[wingspan33]

I recently bought a new hang glider and have begun thinking about a flying site that is owned by a local U$hPa chapter (aka club).

Since I'm no longer a U$hPa member they could easily exclude me from flying from their property. But that made me think. If they said "Okay. But you have to pay the membership fee like everyone else." What would happen to the NYS Recreational Land Use Law? If you're paying to use the property, i.e., paying to launch your hang glider, then the Recreational Land Use Law goes out the window. A person could sue the chapter/club for some "defect" that helped cause some personal accident. It seemed to me that not demanding any payment by a non U$hPa member would be the best course of action since it allows the Recreational Land Use Law to remain in place. The other alternative is to DEMAND U$hPa membership that requires that you sign the waiver, that itself says that you won't/can't legally go after U$hPa related entities.

I'm also wondering about different flying sites where money is collected. Such sites would include City, State or Federally owned flying sites. Considering Torrey Pines, does Air California Adventure's collecting of "flying fees" negate the California Recreational Land Use Laws? It probably does. People who aren't U$hPa members and want to fly Torrey Pines should/could communicate to the San Diego City Council that the city is protected as long as no money (to fly) changes hand.

I've also wondered about privately owned launch/landing sites where some U$hPa chapter/club (who doesn't own the site) claims that you can't fly there until you pay the U$hPa and Chapter dues. Do U$hPa/chapter members nullify Recreational Land Use Laws? It could be a grey area since the chapter usually has some agreement with the land owner to use their property. Even if the land owner gets no "payment", a payment to fly is still being made, so, . . . ?

.
.

[JoeF]

Disclaimer: Below is my personal interpretations and not legal advice:

"manager" may be key, not just "owner."
If a land manager invites or arranges pay-invite-permit, then manager operates outside the states' recreational-use space. They incur liability on the fact of inviting or trading.

Two ways for owner/manager not to be liable using recreational-use statutes:
1. Fly and talk later. [Sometimes a good plan, but many times not a good plan.]
2. Initiate "may I occasionally recreate here for a few minutes; I will respect the gates and vegetation and not have any event. Mostly I will be in the air. You are not liable for me and my things via the states' recreational-use statutes; the recreating person is 100% liable for his or her own matters and actions." If permit is given without trade but with only incidental respect demands: close gate, do no damage, repair any divots or damage you make, take your trash with you, report by email or text or phone your use facts, etc..

Note that a "club" might become a "manager" in which case the same applies; the club could place itself outside the recreational use statutes by inviting or trading beyond incidental respect demands. A fee for use or a forcing a joining of a private corporation brings goods to the manager that puts that manager outside the recreational use statutes.

A land owner could let ride two or three use paths simultaneously:
1. John Doe: You are invited to fly here on my land. I am liable for certain matters because I have invited you, John. I can charge or trade with you whatever I wish to keep this invitation open; if you do not pay the charge or fulfill the trade, then the invitation is null and void. You, John, are still responsible for your own actions. But I am liable to maintain the property reasonably for the activity invited. We might spell out a contract more carefully.

2. Sally Smith or Flight Club, you have asked to fly off or on my land; I permit you to do so; I have not invited you; and I trade nothing with you for this arrangement; have fun; fly safely; do no damage to anything; we recognize that you Sally are 100% responsible for your actions and their results; I am protected from suit by the state's recreational-use statutes. Have no event, and repair any damage you do to my property. I am not liable to make changes to my property to suit your activity. I am liable to report to users gross-negligence matters like a camouflaged trap or deeply hazardous hidden-covered hole or arsenic pit or known land mines.
Note: If the self-initiating Flight Club is permitted, the land owner could have an exclusion (e.g., "Do not let club member John Doe use my land). Note further: The Flight Club may be sole manager or not sole manager; perhaps the club manages only its members but not its non-members. For the non-sole-manager case: Non-member recreating pilots are on their own; they may choose to communicate and cooperate with Flight Club or not. The Flight Club that invites use and or trades use of the land puts the Flight Club outside recreational use statutes and owes invitees various oversight duties; thus the drive to have third-party insurance for Club self-coverage; an invited member could sue the Flight Club (manager). Flight Club could be a flight school or site operator.

Note: if the land owner invites a Flight Club, then the owner puts itself outside the state's recreational-use statutes; it is important that the Flight Club or individual initiate request to use.

===============
Errors in my analysis are invited to be recognized.

[wingspan33]

. . . Note: if the land owner invites a Flight Club, then the owner puts itself outside the state's recreational-use statutes; it is important that the Flight Club or individual initiate request to use. =============== Errors in my analysis are invited to be recognized.

Hi Joe, In New York State a land owner can invite parties onto their land and still has liability protection. That's as long as no money changes hands. In NY there's another exception to ALL the non-liability laws. That involves not telling (or putting up notices) about hidden acid pits with pointed spikes in the bottom that you, as the land owner, have here and there on your property. In other words, VERY obvious hazards to the health and well being of persons entering your property (with or without permission).

[JoeF]

Thanks, Scott.
=======================
Please clarify: Does the NY land owner--to remain non-liable--need to notice the land users of the spiked acid pits?

[wingspan33]

Thanks, Scott.
=======================
Please clarify: Does the NY land owner--to remain non-liable--need to notice the land users of the spiked acid pits?

Yes, Joe. The land owner is required to tell or give notice to property users about "dangerous conditions".

"2. This section does not limit the liability which would otherwise exist
a. for willful or malicious failure to guard, or to warn against, a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity . . ."