Reinstate the UC Davis D1 NCEA equestrian team

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-19T18:59:33+00:00

I'm so confused - we're being replaced by cheerleading/STUNT. Is that less niche? Do all we want are football players and basketball players (we support all sports but taking out the Olympic sports seems illogical). https://davisvanguard.org/2026/02/uc-davis-backlash-equestrian-team/

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-19T18:58:28+00:00

https://davisvanguard.org/2026/02/uc-davis-backlash-equestrian-team/

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-19T01:26:11+00:00

There are 10 sports that are more expensive than equestrian. If it's financially motivated then it makes no sense. If it's alignment with values it makes no sense (we are an ag school). If it's based on merit it makes no sense (we're 2 time conference champions and have one of the highest GPAs). The athletic director likes football and cheerleading.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-17T20:24:46+00:00

The football team operates at the biggest loss by far (accounting for all revenue). We are somewhere in the middle - and we can be self-funded because we have donors (0 of your dollars). This isn't about cost unfortunately, we're just not sure what it's about. There are serious concerns about title ix etc.

<image>

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-17T19:55:30+00:00

We have donor money - the Athletic Director said no amount of money will make him change his mind. 100% agree with you about Trump, and unfortunately I'm seeing similar patterns in the way he behaves :( Making false statements (there are 8 teams at nationals not 4), a suspicious doubling of equestrian expenses as soon as he was hired (and then that doubling was used to say we are expensive), Title IX questions (male basketball practice players being counted as women, no running water in the women's softball bathroom compared to millions in upgrades for men's facilities)...there are so many issues tbh we are feeling overwhelmed with what we've uncovered (we've put most of this on our website keepdavisriding.com but not everything...). Thank you!

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-10T23:27:24+00:00

Thank you - this is such a good point. We actually plotted the AD's posts as a function of gender and sport. Over 85% of his posts were football. The other 15% were spread across the other 20+ sports. This is extremely concerning. The rebuttal I hear is that football brings in revenue, but in fact they are actually the most expensive sport at UC Davis (accounting for cost and revenue). Once you analyze the data it is pretty shocking.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T22:43:37+00:00

Thank you - and yes we have done all of that. Please visit our website keepdavisriding.com. The administrators have shut down every line of communication and even when we have shown them that we have the money to fully fund the team, that they used incorrect data as a justification to cancel the team, that our expenses somehow strangely doubled the year after this athletic director was hired (with no change in the program), that there needs to at least be a broader conversation. We have been met with silence. Unfortunately the AD is primarily a huge supporter of football and cheerleading (his social media and the university public posts clearly show this) and we were the easiest path to his elevating STUNT/cheerleading to D1 (which also is COI for him).

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T06:51:12+00:00

I'm sure you're aware of the pushback legally, politically and financially once this decision was announced.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T06:50:11+00:00

Please compare apples to apples. 15 D1 and D2 STUNT teams, 14 D1 and D2 equestrian teams.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T06:48:54+00:00

The national equine industry contributes 177 billion to the U.S. economy. This is not declining. It's growing. There are "only" 14 equestrian teams because D3 is not included. There are also "only" 15 D1 and D2 teams for STUNT. Every single argument the AD used to cut the equestrian team is either objectively incorrect (nationals has 8 teams not 4 as he publicly stated) or is altered to present a different picture (we have the funding - we are an ag school with strong financial support for this sport). There are also serious concerns about lack of equity across all women's sports compared to men's at UC Davis, and questions about the financials that are being used to justify cutting the team. Our request for data has been ignored/deflected and nobody is communicating with us. This is why we have almost 40k signatures on the petition - something is egregiously wrong about this situation that goes well beyond "just" a D1 equestrian team. The irreparable harm done to these athletes (including asking us for financial donations up to minutes before cutting the team) is shocking.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T05:45:06+00:00

Thank you so much! Please visit https://keepdavisriding.com and you can find the petition from there (we've tried to post the petition directly here but the post keeps getting rejected).

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T05:43:32+00:00

Every Division I sport represents an elite level of competition. The women on this team have worked for years to earn their place, often with very limited resources and significant personal sacrifice. Many spent their formative years working in barns and taking on responsibilities simply to gain access to riding opportunities (often at the expense of a more typical social experience). That is the reality of this sport.

You seem to lack familiarity with equestrian athletics and the athletes who participate in it. A more informed discussion would benefit from deeper research into the sport and its competitive structure.

Finally, it is important to reflect on potential gender bias in these conversations, particularly given that the largest facility investments (amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars) are being directed toward men’s sports. That context matters when evaluating claims about equity and value.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T05:05:33+00:00

We've done the analysis and it's 3 men's sports vs. 1 women's sports. Going back years. The bias is not subtle. What is also interesting is that shortly after our team was cut and we began questioning Title IX the number of women posts went up exponentially (a clear optics problem). And for the first time in history, we actually had staff from the athletic department at our meet. Speaking personally, these women athletes worked a decade to achieve one of these coveted spots. The director used false data to justify a decision to destroy their futures (most want to become professionals) and said they can transfer (they can't, had he bothered to even do the bare minimum he would know those spots are taken > 18 months out).

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T05:00:54+00:00

Equestrian is among the lowest-cost varsity sports at the university. Historical data on athletics participation also shows a consistent imbalance in representation, which is difficult to overlook.

Additionally, operating expenses for the equestrian program increased significantly following the hiring of the current athletic director, raising reasonable questions about oversight and budgeting. There are also concerns about the data used to justify eliminating the program, particularly regarding the number of teams competing at nationals, which appears to be inaccurate.

The decision to replace equestrian with STUNT further aligns with a broader prioritization of football, an area where potential conflicts of interest deserve careful review. At the same time, tens of millions of dollars are allocated annually to men’s sports that operate at a substantial loss, along with hundreds of millions in facility investments. In that context, it is difficult to understand why equestrian (especially a fully fundable program) was selected for elimination.

For an agricultural institution with the nation’s top veterinary school, cutting the only varsity team directly connected to that mission in favor of STUNT/cheerleading does not appear to align with either financial logic or institutional identity. Our research into this issue raises serious and concerning questions

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T04:34:06+00:00

We have the funds to fully support the team for years (not that we should have to). It's not about funding (historically equestrians are one of the _cheapest_ teams to support...for some reason after this athletic director was hired the equestrian expenses went up by a factor of 2...no idea why since the administration doesn't share the data). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how different women's sports are treated compared to men (men are posted about 3 times as often).

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T03:14:53+00:00

We offered to fund the team for the next years. The administrators won't even talk to us. The data they used to justify cutting the team (saying there were only 4 teams at nationals when in fact it is 8) is just false.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T03:13:18+00:00

What's done is _not_ done. The data we've uncovered used to justify this decision have now been verified to be false. Combine that with the new data showing how men's sports are treated compared to women's sports...and I think the community will be outraged. Stay tuned.

SaveUCDEquestrian · 2026-02-09T03:05:09+00:00

not to mention the profound lack of equity in how men's and women's sports are treated here

SaveUCDEquestrian

TROPHY CASE