California Equestrian Trails & Lands Coalition (CET&LC)

 

CET&LC Objective, Purpose and Process for Coalition Actions

Objective:  (MOU introduction)

To develop an Equestrian Trails and Lands Coalition among concerned California organizations for the purpose of protecting our mutual interests in the preservation and use of trails and access to public and private land uses, and to inform and to educate Public Agencies, Legislators and the general public about equestrian recreation issues.

Purpose: 

  1. Follow Trails and Lands Management issues as they occur in California reported by member clubs, corrals, units or chapters (clubs) for consideration of a consensus viewpoint for member organizations.
  2. Respond when requested by any member club, corral, unit or chapter (club), to form a consensus supporting document on any equestrian closure or limiting use factor of a public land trail or trail system by public agency actions.
  3. Develop equestrian consensus for public and private land use practices to assist public agencies to continue historical equestrian uses. Comment on equestrian interests in Public Land Management Plans where appropriate.
  4. Work and communicate with other trail user groups to reach workable accommodations for safe and enjoyable trail solutions to interface issues.

Process:

The trail and land use process each member club follows in reviewing and implementing concerns with public agency, policies, regulations, and management plans is as noted:

á      Awareness:  When a local member club (club, corral, unit or chapter) becomes aware of trail or campground closure, a change of policy on trail use, a change in management plans or local public officerÕs actions to restrict equestrian usage, the clubÕs leadership should take investigative actions and start the process of evaluating the issue. The clubs are grass roots managed entities and are the eyes and ears of the parent organization and the Coalition in following the actions of public agencies.  This approach is the strength of our Coalition and the clubs should not depend on the Coalition to raise the issues occurring at the club level, but instead should be the requestor of a consensus position.

á      Relationship of Coalition and Local Organization:  Trails and public land issue management depends heavily on local club leadership.  Almost any public lands issue or concern is led by local club leadership groups, which may involve one or more clubs.  The CET&LC supports the clubÕs efforts by developing a consensus viewpoint or position of CET&LC member organizations to write letters and attend meetings related to the issue. Some local issues can best be handled at the local unit level with only letter writing and policy support from the Coalition. With the current onslaught of trail closures and policy changes, nearly all trails and land management issues are becoming general concern issues. The CET&LC numbers open doors to listen.

á      If a consensus position or proposal is not obtained through the Coalition process made by a  requesting club(s) for support or if it differs from the club(s) position or perspective on the issue, the Coalition will be silent in responding to the agency involved. The club(s) may respond with its own position or proposal.

á      CET&LC Chairperson:  The CET&LC Chairperson(s) presents trails and public land issues to member organizations for consensus evaluation and determination using the email protocol procedure.  A letter of support or consensus is communicated to the requesting local club(s) for use and processing. A letter can be written by the Coalition Chairperson(s) representing the collective number of the Coalition to the public agency if so requested.

Process Management:

á      Review Process:  One of the most critical portions of the process is the detailed review of the specific issue or plan as it relates to Ôcause and effectÕ to equestrian use.   A review document is nearly always necessary.  It can range from one page to many pages depending on the complexity of the issue or public agency plan of action. This is usually done by the local club..  For every concern and potential problem, there must be a proposed solution or action that the Coalition supports or opposes. We should offer alternatives for mitigating actions that are workable.  Editorializing or emphasizing purpose is reserved for the ÒIntroductionÓ or ÒSummaryÓ of the Coalition consensus document.

á      Data Evaluation:  It is important that the data presented by the public agency to support its actions be reviewed in light of all data and science reports, both past and present.  Many times the public agency does not have data to back up its actions and only have a Òdesired future conditionÓ as its justification for the management action.  This should be challenged with insistence that a review supportable by ÒfieldÓ data of purported problem be the basis for determining change.  Many times this cannot be done and is part of the review process. 

á      Be Professional and Practical:  Any club or Coalition counter proposal to a public agency action or plan takes the concerted effort of many people.  Equestrian issues are often complicated and controversial, i.e.: water quality, turbidity (erosion), public health, group interface conflicts, etc. The trail and public land process must be professional and assertive but be ready to mitigate specific issues if a compromise is reasonable and workable.  Sometimes solutions by other user groups are not practical or workable. Counter proposals are part of the process.

á      Public Support:  A campaign of public support is vital to any large and complicated trail and public land issues.  This usually is the role of an assigned separate group in a club or group of clubs made up of people with particular skills that can relate with other groups and organizations.  They arrange or participate in meetings and public forums that get the equestrian userÕs point across in a logical and supportive way. If other user coalitions exist that in general have supportive views to equestrian use, but may have some differing views, we should participate and work hand-in-hand with these coalitions.  The larger cross section of support for the issue, the more public officials will listen.  They listen because this means VOTES for legislators that respond to constituency concerns.

á      Legal Review:  A legal challenge is both complicated and expensive but is necessary when the public lands issue does not follow a legislative law or procedure.  This is often used by other user groups almost  to the exaggeration of due process.  Many public agencies respond to support a position of these groups without Ôdue processÕ in order to avoid a legal battle.  This puts other user groups, such as equestrians, at a disadvantage if they in turn do not use the same legal means to balance the process.  That is where the equestrian community is today. There is equestrian legal support for many of the trail and public land issues, but there seems to be a reluctance of horse people to enter into this process.  Today, it must be an element of any public land process and equestrians must use it when applicable.

Revision date 4/14/04