[wingspan33]

Gary,

I'm guessing that you are located somewhere in Region 8. If I'm correct, check out the below information.

Here's a link to Connecticut's Recreational land statute -

https://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/recreate/ct_rec.htm

Under #4 you will see hang gliding listed.

Here's Maine's law -

http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/14/title14sec159-A.html

Under B you will find hang gliding.

Here's a link to Massachusetts' law -

https://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/recreate/ma_rec.htm

Oddly, MA only defines "recreational" activities and does not seem to give a list. But other States usually do not limit their law to only what's on their list. So, . . .

Here's a link to New Hampshire's law -

https://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/recreate/nh_rec.htm

It doesn't mention hang gliding or seem to include anything beyond their limited list. But I've made the point before that until a person is in the air they are not hang gliding. While your feet are on the ground you are (arguably) hiking - with a hang glider over head, . . . in case it begins to rain. Hiking is listed in NH's law. Also, once you're in the air only the FAA has authority over your movements, not a land owner or the local or State gov.

Here's a link to Vemont's law -

https://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/recreate/vt_rec.htm

Under #4 you will once more find hang gliding listed.

About Rhode Island, . . . is there even such a thing as a hang gliding site in Rhode island?

I couldn't (easily) find a recreational land use law for Rhode Island. I might have to look harder.


BTW - I've yet to find a State law that specifically includes the activity known as "paragliding" in their land use law.

.

[Rick Masters]

I've yet to find a State law that specifically includes the activity known as "paragliding" in their land use law.

That's because it's under a different category:

http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/states-with-littering-penalties.aspx

[wingspan33]

I've yet to find a State law that specifically includes the activity known as "paragliding" in their land use law.

That's because it's under a different category:

http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/states-with-littering-penalties.aspx

. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. .

[GBTFLY]

Hi everyone

I want to thank you for your comments and thoughts. I fully agree with everything that you wrote. Unfortunately, the club I am doing the work for already has insurance on public and private land sites. The states, towns and private land owners are expecting insurance for us to continue flying from their land. So, we are kind a forced to provide insurance for now. There are many in the club who believe USHPA is the only answer to everything flying. I am on a very different page than that. It is going to take some time before enough people in the club open their eyes to USHPA and make changes at the local level.

I am trying to get different insurance company quotes and present them to the club at a meeting. The members will make the decision to change or not. Maybe this will be the first step to getting the club to realize they don't need insurance at most of their sites.

Thanks for your help.

Gary Trudeau

[Rick Masters]

I am trying to get different insurance company quotes

Lotsa luck.

[Red]

Hi everyone
I am trying to get different insurance company quotes and present them to the club at a meeting. The members will make the decision to change or not. Maybe this will be the first step to getting the club to realize they don't need insurance at most of their sites. Thanks for your help.
Gary Trudeau

Gary,

Not THE Gary Trudeau?

Check out your state and local laws about landowners' liabilities in recreational uses. Chances are, if you find any insurance company that is willing to sell you site insurance, they did read the law too, and they are certain that they will never have to pay out a penny on your policy. That makes the whole insurance thing a waste of money for local pilots.

If you do not have such state laws to protect landowners, your efforts would be much more effective (and a lot cheaper for everybody) to get such laws passed at the state level. If a school-kid can get new laws passed, certainly we can, too.

My US$ .02 worth . . .

[Bob Kuczewski]

Check out your state and local laws about landowners' liabilities in recreational uses.
   :
If you do not have such state laws ... get such laws passed
   :
My US$ .02 worth . . .

The only thing I can disagree with ... is the 2 cents. You're way under priced!!

[eagle]

~ But what about all the Money ~

As History Repeats.jpg (36.22 KiB) Viewed 5064 times

[DaveSchy]

That's exactly the problem with site insurance, it is expected once it is offered! Your efforts would be better spent on re-educating land owners about the limitations and likelihood of any payout and the cost and hassle involved, vs having zero liability as long as money is not involved. Better to offer signed waivers for each pilot as a last resort. Have you ever read the U$HPA waiver? It is nonsensical and it's implementation was a huge mistake, except for the dumbo who was paid to write it. U$HPA insurance ONLY benefits their prolonging a certain slide into oblivion.

[DaveSchy]

Forbonian missives have even defended the waiver having a stupid multitude of fonts in a supposedly legal document...