Grand River Conservation Association Off Limits to Snowmobilers

[bbakernbay]

GRCA trails off limits to snowmobiles this winter

Snowmobile clubs realize agreements with GRCA left them with insurance liability they were unaware of

about 9 hours ago By:  Tony Saxon

Village Media file photo

Grand River Conservation Area trails will be off limits to snowmobilers this winter after a problem arose with the annual agreements area snowmobile clubs sign with the GRCA.

 

Clubs from three different districts of the Ontario Federation of Snowmobile Clubs (OFSC) sign agreements with the GRCA allowing them to use its trails for a small fee. Those include roughly 200 kilometres of trail in District 9, which includes Wellington County.

 

This year those agreements were not renewed after the district governing districts of the OFSC realized there was a gap in what the snowmobile clubs' insurance policies covered and what the agreement with the GRCA covered.

 

In a nutshell, there was a gap, leaving the snowmobile clubs liable for non-snowmobilers on the trails said District 9 president Karen Buratynski.

"People have tried to portray it as an insurance issue. It really is an issue in the agreement that the club has signed in the past with the Grand River Conservation Authority," Buratynski said.

"What we discovered this year was that there was a clause in the agreements (with the GRCA) that actually had the clubs guarantee the safety not only of the snowmobilers that use the trail, but of all users that use that GRCA trail in the winter," she said.

 

"Our agreement would cover the GRCA for all of the walkers, snowshoers, equestrians ... anybody that was on that trail. And our policy covers snowmobilers. Incidents related to snowmobilers."

She said the association approached the GRCA in late September and asked it to amend the agreements so that the GRCA, not the snowmobile clubs, covered other users of the trails.

The GRCA essentially said there was a process involved in addressing such a request.

The GRCA offered to renew the agreements as they existed, but the snowmobile clubs declined because of the liability it would have left them with, Buratynski said.

 

She added that the individual clubs have been out finding new landowners where trails could be established, specifically getting people out of the small towns and onto the larger trail network.

Locally the move affects the Arthur Snowblazers and Fergus, Elora, Belwood snowmobile clubs that use GRCA trails.

 

Clubs in Conestogo, Orangeville, Elmira and Hillsburgh are also affected.

It is not known how many individual snowmobilers are affected, Buratynski said, because members purchase permits that allow them to use any of the trails in the province.

The GRCA said in a statement on its web site that it isn't in a position to consider accepting that liability without a process taking place.

 

"The clubs’ requested changes to the agreements would substantially increase the GRCA’s obligations, liability and risk as a private landowner," says the GRCA statement posted on its web site.

"Accordingly, the GRCA advised the District 9 snowmobile clubs at that time that it was unable to accept the amendments. Renewed agreements were sent to all of the local snowmobile clubs, without revisions."

 

Reports to senior management and/of the GRCA board would be necessary, as well as a new program to manage increased risk and obligations, the GRCA said.

"Currently, the GRCA does not have the framework, resources or capacity to implement such a program for snowmobile use."

 

The clubs were also advised that the increased risk would likely result in a licence fee above the current small fee the clubs pay each year.

 

Both sides hope an agreement can be worked out, likely for next year.

There are currently no discussions taking place.

 

"GRCA and the snowmobile clubs have had great partnerships over the years, so we are really, really hopeful that this is a one-year closure while everyone regroups and that next year we will be able to work with them again,' Buratynski said.

[Oggy]

Not good at all.

[wrightonalan]

I would like to know if this clause was always in the agreement or something new that the grca added this year.

[gtserider]

31 minutes ago, wrightonalan said:

I would like to know if this clause was always in the agreement or something new that the grca added this year.

I would like to know if all the trails are closed for all of the users as well? Should be in my opinion.It seems GRCA doesn't have winter insurance for the other groups.

[Muskoka Man]

I guess my original post on this subject got locked ?? Hmm shut down by OC once again ,lol

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

36 minutes ago, Muskoka Man said:

I guess my original post on this subject got locked ?? Hmm shut down by OC once again ,lol

Amazing and now this new thread on the same subject. I think that makes 4 threads to date on this subject.

[ToSlow]

i heard about this last week, just waiting till it was official 

[ToSlow]

why did the other threads get locked?

[topnotch]

17 hours ago, gtserider said:

I would like to know if all the trails are closed for all of the users as well? Should be in my opinion.It seems GRCA doesn't have winter insurance for the other groups.

Your last sentence is what I'd like to confirm as well, so in previous winters and during the off season the GRCA doesn't have insurance at all to cover people who might walk through the parks?

Although I guess their parks are closed in winter( I don't think they have winter walking trails?) so I'd be considered trespassing if someone were to get hurt?  If it wasn't for the sled trails maybe you can't access the park really anyway. 

 

It's an unfortunate situation but I understand the parties involved not wanting that extra liability.  

 

 

[gtserider]

38 minutes ago, topnotch said:

Your last sentence is what I'd like to confirm as well, so in previous winters and during the off season the GRCA doesn't have insurance at all to cover people who might walk through the parks?

Although I guess their parks are closed in winter( I don't think they have winter walking trails?) so I'd be considered trespassing if someone were to get hurt?  If it wasn't for the sled trails maybe you can't access the park really anyway. 

 

It's an unfortunate situation but I understand the parties involved not wanting that extra liability.  

 

 

They have groomed X country tails,packed snowshoe trails and plowed walking trails

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

11 hours ago, ToSlow said:

why did the other threads get locked?

My original thread from December 15 in the Clubs South forum hasn't been locked.

[Muskoka Man]

33 minutes ago, PISTON LAKE CRUISER said:

My original thread from December 15 in the Clubs South forum hasn't been locked.

They just don't like me anymore because of my thoughts .but don't care 

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

1 hour ago, topnotch said:

Your last sentence is what I'd like to confirm as well, so in previous winters and during the off season the GRCA doesn't have insurance at all to cover people who might walk through the parks?

Although I guess their parks are closed in winter( I don't think they have winter walking trails?) so I'd be considered trespassing if someone were to get hurt?  If it wasn't for the sled trails maybe you can't access the park really anyway. 

 

It's an unfortunate situation but I understand the parties involved not wanting that extra liability.  

 

 

The Conestoga Lake GRCA park has cottages which appear to be used almost if not all year around on land leased from the GRCA. The roads into these cottages would be GRCA owned I would think.

[soupkids]

58 minutes ago, PISTON LAKE CRUISER said:

The Conestoga Lake GRCA park has cottages which appear to be used almost if not all year around on land leased from the GRCA. The roads into these cottages would be GRCA owned I would think.

I would imagine that the driveways would be included in the lease this cover by the persons own insurance.

[Big Pussy]

GRCA did not plow the roads the last time I was at the BIL's cottage.  GRCA did not want anyone staying there in the winter.  They would keep track of how many days a cottage was occupied.  There was a big fight at one time between cottage owners and the GRCA about rent and winter use.  I think the cottage owners won.  Cottage owners would plow into their cottages themselves and that cause a fight as well.  We would park on the side of a road and sled in.  Snow plow would plow the vehicles in then too.  It was a good starting place at the turn of the century but I got sick of all the problems and the alcoholism so I just stay away.

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

51 minutes ago, soupkids said:

I would imagine that the driveways would be included in the lease this cover by the persons own insurance.

Most of the cottages have a common road to each group.

[Lep]

Time will tell...sad with what is going on.....sure hope it gets worked out.

[revrnd]

The other thread was locked since it more or less duplicated this thread. It wasn't about any opinions expressed.

[Muskoka Man]

I do believe mine was posted first though

[ToSlow]

3 hours ago, revrnd said:

The other thread was locked since it more or less duplicated this thread. It wasn't about any opinions expressed.

why not just merge the two threads?

[Strong Farmer]

On 1/2/2020 at 8:52 PM, Lep said:

Time will tell...sad with what is going on.....sure hope it gets worked out.

If we can’t retain permission what kind of message will this send to local land owners. I am hoping new farm trespassing laws, will make it easier to bust trespassers. Have to wait and see but government seems serious on new farm trespassing laws.  This could be good news for sport and to ensure compliance with permits. 

Edited January 4, 2020 by Strong Farmer

[snowchopper]

The Minister of Tourism should be contacted and asked to weigh in on this problem.They need to be reminded how much money/revenue will be loss cause of this problem.Just my 02 cents...  

[PISTON LAKE CRUISER]

43 minutes ago, snowchopper said:

The Minister of Tourism should be contacted and asked to weigh in on this problem.They need to be reminded how much money/revenue will be loss cause of this problem.Just my 02 cents...  

I'm not a lawyer and contract wording can be very baffling to me. Last night I Googled the Memorandum of Understanding OFSC and sure enough the new version showed up. I went and dug out one from a year or 2 ago. The wording regarding insurance coverage has certainly changed. It appears at first glance that there is more complicated wording in the 2019/2020 version.  I'm not by any means taking the GRCA's or OPG's side but like most disagreements, there are two sides to the story. 

I for one would like to be told in layman's terms exactly what was changed in the MOU and what effect those changes have for both sides involved before going off half-cocked.

[02Sled]

3 hours ago, PISTON LAKE CRUISER said:

I'm not a lawyer and contract wording can be very baffling to me. Last night I Googled the Memorandum of Understanding OFSC and sure enough the new version showed up. I went and dug out one from a year or 2 ago. The wording regarding insurance coverage has certainly changed. It appears at first glance that there is more complicated wording in the 2019/2020 version.  I'm not by any means taking the GRCA's or OPG's side but like most disagreements, there are two sides to the story. 

I for one would like to be told in layman's terms exactly what was changed in the MOU and what effect those changes have for both sides involved before going off half-cocked.

It may be that both sides come to an agreement but as soon as the landowner is given a document where the wording has changed, especially a business or government body, they will send it off to their lawyers for review. The lawyers will dissect it and may accept it or ask for amendments and explain to their client in simple terms. It may be accepted or may go back to the OFSC lawyers who may or may not accept what it proposed.

 

I have at times gone back and forth multiple times for a Non-disclosure Agreement where legal have requested what I thought were extremely minor things they had grave concerns over.

[Spiderman]

Guys, agreements, leases etc evolve and change with the times like everything else.

i highly doubt anyone here would want their own personal insurance providing endless coverage to people it should not be and I for one am glad the ofsc and their carrier closed off this egregious open area of blanket coverage to users it's not intended too.

 

we, us pass purchasers pay for that, we pay now, and we will pay later.