There's no telling how this will turn out.
One thing that should at least be tried in parallel with the formation of the RRG is for each club with a local managed site to form a committee to approach the landholder, be it private or government, and lay their cards on the table.
"One form of liability insurance may be lost but our individual liability and responsibility and rights remain intact."Present the state code section of exclusion from the landholder's liability, explain how this has changed the liability landscape and offer to alter or dissolve the formal club arrangement to meet the new code requirements.
This will work for some, possibly most.
Others may be able to return to fly the sites as individuals after group liability is lost.
And nothing prevents individuals from continuing to provide good works - sanitation, clean-up or road maintenance - exclusive of flying.
The USHPA won't like this because it will inevitably remove some "cheapskate" participants from the insurance money pool.
But to carry on the old way of operation in the face of the insurance debacle may not work for anybody.
Why place recreational hang gliding at risk for the supposed benefit of joyriding, paragliding and commercial training?It seems to me that USHPA should be diligently readying legal assistance packages for every club and pilot to assert their rights instead of focusing on a risky RRG as the only solution.
It's time to pull back and reassess for the survival of the sport.
In my opinion: Caveot emptor - buyer beware.
Hang glider pilots did not form the USHGA to drown under the weight of all the extra baggage demanded by USHPA and its definition of "free flight."
But please notice that, even with a successful negotiation, nothing is preventing anyone from going ahead and buying into the USHPA RRG scheme anyway, even if you have already opted out of the RRG.
The worst that can happen then is you lose the RRG and your money.
You may also lose the USHPA (thanks to the RRG).
But you will keep on flying as free men.
Home
