costly when it would have only been a few bucks to do it right.

Sloshing half full tanks are not something to have on a farm wagon. The tongue is not designed for that stress. Use the truck if at all possible. I have a IH with 1900 gallon capacity. Great liquid hauler.

[markcasper]

Sloshing half full tanks are not something to have on a farm wagon. The tongue is not designed for that stress. Use the truck if at all possible. I have a IH with 1900 gallon capacity. Great liquid hauler.

Thanks for the information. I agree and disagree with some of what you are saying. You are right, the first place to check would be the DMV.
In regards to 1/2 full tanks, there are numerous liquid manure tankers much bigger than this and I have never heard of it being a problem. I am eyeballing putting this tank on a former tandem axle liquid manure tanker frame, so its not a hobby 100 bale hay rack gear.

One plus too not having the truck chasis is not having to deal with keeping that thing running, the thing is like 1970 as it is, so probably going to be just a pile of headaches every year.

[upsmapleman]

In PA. they view sap as a forestry product and it carries the same restrictions as log trucks. I know the state association is working to get it changed but so far no luck.

[OGDENS SUGAR BUSH]

please explain....no, don't know b/c it seems everyone is different who you talk to.

I know a guy that has a gravity box mounted on a 2 ton truck, no license there either.

Its pretty cut and dried in my opinion.....if it COULD be used for hire then the answer would be pretty obvious.
simple go where you like the answer to your question

[blurr95]

Not trying to sound rude, but, with all the time wasted on this, seems like you could have just contacted the BMV direct and got your answer from them.

Jason

[markcasper]

Its unfortunate that I ruined several peoples day by asking a simple question! I am not advocating breaking the law in any way! I do not feel I have wasted more than two minutes by posting on here.

The issue of getting and keeping a 45 year old truck in operating condition, versus turning it into a drawn unit with a tractor(s) that we already have was a fair question in my opinion. It would be going no more than a mile radius of our farm and to not want to license and title it just for this would be considered a smart business decision in keeping expenses in check. Big corporations in town would do the same thing (including the one I am employed at). They certainly would be smarter than I and not ever ask this type of question on mapletrader!

[OGDENS SUGAR BUSH]

think about this , how many people on Maple Trader work for the DMV. its pretty hard to get the right and legal answer here.

[wiam]

think about this , how many people on Maple Trader work for the DMV. its pretty hard to get the right and legal answer here.

I do not work for any DMV. But I could have given the right advice for Vermont. I have looked into these laws here and carry copies of the regulations in my truck.

[wiam]

And I also don’t understand why people with no useful information have to comment negatively about somebodies question.

[n8hutch]

I think that the running gear idea is a good one. Anybody that's been around tractors and equipment for a substantial amount of time should be able to navigate a trailer behind an appropriate sized tractor for a mile or 2.

And as said you're maintenance costs could potentially be much lower. Also I would think that the tractor would be less likely to get stuck , compared to a single axle truck?

[markcasper]

Thanks for the positive comments. Yes, pulling a 2500 gallon tank with a 100hp or larger tractor is just another day on the farm. Not looking to go offroad regardless of which way I go. Just looking to be more efficient with the trips.

[OGDENS SUGAR BUSH]

do you feel better?

[markcasper]

For those interested...I contacted the DOT in Madison and the response that I received was quite concerning to say the least. It came as no surprise to me based on what has been mentioned in this thread. The answer to the tank trunk being being classified as an AG Commercial Motor Vehicle was a "NO".

The gentleman went on to say in the e-mail that "Additionally, raw maple sap and maple syrup are commodities that do not fall within the scope of agriculture, horticulture, or arboriculture. Consequently, maple sap and syrup are not IoH commodities." Internal Revenue Code - Title 26 Section 464 (e). The preceding was given as the cited reference

Yet when you go here:

https://www.revenue.wi.gov/Pages/FAQS/slf-useassmt.aspx#asmt7

See question #18, The Dept. of Revenue clearly states that maple sap gathering IS an agricultural activity. In addition, the NASS collects data yearly with maple being one of them. Since the DOT does not consider this an agricultural activity, are we therefore not allowed to pull a tank with a tractor either? Will they require licenses/permits on ANY sap collecting apparatus?
Will going to the sugarbush with the 4 wheeler now be considered an recreational activity, rather than a farm activity? Will the farm exempt status of the 4 wheeler now be punishable due to its use in a non - agricultural endeavor? These are items we all need to be asking, a very slippery slope indeed. There is alot of work that needs to be done with getting these government agencies on the same page.

[wiam]

For those interested...I contacted the DOT in Madison and the response that I received was quite concerning to say the least. It came as no surprise to me based on what has been mentioned in this thread. The answer to the tank trunk being being classified as an AG Commercial Motor Vehicle was a "NO".

The gentleman went on to say in the e-mail that "Additionally, raw maple sap and maple syrup are commodities that do not fall within the scope of agriculture, horticulture, or arboriculture. Consequently, maple sap and syrup are not IoH commodities." Internal Revenue Code - Title 26 Section 464 (e). The preceding was given as the cited reference

Yet when you go here:

https://www.revenue.wi.gov/Pages/FAQS/slf-useassmt.aspx#asmt7

See question #18, The Dept. of Revenue clearly states that maple sap gathering IS an agricultural activity. In addition, the NASS collects data yearly with maple being one of them. Since the DOT does not consider this an agricultural activity, are we therefore not allowed to pull a tank with a tractor either? Will they require licenses/permits on ANY sap collecting apparatus?
Will going to the sugarbush with the 4 wheeler now be considered an recreational activity, rather than a farm activity? Will the farm exempt status of the 4 wheeler now be punishable due to its use in a non - agricultural endeavor? These are items we all need to be asking, a very slippery slope indeed. There is alot of work that needs to be done with getting these government agencies on the same page.

Sounds like something your state association needs to get addressed.

[Bucket Head]

Syrup production does not fall under agriculture in Wisconsin? Yeah, somebody needs to notify someone of that gem. Wiam's suggestion would be a good start.

[BreezyHill]

Manure is a totally different product due to the semi solids and particle size.

That will be a nice running gear and plenty able to stand the weight.

As for those that like to rain on everyone's parade...well some people need to put in their two cents. Unfortunately they often don't realize that from the exchange of what another has experienced others will glean useful ideas that save time, energy, and resources.

So please keep sharing the ideas and just skip over those that fail to see the usefulness of sharing and discussing projects.

I would use other words but I don't want to have the edit police sending me an email. LOL

[minehart gap]

Manure is a totally different product due to the semi solids and particle size

BreezyHill, I’m thinking that there are other things that separate manure from maple sap too. Just saying (and trying to make light of what unfortunately has become a tense forum)

Sharing ideas does help everyone, this place is great for that.

I’m not sure how far this will help but I believe that most states agriculture departments receive there funding from the USDA and therefore are required to use USDA definitions. If one state department classifies maple syrup as agriculture, would other departments be required to do the same? Maple Syrup is covered and defined by the USDA. Maybe pointing this out would help. Not sure. Or maybe this could be an argument for your states Maple Syrup association to make if they take up the challenge of helping.

[markcasper]

I am planning on sending another e-mail to this dude at the DOT, asking if a tractor pulling a sap collection vessel is or isn't an IoH Implement of Husbandry. I don't know about other states, but there was a big deal last year about updating the law in Wisconsin due to the changes in farm equipment size, lighting, weights and such. If the response indicates that it isn't an IoH, because maple is not considered agriculture, then we in this state have some big issues that will need to be addressed with our state politicians. I believe the state assoc. is working on getting permitted uses for sap hauling on roads in the spring to be identical to milk trucks in terms of weights. Issues like this could be incorporated I would think.

There are so many things I'd like to tell this DOT guy, but he is just a worker and doesn't make the law. I find it ironic that I file a state and federal "farm" tax return due to syruping, only to have the DOT tell me that maple sap and syrup is not considered farm or agriculture.

I will certainly be taking this issue higher up the ladder.

[Louie]

I find it ironic that I file a state and federal "farm" tax return due to syruping, only to have the DOT tell me that maple sap and syrup is not considered farm or agriculture.

I will certainly be taking this issue higher up the ladder.

Sometimes it is best to not ask questions. Try calling the IRS and ask them if maple syrup is farming. You will get the answer that is is manufacturing. Ask if the fuel burnt in the evaporator is farm fuel and they will give you specific law that it is not. That was about 10 years ago so things may have changed. You can drive yourself crazy asking questions or just go with the flow and do whatever everyone else is doing.

The SIC was updated and called the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). Sap reduction was added to all other farming. I asked the IRS if they use the NAICS as a guide and they said yes. I then brought up the maple syrup issue. They replied the NAICs was only a guide and it held no legal weight, maple syrup was manufacturing. Only sap collection was farming, so at least you could say the sap truck is farming.

I have found that most government people have no idea how maple syrup is made. One person thought you boiled wood pieces in water.