...do you have any better suggestions?
Well, sure.
Before this culminates in a citizen asking an FAA official to accompany him to a site supported by some federal monies, where the refusal of being allowed to fly will be officially witnessed, the managers of these sites should put out the word that anyone wishing to fly under state recreational liability law be allowed to do so by all club members.
That way, nothing bad, from a federal perspective, will result.
We do not want that to happen. I repeat:
WE DO NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN! 
These "rogue" pilots can also be asked to sign a waiver to protect the local club and landowner - but that's not really necessary.
They're already protected.
Responsibility lies solely on the individual pilot.
Oversight is a fine idea, but don't get carried away.
Hang gliding is a dangerous sport.
Under recreational sports liability law, every pilot is responsible for his own actions. No one else is.
In the event of an accident, it can always be demonstrated that a non-member refused the club's oversight.
The club is therefore not responsible. Or liable.
In fact, because fedral law requires a club on state or federal land to allow any citizen to fly, the club cannot be held responsibe for the actions of non-members.
It is therefore ludicrous to prohibit them.
Clubs have to let go of the "Nanny-HG" thing for outsiders.
I am not angry with the local clubs.
(I loved my first club, the San Luis Obispo Soaring Association, and I later built the Cross Country Pilots Association - with over 400 members.)
There are a lot of good people in our nation's clubs.
I would encourage visiting non-member pilots to contribute to or join these clubs and recognize their importance.
I would even accept the banning of pilots for flying dangerously.
(This could be interpreted as a responsible peer action under FAR 103, particularly with video evidence).
However,
all citizens are allowed to fly hang gliders from state and federal land where flying is permitted.
Ratings by your peers are only advisory (notwithstanding, a good idea!). But they are not requirements under federal law.
The clubs have to accept this. It's not a big deal. The alternative is folly.
Yes, in some places, illegal monopoly operatives can bully their way for a while longer.
The biggest bully of them all is the USHPA when it unfairly and illegally demands that all pilots fly with USHPA 3PL insurance.
If non-members are allowed to fly under recreational liability law, USHPA threatens to attack the clubs by invalidating them.
What??
-- I mean - really - this is what the elitists pay for? And they call it "free flight?"
Those of us pursuing freedom from the USHPA need to have sympathy for the clubs during this inevitable and ongoing transition.
They are caught in the middle. Some members are curious about options. Some are opposed. All are concerned about the future.
In reality, USHPA 3PL insurance is optional. You don't have to obtain it. You don't have to pay for it.
In many instances, it appears to be nothing but a scam.
But then, where do you go?
The truth is, you don't need to go anywhere. You're already there. You're recreational hang glider pilots.
Under FAR 103, you've got it made. Things are better now than ever.
Aside from commercial operations, site insurance has been superceded by state recreational liability law which automatically protects the landholder.
Things are changing. This is an earthquake.
Yes, USHPA has been working for decades to convince landowners that their 3PL insurance is needed.
But it's not true.
In fact, in a lot of cases where USHPA was sued, if they had used recreational liability law instead, nothing would have happened.
There is no giant pot of money to attract lawsuits under recreational liability law.
Recreational hang gliding activity does not require any type of insurance under law.
USHPA 3PL insurance is, for the most part, a made-up standard.
It was useful first in contests, where it was required, then in commercial enterprises, where it was also required, but then it was seized as a universal method for creating a USHPA monopoly.
That was before the widespread state recreational laws were created.
Clubs should embrace recreational sports liability law and use it as the primary tool in procuring flying sites.
Fighting the federal rights of hang glider pilots to preserve their status quo is a certain path to disaster.
I appeal to all to recognize the hierarchy of citizens rights over special interests - which is what this boils down to - and accommodate all citizens who demand access to the sky.
USHPA folks, remember, we hang glider pilots - both USHPA and non-USHPA - have very special privileges.
We can fly our hang gliders to 18,000 feet.
The Sport Aviation people cannot.
Don't make a stink.
Don't ban pilots for political reasons.
Don't create insurance monopolies.
Don't enforce laws that don't exist.
Do this, and you place our sport at risk.
Oh, you already did?
KNOCK IT OFF!
Home
