I think they're one in the same. The US Hawks IS its members. The US Hawks IS its chapters.


It's a shame that the Internet didn't exist then or XCPA.org might be a hang gliding site rather than an accounting match making site.


It's much the same history with the US Hawks. I originally tried to start a new organization named the HGAA (I'm not sure if you followed that fiasco). I trusted someone to run the forum, and he ended up hijacking it and killing it. That's why I've been a lot more careful this time around.


It's even better than a great strategy. It's the way to really run things. Local people make local decisions. The people running each Chapter make all the decisions on their forums. They tell me what to do, and I work for them when it comes to their forums. And yet we're still all integrated so our resources and ideas are easily shared. It's the one thing that neither USHPA nor hanggliding.org nor the Oz Report will provide ... because they're all scared to give up control to someone who might be critical of them. I think that's the biggest breakthrough for the US Hawks. Whether it's in the Blog forums or in the Chapter forrums, we have come up with a delegation model where individuals and clubs can be responsible for their own subsections of the larger organization.


That's exactly how it should be. That's exactly how we want to model the US Hawks!!!


You're right on all counts Rick. I've been wanting to move toward a BOD for years, but after seeing what happened to the HGAA, I want to make sure that we have a BOD that's on the same page just as you've said. With new chapters and members coming on "board", I think we might be gaining enough critical mass to start discussing a BOD to diffuse the "it's just Bob's club" protests.


Right now, the perks are each other. The friendship and support that we build among ourselves is pretty much what we have to offer. But as we grow, we can start to approach the big "I" word.


This is going to be tricky. For a long time I am expecting that our members will be getting their insurance from U$HPA. So most of our members will be dual members and most of our chapters will be dual chapters. That's where the fact that we're absolutely free of charge helps us. Most members and clubs wouldn't want to pay to belong to both. Since USHPA gives them something they need (insurance) and we don't, then the choice would be clear. But by being absolutely free, it gives both members and clubs the ability to belong to both at no additional cost. Eventually I'm hoping we can gain enough members to make insurance affordable, and then we can have a discussion about making that purchase. I'm thinking that US Hawks membership will remain free, but being an insured member will cost. So insurance will be an option not part of the package. Your membership ... and your ratings ... will be good for life for free, but if you need something that costs us (like insurance) then that's something that will have to be paid for.


You saved the toughest one for last.

We are a hang gliding organization, but some of our members and some of our chapters will be either biwingual or paraglider only pilots. We can't tell the RGSA that we won't allow their club because they have paragliding pilots. We can't tell the AFFA that we won't allow their club because they have paragliding pilots. Paragliding pilots have joined the Torrey Hawks Hang Gliding Club because they support reforms of the management at that site. We can't tell them we don't want them either. The fact is that we do want them. We want anyone who supports hang gliding whether they fly paragliders or 747s. Remember, I'm a biwingual pilot myself. I'm also a private pilot and a sea-plane pilot. None of the other things I fly prohibits me from supporting hang gliding. As an organization, that has to be our position. Individual members and individual clubs may take a different viewpoint, but the US Hawks must remain just as neutral with respect to paragliding as we are to bowling or baseball or hopscotch or any other sport. We give our members a platform to speak their minds on any topics, but as an organization, we must remain neutral.

I sure hope that doesn't lose you Rick.

RickMasters wrote:
-- Don't go ahead with the BOD until your members can fly without U$hPA certification. Have a site or two for your activities where public liability insurance is not required. Even if they're far away, each chapter needs one. In time, governments will recognize US Hawks certification. They are not supposed to play favorites.

Bob K responds:
This is going to be tricky. For a long time I am expecting that our members will be getting their insurance from U$HPA. So most of our members will be dual members and most of our chapters will be dual chapters. That's where the fact that we're absolutely free of charge helps us. Most members and clubs wouldn't want to pay to belong to both. Since USHPA gives them something they need (insurance) and we don't, then the choice would be clear. But by being absolutely free, it gives both members and clubs the ability to belong to both at no additional cost. Eventually I'm hoping we can gain enough members to make insurance affordable, and then we can have a discussion about making that purchase. I'm thinking that US Hawks membership will remain free, but being an insured member will cost. So insurance will be an option not part of the package. Your membership ... and your ratings ... will be good for life for free, but if you need something that costs us (like insurance) then that's something that will have to be paid for.

Bill C,’s (two cents)
We have a BLM site that doesn’t require site insurance.
As long as we don’t do anything there but fun fly we are good to go.
Years back we held the nationals at Dry Canyon and collected registration fees from registered pilot flying in the US Nationals Hang Gliding Championship. That was the start of us paying for site insurance from that day on.
No other sport users of the same Lincoln National Forest area near launch are required by the NFS to buy site insurance.
(Rock climbers, Hikers, Campers, 4X4 Jeeps, ATV’s, Dirt Bikers, Mountain Bickers, Bow hunters, Gun season hunters, Skeet Shooters, Descending the cliff by rope, Garbage dumpers, Empty beer can sower groups, and more are exempt from buying site insurance.)

Bill, your point is right on, and it addresses a bigger problem in our society. How did the land of the free end up requiring us to be insured for every bad thing we might do intentionally or even accidentally? Did people need liability insurance to ride horses in the old days? Surely horses ran over numerous people and maybe even kicked and bit them to boot. Were cowboys required to have horse liability insurance? It's almost as if we have to pay in advance for crimes that we haven't even committed ... but someday might!! It's backwards because it removes personal responsibility for bad things that people do (it's all right, I'm insured), and it penalizes people who haven't done anything wrong ... and never will. In fact, if you think about it, insurance is really a transfer of wealth from people who are careful to people who are careless. How can that be a good idea?

Having said all of that, the reality is that many sites will continue to require insurance, and we're going to have to address that issue at some point.

Not really. It solves the problems that destroyed the USHGA.

Here's a bit of wisdom from long ago:


The US Hawks is not anti-paragliding in any way, but the master we serve is the sport of hang gliding.

Would paragliding be mentioned in the US Hawks articles of incorporation?
Would paragliding be mentioned in the US Hawks protocols?
Would the US Hawks be insuring their sites for only hang gliding or for paragliding as well?

I was a member of an organization that believed that. Then the BOD invited in parachuting. Then the freeflight majority, the paragliders, took it over and we hang gliders lost our influence, our numbers plummeted and today the average age of hang glider pilots is way up there. Now they've taken away our ability to train and certify new pilots. I have no interest in being involved in a repeat of that fiasco. And I am not worried about anyone who is anti-paragliding. They are not the problem. The threat is people of influence who are pro-paragliding. They should participate in a paragliding organization. I would like to see a reinvigoration of hang gliding. If the US Hawks Articles of Incorporation don't provide solid barriers against a repeat of what happened to the USHGA, then you can be sure I'll keep looking.

Hi Rick,

Here's the Torrey Hawks Mission Statement and By-Laws (essentially unchanged since 2007):



They don't mention the word "paragliding", and I will work to make the US Hawks By-Laws very similar. How do they sound to you?

More importantly, would you like to be part of the team that drafts the US Hawks By-Laws and Articles of Incorporation? I'd be very happy to work with you on that team.

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... c&start=70

Steve Forsland:
.

Let me say, I know BobK and the above quote is faaaaar from the truth.

We don't agree on everything as you can see. We sure didn't waste any time arguing about it

Sam, thanks very much for posting that picture and for the wonderful hospitality that you've always shown to me and so many others who've been lucky enough to find your door.

You're a true gentleman, and it's an honor (and a real treat) to be your friend.