To intervene as of right in an action under CCP 387(d)(1)(B), the intervenor must show that its interest is not “adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties.”  Ordinarily, that is not a high hurdle, but a compelling showing is required to demonstrate inadequate representation if the intervenor’s interest is the same as one or more of the existing parties to the litigation.  For this purpose what matters is the party’s and the intervenor’s interest in the specific litigation not in other or more general matters.  Here, the intervenors had the same interest as the state defendants in upholding the defendants’ authority to promulgate regulations of ATVs on the beach.  The mere fact that the parties and intervenors disagreed about litigation strategy or which arguments to pursue didn’t show the defendants were inadequate representatives.