[Bob Kuczewski]

Great topic!!

USHPA won't push recreational use statutes because it undermines their business model. They've become such a leech on the sport of hang gliding that they would rather suck the life blood from its members rather than show them the path to true free flight.

Thanks for this topic Mike!!!

[magentabluesky]

I did not start the topic, just resurrected it after a couple of years.

Bill Cummings should get credit for starting the topic.

His “Reference chart of states with hold harmless statutes for recreational use of land” link went dead.

I just happened to run across the Fifty State Survey.

[Bob Kuczewski]

Ooops. You're right.

That gives me a chance to thank Bill as well!!

Kinda nice how that worked out.

[magentabluesky]

Every citizen of the United States has a declared right of freedom of transit through the navigable airspace of the United States implying access.

Sec. 104. There is hereby recognized and declared to exist in behalf of any citizen of the United States a public right of freedom of transit through the navigable airspace of the United States. PUBLIC LAW 85-726-AUG. 23, 1958 “Federal Aviation Act of 1958”

That declared right is codified in 49 U.S. Code § 40103 - Sovereignty and use of airspace

With regard to regulations, the FAA and the NPS, BLM, etc. have co-jurisdiction in controlling the activities when exercising your declared right to use the airspace.

The central question at hand: is the insurance requirement by USHPA controlled sites the exercise of an exclusive right per 49 U.S. Code § 40103(e)? Although the USHPA is a non-profit organization (the principle owner of the RRRG) the insurance company is not non-profit. It would therefore follow that there could be no exclusive rights with regard to any insurance requirements to fly a federal government site.

Be intelligent and be inclusive.

[magentabluesky]

Recreational Use Immunity Statutes Fifty State Survey


Recreational Use Immunity Statutes for the State California Code, Government Code - GOV § 831.7


Recreational Use Immunity Statutes for Private Property California Code, Civil Code - CIV § 846


California’s recreational use and trail immunity laws by Jim Porter


Premises Liability Part I: Recreational Immunity and Expert Witnesses in California By Kat S. Hatziavramidis, Esq.


Recreational Immunity by R. Sam


Recreational Immunity on Government Land By Ara Jabagchourian

Section 846 applies to the federal government in that the federal government’s tort liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act, if any, is to be determined according to the law of California, since that is where the negligent act allegedly occurred. (Richards v. United States (1962) 369 U.S. 1, 6-8; Ravell v. U.S. (9th Cir. 1994) 22 F.3d 960, 961.) “Thus, in California section 846 applies to the United States in the same manner it would apply to an individual.” (Casas v. United States (C.D. Cal. 1998) 19 F.Supp.2d 1104, 1107.)