GlamisDunes.com > United We Stand...

HozaykwAIRvo

Jul 18 2005, 01:27 PM

"There's strength in numbers" "United we stand, divided we fall" ...you've heard'm all before, right?

Why is there such a division between the duning community and why does it appear to be getting bigger? This wedge being driven between the duning community is only in the hands of a few people... right or wrong, warrented or not... is that not correct? Regardless of what side (though we should ALL be on one, IMO) you may be on, if you even are on a side... step back for a second and take a look at it... what did you see?

So, are you on a side? Are you against the other side? Do you think these sides will ever be able to "agree to disagree" and move on?

Personally, I'm on the side of "Joe Duner". He's this average guy that abolutely loves Glamis and all that it has to offer. Joe Duner takes his family out to the dunes as often as he can, be it twice a year or 20 times a year. Joe Duner wants to raise his kids with the experience of Glamis and see them raise his grandkids there too. Joe Duner has a few concerns about Glamis;

1) Keeping the dunes open
2) Keeping access to the dunes unrestricted
3) Re-opening the dunes that have been closed to us

and not that Joe Duner can really put a priority on these issues, but if he had to... I'm guessing that is the order they'd be in. Is there any side around here that is opposed to Joe Duner's concerns?

IMO, we need to pull it together collectively. The entire duning (and OHV) community... with the 3 things above in mind.

Take a look at the many wars our country has been in over the years... we have alligned ourselves with other countries to fight a common goal. Do you think these wars would have been harder to win without a concerted effort by the parties involved? Wouldn't the same principle apply to us (the duning community) fighting against them (anti-access orgs, CBD, Sierra Club, etc.)? Does the duning community need some sort of a UN to bring everyone together at one table and hammer out common goals?

Unite - "There is no stronger bond of friendship than a mutual enemy."
Inform - "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance."
Mobilize - "You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try."

I really think someone was onto something when they came up with those 3 principles and I think the entire duning community could bennefit from them, regardless of what side they may be on

Sandzilla

Jul 18 2005, 06:22 PM

Preach it brother! I'm willing to bend on some issue as long as the "core" issue stay intact. Keep the dunes open and open the closed areas!... For me, it's that simple.

Zilla

QUOTE(HozayKwarvo @ Jul 18 2005, 01:27 PM)

"There's strength in numbers" "United we stand, divided we fall" ...you've heard'm all before, right?

Why is there such a division between the duning community and why does it appear to be getting bigger? This wedge being driven between the duning community is only in the hands of a few people... right or wrong, warrented or not... is that not correct? Regardless of what side (though we should ALL be on one, IMO) you may be on, if you even are on a side... step back for a second and take a look at it... what did you see?

So, are you on a side? Are you against the other side? Do you think these sides will ever be able to "agree to disagree" and move on?

Personally, I'm on the side of "Joe Duner". He's this average guy that abolutely loves Glamis and all that it has to offer. Joe Duner takes his family out to the dunes as often as he can, be it twice a year or 20 times a year. Joe Duner wants to raise his kids with the experience of Glamis and see them raise his grandkids there too. Joe Duner has a few concerns about Glamis;

1) Keeping the dunes open
2) Keeping access to the dunes unrestricted
3) Re-opening the dunes that have been closed to us

and not that Joe Duner can really put a priority on these issues, but if he had to... I'm guessing that is the order they'd be in. Is there any side around here that is opposed to Joe Duner's concerns?

IMO, we need to pull it together collectively. The entire duning (and OHV) community... with the 3 things above in mind.

Take a look at the many wars our country has been in over the years... we have alligned ourselves with other countries to fight a common goal. Do you think these wars would have been harder to win without a concerted effort by the parties involved? Wouldn't the same principle apply to us (the duning community) fighting against them (anti-access orgs, CBD, Sierra Club, etc.)? Does the duning community need some sort of a UN to bring everyone together at one table and hammer out common goals?

Unite - "There is no stronger bond of friendship than a mutual enemy."
Inform - "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance."
Mobilize - "You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try."

I really think someone was onto something when they came up with those 3 principles and I think the entire duning community could bennefit from them, regardless of what side they may be on

[right][snapback]1074345[/snapback][/right]

EZRider

Jul 18 2005, 06:29 PM

Well said my brother!

That's the whole thing in a nutshell.

Bob

ChuckZilla

Jul 18 2005, 06:36 PM

Excellent, excellent post. My sentiments exactly.

SandTrap

Jul 18 2005, 06:54 PM

Great posts Hozay you got it all in there.

As far as some diagreeing that is just Human nature.

I heard this once that kind of pertains to this.

It was I might not agree with what you said but I'll fight for the right for you to say it!!

APHANTOMDUCK

Jul 18 2005, 09:23 PM

I've been involved in OHV access issues a better part of my adult life. And for the record, I don't "hate" ASA. I just have a number of years of experience, background, perspective to call upon and find that some ASA decisions are ill advised. It is my opinion that as newcomers to OHV issues - they could do a better job in reaching out to the more established groups for advice and counsel.

"Infighting" between the groups has always been an issue that never seems to resolve itself. I think the infighting has a lot to do with the volunteer nature of our groups. Some are thrust into positions of power that have little or no background in management or leadership. In turn, these same folks can get on a power trip and forget the real goal. That turns some in our community off.

The ONLY time I've ever seen any level of cooperation between the groups was back in about 1985 when then Senator Alan Cranston (D) CA introduced the California Desert Protection Act. A wise doctor from Cal Four Wheel - Dr. David Hess - took it upon himself to get the "warlords" into a room shortly after similar minded groups created the California Desert Coalition.

For nearly 8 years, the infighting was minimal and the united front we provided to Congress nearly killed the proposed legislation. Only when President Clinton was elected and the make-up of the Senate changed did the legislation see the light of day. In the end, we lost that battle - but the unified approach really worked.

I spent nearly three years in a Federal Mediation conflict resolution process for the Land and Resources Management Plan for the Sequoia National Forest. For the most part, this conflict resolution process resolved some continuous OHV issues on the Forest and at the very least, got the parties to talk and understand each other. In light of all the potential litigation the Forest was facing, this process mitigated the tension and allowed a period of time to attempt to resolve the concerns.

This being said, I'd say I'd support a summit (or ten round match) on a quarterly basis to allow an exchange of ideas, venting of frustrations, and hopefully progress in mending some bridges.

LoBuck

Jul 18 2005, 09:44 PM

QUOTE(APHANTOMDUCK @ Jul 18 2005, 10:23 PM)

This being said, I'd say I'd support a summit (or ten round match) on a quarterly basis to allow an exchange of ideas, venting of frustrations, and hopefully progress in mending some bridges.
[right][snapback]1075262[/snapback][/right]

I think a lot of us would support it also. Now, if we can get the leaders to the table (or ring)...

GRANT@FUNCO

Jul 18 2005, 09:57 PM

Your perspective on history is appreciated.

It might be appropriate to share where we are presently, with respect to cooperative OHV land access issues.

In DC this past week OHV leaders from across the country converged on the capitol in support of ESA reform. There was no dissention visible. In fact we represented the OHV community as a very professional , credible and formidable political force.
Co Chairs fo the event were ORBA and BRC

Some specific examples of cooperative efforts

Eco Logic Partners... ASA, SDORC, AMA D37, CORVA and ORBA all split the full time legal efforts,with Attorney David Hubbard

Washington DC Lobby firm Sonnensheim assoc. represented by Paul Kavinocky full time effort partners ORBA, SDORC, CORVA, Cal 4 wheel and ASA

CLORV, Most California OHV groups represented by Pete Conaty full time Ca. lobby effort

Cal Four wheel, AMA D36 ,ASA and The Snowmobiles represented by Terry McHale of Aaron Read assoc full time Ca. Lobby efforts

We are all very proud to be working side by side in a multiple of cooperative efforts.

A small story In DC the Sonnesheim group had the privilege of meeting with Sec of Interior Gale Norton . We had a pre meeting in my hotel room to coordinate our presentation. There was absolute unity and no ego’s got in the way of the mission at hand.Which was a pleasure to witness knowing the caliber of the meeting

The meeting went flawlessly.

SailAway

Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM

Hozay, what you are saying here has been said by DUNERS since its inception. All we have ever wanted is to share the Glamis sandbox and help where we can. Believe me, there are enough issues facing our duning community to keep ten organizations busy.

Do I raise red flags? Absolutely, especially when something is happening that I believe affects the entire dune community, not just a small percentage of its users.

And you know what? That's my right, whether I am president of an organization or just a Joe Duner. And, well, trying to right a wrong is what I was taught is the right thing to do, even when it's the hardest thing to do. Maybe even more when it's the hardest thing to do.

I know that you want us all to be feeling warm and fuzzy right now, and I'm trying, I really am.

But although DUNERS, and me, have only had the best interest of the dunes at heart, ever, we have been targeted publicly over and over again, "systematically beaten down" as it was once written.

Please tell me... does this new kinder, gentler duning nation include any kind of assurance that such public attacks won't continue? How about the private ones? I'm not just talking about the sanduners or obsesseds or a handful of the others that we have all come to recognize for what they are. They prove my point more often than not. I'm talking about the leaders, those that should be building those bridges instead of sabatoging them. What kind of assurance do I/we have that we are not simply in for more of what we've tasted for three years?

Or does this new kinder, gentler duning nation require silencing the dissenters?

If we see a wrong... will we still be hung in the town square when we try to right it?

Vicki

QUOTE(HozayKwarvo @ Jul 18 2005, 01:27 PM)

"There's strength in numbers" "United we stand, divided we fall" ...you've heard'm all before, right?

Why is there such a division between the duning community and why does it appear to be getting bigger? This wedge being driven between the duning community is only in the hands of a few people... right or wrong, warrented or not... is that not correct? Regardless of what side (though we should ALL be on one, IMO) you may be on, if you even are on a side... step back for a second and take a look at it... what did you see?

So, are you on a side? Are you against the other side? Do you think these sides will ever be able to "agree to disagree" and move on?

Personally, I'm on the side of "Joe Duner". He's this average guy that abolutely loves Glamis and all that it has to offer. Joe Duner takes his family out to the dunes as often as he can, be it twice a year or 20 times a year. Joe Duner wants to raise his kids with the experience of Glamis and see them raise his grandkids there too. Joe Duner has a few concerns about Glamis;

1) Keeping the dunes open
2) Keeping access to the dunes unrestricted
3) Re-opening the dunes that have been closed to us

and not that Joe Duner can really put a priority on these issues, but if he had to... I'm guessing that is the order they'd be in. Is there any side around here that is opposed to Joe Duner's concerns?

IMO, we need to pull it together collectively. The entire duning (and OHV) community... with the 3 things above in mind.

Take a look at the many wars our country has been in over the years... we have alligned ourselves with other countries to fight a common goal. Do you think these wars would have been harder to win without a concerted effort by the parties involved? Wouldn't the same principle apply to us (the duning community) fighting against them (anti-access orgs, CBD, Sierra Club, etc.)? Does the duning community need some sort of a UN to bring everyone together at one table and hammer out common goals?

Unite - "There is no stronger bond of friendship than a mutual enemy."
Inform - "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance."
Mobilize - "You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don't try."

I really think someone was onto something when they came up with those 3 principles and I think the entire duning community could bennefit from them, regardless of what side they may be on

[right][snapback]1074345[/snapback][/right]

Sandzilla

Jul 19 2005, 08:17 AM

QUOTE(APHANTOMDUCK @ Jul 18 2005, 09:23 PM)

I've been involved in OHV access issues a better part of my adult life. And for the record, I don't "hate" ASA. I just have a number of years of experience, background, perspective to call upon and find that some ASA decisions are ill advised. It is my opinion that as newcomers to OHV issues - they could do a better job in reaching out to the more established groups for advice and counsel.

"Infighting" between the groups has always been an issue that never seems to resolve itself. I think the infighting has a lot to do with the volunteer nature of our groups. Some are thrust into positions of power that have little or no background in management or leadership. In turn, these same folks can get on a power trip and forget the real goal. That turns some in our community off.

The ONLY time I've ever seen any level of cooperation between the groups was back in about 1985 when then Senator Alan Cranston (D) CA introduced the California Desert Protection Act. A wise doctor from Cal Four Wheel - Dr. David Hess - took it upon himself to get the "warlords" into a room shortly after similar minded groups created the California Desert Coalition.

For nearly 8 years, the infighting was minimal and the united front we provided to Congress nearly killed the proposed legislation. Only when President Clinton was elected and the make-up of the Senate changed did the legislation see the light of day. In the end, we lost that battle - but the unified approach really worked.

I spent nearly three years in a Federal Mediation conflict resolution process for the Land and Resources Management Plan for the Sequoia National Forest. For the most part, this conflict resolution process resolved some continuous OHV issues on the Forest and at the very least, got the parties to talk and understand each other. In light of all the potential litigation the Forest was facing, this process mitigated the tension and allowed a period of time to attempt to resolve the concerns.

This being said, I'd say I'd support a summit (or ten round match) on a quarterly basis to allow an exchange of ideas, venting of frustrations, and hopefully progress in mending some bridges.
[right][snapback]1075262[/snapback][/right]

I hear ya loud and clear. Maybe we need to get back to our "roots"… Is that where we were all united? Lord knows be need a mantra and our "true" common enemy has NEVER changed. < Eco-dirt worshiping, seed eating, hemp wearing, earth cookies! And I don't want to hear one single person say that we don't believe in conservation! People, take another look at the dunes map… Go ahead! Click on the ASA web site and take a hard look at that map and preach to me about conservation! We are being "conservation-ed" TO DEATH! I love a good lookin' lizard, or cute turtle just as much as the next guy but DAMN!... When is enough, enough? If you give me a tack hammer and enough time, I can bring down a mountain… This is what the CBD is doing with OUR dunes via the court system… Look at the map! If we don't start skipping a trip to Bugger King once a month and put that measly 20-bucks towards keeping A WAY OF LIFE alive for many of us, you will have a garage full worthless junk that you can neither use or even SELL for that matter. Again, JMHO.

Zilla

HozaykwAIRvo

Jul 19 2005, 08:34 AM

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM)

Hozay, what you are saying here has been said by DUNERS since its inception.[right][snapback]1075567[/snapback][/right]

No Vicki, you haven't. Not sure if you were speaking on your own behalf, or on behalf of DUNERS... but have seen a few times now where you state the "we've fallen for that too many times, we won't do it again... they can't be trusted..." type stuff. I know you have every right to do that and I respect that.. but don't tell me that you have been preaching unity when, at least lately, it just isn't so.

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM)

I know that you want us all to be feeling warm and fuzzy right now, and I'm trying, I really am.
[/b][right][snapback]1075567[/snapback][/right]

Not looking for everyone to get a warm fuzzy... I'm looking for some way to remove the chip off the shoulder of you, ASA BOD, and any other leader within this community as well as their supporters. This is about uniting for the cause, not just burrying a hatchet.

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM)

But although DUNERS, and me, have only had the best interest of the dunes at heart, ever, we have been targeted publicly over and over again, "systematically beaten down" as it was once written.

Please tell me... does this new kinder, gentler duning nation include any kind of assurance that such public attacks won't continue? How about the private ones? I'm not just talking about the sanduners or obsesseds or a handful of the others that we have all come to recognize for what they are. They prove my point more often than not.
[/b][right][snapback]1075567[/snapback][/right]

I have never once doubted the intentions of you or DUNERS, I know that you want nothing more than to have all of the dunes open and feel that you have "Joe Duner's" interest at heart.

Getting "systematically beaten down" or attacked may not be fun, but that's part of it sometimes. That's what happends when people have free speech. There is no guarantee that it won't happen again to you or the ASA, regardless of your actions. I'm not saying that it is right or even healthy for our community... just syaing that it's highly likely that someone at some point will have something to say that someone else might not like, true or not... warrented or not...

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM)

I'm talking about the leaders, those that should be building those bridges instead of sabatoging them. What kind of assurance do I/we have that we are not simply in for more of what we've tasted for three years?
[/b][right][snapback]1075567[/snapback][/right]

See above. I know that you want what is best for the dunes... and IMO part of that is everyone (at least the leaders of the orgs/duning community) getting the chips of their shoulders and working together... There is no asurance that you will get anything... other than the assurance of getting absolutely nothing for not trying.

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM)

Or does this new kinder, gentler duning nation require silencing the dissenters?

If we see a wrong... will we still be hung in the town square when we try to right it?

Vicki
[/b][right][snapback]1075567[/snapback][/right]

There is no silencing of the dissenters... everyone has their own voice and their own oppinion. This is part of what makes being a leader harder than just being a follower...

No guarantees. Hung out to dry or not, right the wrongs. Anyone that sees one regarding our sport should expose it and do whatever is within their power to correct it.

SolMaster

Jul 19 2005, 08:46 AM

I like where you are taking this whole conversation Hozay.

Hopefully it does some good.

SailAway

Jul 19 2005, 08:58 AM

QUOTE(HozayKwarvo @ Jul 19 2005, 08:34 AM)

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 06:12 AM)

Hozay, what you are saying here has been said by DUNERS since its inception.[right][snapback]1075567[/snapback][/right]

No Vicki, you haven't. Not sure if you were speaking on your own behalf, or on behalf of DUNERS... but have seen a few times now where you state the "we've fallen for that too many times, we won't do it again... they can't be trusted..." type stuff. I know you have every right to do that and I respect that.. but don't tell me that you have been preaching unity when, at least lately, it just isn't so.

Thank you Hozay for this and the rest of your response.

And you're right... I should have said "at" its inception.

While DUNERS had unity in mind at its inception, attempting unity with the ASA was given up probably about a year ago. And you're also right, I/we have stated that we've had the rug pulled out from us too many times to try again.

I'm certain at this point there will be a lot of "See? No matter how hard we try, this is the attitude we get" but those that have actually witnessed the "attempts" know better and just won't fall again for the pretense. Sorry... I know that sounds harsh. But history has been a harsh teacher and I will not pretend otherwise.

Will there ever be unity? Heck, at this point I couldn't begin to expect it and, quite frankly, it's not even necessary to the fight.

Even through the gauntlet, all the same doors that are open to the other organizations are open to DUNERS, the same high-powered meetings, the same offers of legislative assistance. Could we accomplish much more if we complemented each other? Absolutely. But there would have to be a sharing across the board and honey, I just don't ever see that happening.

After three years of this nonsense it is clear the only "unity" would come with compliance and submission. The problem is, DUNERS was not formed and does not operate on "Don't rock the boat, we know what's best."

The calms between these storms only exist when no one makes waves. As soon as a ripple starts, the hatefulness takes over and all messages get lost in the drama.

As great as it would be, I just don't see that changing.

Vicki

The Pastor

Jul 19 2005, 09:54 AM

There is also another problem, Hozay...
The fact that many do not believe in the methods and even question the goals of some parties.
They may have all the best intentions in the world... "We want the dunes open". I don't know about you, but I'm not willing to sit back and watch my Glamis turned into a police state with all the services of Yosemite and a price tag that requires a mortgage to meet.
The talk of "unity" is nice, and I would certainly like to see the hatefulness go away, but there has to be room for dissent, because I will never sign on with a program that seems only to want more cops, more rules, and more costs.
What good would open dunes do for ME if I cannot afford or am not allowed to go?

HozaykwAIRvo

Jul 19 2005, 09:59 AM

Thank you Vicki, I appreiciate your honesty.

This is what I'm stuck on...

QUOTE(SailAway @ Jul 19 2005, 08:58 AM)

Could we accomplish much more if we complemented each other? Absolutely. [right][snapback]1076002[/snapback][/right]

What would that concerted effort of orginizations chalk up to? Would it be the equivilent of 200 man hours? 1000? $10,000 worth of donations? Ok, I know we can't pin a number or $ amount on it... but how much easier would it be for us as a whole to accomplish our goals if we were able to colaborate at least some efforts between all of the orgs taking up the ISDRA cause?

Now, that said... which is more productive and efficient? A concerted effort? or a bunch of different people trying to skin the same cat and arguing over who has the sharpest knife?

HozaykwAIRvo

Jul 19 2005, 10:06 AM

QUOTE(The Pastor @ Jul 19 2005, 09:54 AM)

There is also another problem, Hozay...
The fact that many do not believe in the methods and even question the goals of some parties.
They may have all the best intentions in the world... "We want the dunes open". I don't know about you, but I'm not willing to sit back and watch my Glamis turned into a police state with all the services of Yosemite and a price tag that requires a mortgage to meet.
The talk of "unity" is nice, and I would certainly like to see the hatefulness go away, but there has to be room for dissent, because I will never sign on with a program that seems only to want more cops, more rules, and more costs.
What good would open dunes do for ME if I cannot afford or am not allowed to go?
[right][snapback]1076094[/snapback][/right]

And I couldn't agree more VOR. I'm not asking anyone to quit questioning... quite the opposite. My whole awareness the last week or so came because of the UDG post and I started asking questions and doing research.

I'm not trying to say that even DUNERS or any other org or peoples should blindly follow the ASA or anyone else... just trying to get some cohesion here within the community so at some point maybe our leaders could drop their chip on their shoulders and get to the table at some point ...working on a common goal.

SailAway

Jul 19 2005, 11:14 AM

QUOTE(HozayKwarvo @ Jul 19 2005, 09:59 AM)

Now, that said... which is more productive and efficient? A concerted effort? or a bunch of different people trying to skin the same cat and arguing over who has the sharpest knife?

[right][snapback]1076104[/snapback][/right]

You should know the answer I will give you...

I believe, have always believed, a cooperative effort is much more productive and efficient.

And yes, I mean to say I still believe and have always believed.

But... that is not to say that I will continue to make the attempt at cooperation.

That ball left my/DUNERS court long ago.

Vicki