The Great Falls Trail Bike Riders Association (GFTBRA) and the Back Country Horsemen of Montana (BCHMT) have been providing trail maintenance on the Lewis & Clark National Forest for nearly 30 years. In 1985, when both groups were organized, neither thought much of the other. That’s about as close as they got.
Then there was a barbeque.
Seeing that the two groups weren’t working together, a land manager with the U.S. Forest Service organized a work day and had each group start at opposite ends of a trail. When they met in the middle, he made them stay for a barbeque. They started talking. Over time, they realized they had more in common than not. Whether their feet were on foot pegs or stirrups, trail riding improved their quality of life. They wanted the same experience and had an appreciation for the natural resource they were both using.
Friendships were formed.
Over time, the two groups started working the trails together. They discovered their respective strengths. Motorcycles could carry chainsaws easier and were faster at clearing logs and getting to distant work sites. Horses were better at carrying signs and sign posts, and moving material.
Communication was shared. Safety was enhanced.
Today, working together, the two user groups educate the public on proper trail etiquette for all motorized and non-motorized trail enthusiasts, using maps, signs, newsletters, websites and social media. Their common message: knowing proper trail etiquette isn’t just for common courtesy, it’s a matter of safety.
“The most important thing Mark Himmel (past chair of the BCHMT) and I talk about is that we need to keep each other safe,” said Russ Ehnes, president of the GFTBRA and executive director of the National Off-Highway Vehicle Conservation Council (NOHVCC). “Rider safety is paramount. Education and communication are the keys to making that happen.”
“Why resolve conflict when you can prevent it?”
That was the title of a webinar held in late January, where Himmel and Ehnes shared their experience as a real-life example of motorized and non-motorized clubs partnering to prevent trail conflicts. Part of the American Trails “Advancing Trails” webinar series, the hour-long presentation was made by Himmel, Ehnes and Karen Umphress, NOHVCC IT and project manager.
“Because it’s not a perfect world, there will always be conflict. There will always be somebody that’s unhappy,” said Umphress at the start of the webinar, attended by trail enthusiasts from around the country on their computers. She went on to define conflict and the steps it takes to manage it.
Identify the cause and avoid conflict escalation.
“First, you have to understand the underlying cause of the conflict. On a trail, what is the resource and value people are interested in? Sometimes it’s the trail itself, or it may be at the end of the trail, a waterfall or fishing area. Is there one group allowed to go but another that’s not?
“Next you have to understand the subsequent steps that may lead to conflict escalation. If there are groups all seeking to use a limited resource, there will be conflict. The groups start forming cohesiveness that butts up against the other group. It sparks stereotyping, or insulting, or an ‘us vs. them’ attitude. The two sides start seeing each other not as people, but as ‘the other group.’ Animosity develops and conflicts escalate. What are the actions that the groups may or may not be taking to intercept the conflict?”
Start communicating with each other and work through the issues.
Umpress continued: “The key is for the two groups to start communicating. In working through a conflict, very often, the land managers with state or federal agencies are caught in a lose-lose situation, because the two sides may not work together. If you can get both sides communicating, with land managers as the mediator, you can then start working toward a win-win position. That may involve working toward a common goal, or identifying a trail project that requires cooperation by both groups. Then the two groups start seeing everyone as people again.”
Make all stakeholder groups equal.
“One group can’t think they have more rights,” Umphress explained during the webinar. “The playing field has to be level. You have to remember that you aren’t managing bikes or horses, you are managing people. Keeping that in mind, that all forms of recreation are performed by people who all have the same wishes across the board, it’s for exercise, enjoying the trail, getting out to nature.
“It helps in the communication efforts to show that they have more in common than not. And not just the trails, but the ability to spend the same amount of time on the trails. If you are combining single-track mountain bike and dirt bike trails, there should be the same amount of recreation time. The motorcycle can go faster, so that user group needs more miles to have the same amount of recreation time as the mountain bikers.”
Set expectations for user groups at the trail planning stage.
“If people go to a trail system and understand it’s open to horseback riders and hikers, and they know they will see the other user group, they’re fine with it. If it’s open to horseback riders and people walking dogs, but horses that can’t stand dogs go on it, the expectation isn’t set, they aren’t prepared and conflict will come. If you do a good job of setting expectations ahead of time, the users can bring the right kind of horse on that trail.”
Today, thanks to the long-standing partnership of the GFTBRA and the BCHMT – and the friendships that developed among their members – dirt bike riders and horseback riders do all the maintenance work and work together in the Lewis & Clark National Forest.
“We don’t have boundaries anymore,” said Himmel during the webinar. “We learned how to work together, using each other’s strengths.”
You have questions. NOHVCC has answers.
After their discussion, the presenters fielded questions from the webinar participants.
One question was: “Have you encountered formal structures to get user groups to work together from the start?”
“In a formal setting, it’s more difficult to form the groundwork of a partnership,” said Umphress. “The best way to get people working together is having them work together on a common trail section and then have a fun activity, like a barbeque.”
Ehnes agreed, saying: “Local collaborative efforts are important...and nothing beats hands on a pulaski out on the trail, followed by hands on a hamburger.”
The psychological term for group conflicts over limited resources is called Realistic Conflict Theory (or Realistic Group Conflict Theory). The most well-known study was conducted in 1954 and is called the Robbers Cave Experiment.
What is happening on your public lands today? Do you have a level playing field? Does one group have more rights than another? If so, you are promoting conflict rather than preventing it.
The webinar was recorded in its entirety. To listen to it, save it to your computer or share it with others, click on this link: http://atfiles.org/files/ppt/AT_WEBINAR_Why_Resolve_Conflict_When_You_Can_Prevent_It_01.28.16.mp4.
Partners on this American Trails webinar were: NOHVCC, Back Country Horsemen of Montana, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and the National Park Service.
