Legislation that would offer clear liability protection for private airfield owners in Washington state has cleared the state House and now heads to the Senate. AOPA is standing shoulder to shoulder with the Washington Pilots Association (WPA) and Recreational Aviation Foundation (RAF) in support of the measure, which would clarify existing law that protects private landowners from liability if they choose to make property available for public use.

Many states have recreational-use laws on the books that protect private landowners from liability resulting from public use, provided that no access fee is charged. In Washington, House Bill 2244 would amend the existing statute to clearly include private airfield owners, who are unsure the present law pertains to them. That uncertainty has prompted many private owners to deny public access to airfields.

AOPA, the WPA, and RAF mobilized support from pilots for the measure, which has potential to increase the accessibility of a broad range of activities such as hiking, camping, and other outdoor recreation. For many people, airplanes and private fields offer the only practical means to reach remote destinations.

AOPA contacted lawmakers, and issued a call to action in January, mobilizing nearly 12,000 members in Washington state to voice their support. Bob Kay, the RAF Washington State Liaison (and WPA member), helped spread the word, working closely with AOPA staff including Northwest Mountain Regional Manager David Ulane. The legislation passed the House with a unanimous vote Feb. 9, and is now under consideration by the Senate.

“Working together, the aviation community has helped move the bill this far, and we’ll count on a continued, coordinated effort to see this commonsense measure signed into law,” said Greg Pecoraro, AOPA vice president of airports and state advocacy. “Members should contact their state Senators to make sure our messages of support are heard loud and clear in the capitol.”

Pecoraro noted that AOPA is also working to support similar legislation in several other states this year.

“General aviation offers unique opportunities to put some of our most beautiful destinations and natural wonders within reach, particularly for those with disabilities who might otherwise never experience what the backcountry has to offer,” Pecoraro said.

This is great. I support this 100% and am sending an email to the representitves involved later today. I wonder if some no tresspassing signs may be comming down? I hate to tresspass on my motorcycle, but I have followed established BLM and FS roads and trails for miles and miles only to get to a no tresspassing sign at the end preventing me from reaching the main road again. If I am low on fuel, it is close to dark, and it already took 6 hours to get to where I am, screw it, I am tresspassing.
Maybe if there wasn't liability invloved, some of the land owners would reconsider, I think now a days most of us backcountry users and quiet and considerate and probably would bother anyone.

D.

We have a 4,000 dirt strip which we have never included on any FAA sectional, for fear that it would create potential liability even if listed as private. Wires at both ends, occasional livestock and/or wildlife on the runway, etc.

Is this concern well-founded? if I was going to list it (as private), would it be better to wait until legislation like this moves forward? (Wyo has a rec safety act, but I haven't checked to see if it has any specific language regarding aviation.) Conversely, is there any benefit to listing it as a private strip--does this mean that transient traffic lands at their own risk or assumes liability if they land on a marked private strip (as compared to an unmarked strip, with a windsock) without permission from the owner?

We have everything in a hangar now, but back when we had planes tied down outside, they literally had a guy land one time, walk right into the house without knocking, ask grandma where the bathroom was and told her to go ahead and top off the tanks! It has never been on a sectional, but he apparently saw the planes and the windsock and assumed it was a working airport.

I've got to ask!!

ask grandma where the bathroom was and told her to go ahead and top off the tanks!

What did Grama DO??
GT

M6RV6 wrote:What did Grama DO??
GT

I wasn't there when it happened, but I think she may have made the guy a sandwich for lunch! Welcome to Wonderful Wyoming.

I wasn't there when it happened, but I think she may have made the guy a sandwich for lunch! Welcome to Wonderful Wyoming

Sounds like what Grama's do!!
That was after he used the bathroom right?
GT

Does anyone know if California has a recreational safety act that will cover a private air strip? Where would I look to find out.

Join RAF
This article might help, and if Kalifornia does not you might get the ball rolling.
http://theraf.org/sites/default/files/raf_page_files/clarifying_state_recreational_use_statutes_pdf_17655.pdf
GT

The definition of "sport or recreational opportunity" from Wyoming's act doesn't expressly say anything about aviation, but does refer to "commonly understood sporting activities," and also talks about "backcountry trips" and "use of private lands for vehicle parking and land access related to the sport or recreational opportunity."

Might include airplanes, but would probably be a stretch. Wyoming strip owners would probably benefit from the same aviation clarification they're doing in Washington. Pretty debatable whether this current language would hold up against the guy flying his retractable Mooney cross country from airport to airport, but who tries to land on my dirt strip for gas when he sees the windsock--perhaps resulting in more of a "backcountry adventure" than he bargained for.

Anybody have any more thoughts on the question of liability created, or prevented, by listing your private strip on the sectional versus not listing it at all? Do any of you folks who have private strips listed carry CGL or other types of insurance specifically for your strip, and/or do you know if it is necessary or advisable to do so?

This is good news GT! CO is in the early stages of getting aviation written into the RUS. The CO recreational aviation committee is working hand in hand with the RAF and CPA to gain support, but the chances are slim in 2012 (the bill failed a few years ago).

Every state would benefit greatly from this and it would sure open up a lot of private airstrips to recreational use. Please let us know what the outcome is and if there are any tips to your success.

MM

Good news! HB2244, the bill in the Washington House of Representatives in Olympia that would amend the existing Recreational Use Statute to include aviation has been passed with 94 yeas and 0 nays. It is now headed for the Washington Senate.

RanchPilot,,,you could give that 30 by 4000 airstrip to the R.A.F. Donate it to them and get a Tax right off,,And that would clear you of liability protection for a private airfield.Only what is used by aircraft..then you could use it without any liability from any persons

52Romeo wrote:RanchPilot,,,you could give that 30 by 4000 airstrip to the R.A.F. Donate it to them and get a Tax right off,,And that would clear you of liability protection for a private airfield.Only what is used by aircraft..then you could use it without any liability from any persons

Our strip is kind of a jointly owned thing within the family. Personally, I might be willing to consider it, except for the fact that few people would ever want to come to Farson, Wyoming on purpose! Trust me, we ain't exactly a destination destination.

We are, however, roughly on the way to JC. For any of you flying in from the east this summer, we're always happy to try and make room in the hanger and we have extra tiedowns outside if the party gets too big! We are also so far out in the sticks that we don't suffer from the ethanol infection yet, so we have e-free 91 on tap.

Recreational Use Statute News

Both Utah and South Dakota have passed amendments to their state recreational use statutes to include aviation as a recreational activity. Bills have passed both the house and the senate in each state and are being sent to the respective governors for signatures.

Recreational Aviation Foundation (RAF) Member Dave Tunge led the effort in South Dakota and contacted Representative Nick Moser, who sponsored the bill. Many other representatives and senators also signed on as co-sponsors. The RUS amendment adds “aviation activity” to the definition of “Outdoor recreational purpose.”

In Utah RAF Member Steve Durtschi contacted Representative Roger Barrus who sponsored the bill along with Senator Todd Weiler. The RUS amendment in Utah adds “aircraft operations” to the listed recreational activities in the definition of “Recreational purpose.”

These recreational use statutes provide a degree of liability protection to landowners who allow others to use their land for recreation. Now aviation is clearly included as a recreational activity in both Utah and South Dakota. This brings the number of states with aviation listed in their RUS to twelve. RAF’s goal is all 50 states.

John Nadeau,

RAF Director

Recreational Aviation Foundation

1711 West College Street
Bozeman, MT 59715-4913
United States

406-582-1RAF (406-582-1723)
theraf.org



Join Team RAF!



RAF Mission:
“Keeping the legacy of recreational aviation strong by preserving, maintaining and creating public use recreational and backcountry airstrips nationwide”

Neither Wyoming's nor Colorado's recreational safety statutes specifically include aviation, although arguably aviation is included in the generic language used. Obviously it would be better if aviation were specifically included.

Colorado's statute is so nebulously written that it's hard to say that just adding aviation to it would be very helpful. It really needs a complete overhaul.

Cary

By Dan Namowitz

Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire’s signature was awaited on an AOPA-backed liability protection bill that could broaden access to private airfields in the state.
AOPA Top Stories

House Bill 2244, providing liability immunity for owners of privately owned airfields who allow public access, would take effect June 6, or 90 days after the state legislature adjourns. It passed the House on Feb. 9, and the Senate on Feb. 27, both on unanimous votes.

Throughout the legislative process AOPA teamed with the Recreational Aviation Foundation and the Washington Pilots Association to mobilize support for the measure, which includes aviation among recreational uses for which landowners are afforded liability protection when granting public access to their lands.

In late February, Greg Pecoraro, AOPA vice president of airports and state advocacy, and David Ulane, AOPA Northwest Mountain regional manager, met in the state capital of Olympia with key members of the Senate to press support for the bill, following House passage. In January, AOPA had issued a call to action that mobilized 12,000 members to support the measure, working in tandem with Recreational Aviation Foundation State Liaison Bob Kay, who is also a Washington Pilots Association member.

Backers of the bill pointed out to lawmakers that by broadening airfield-access opportunities for aircraft owners and pilots in Washington state, they would be boosting aviation-related economic activity statewide—with no state outlay of funds required.

The broader airfield access would also facilitate a wide range of activities including camping, hiking, and other outdoor recreation, they said.


IMO
Looks like I'll have to get this done in Oregon. No one else seems to be doing it.

Good day

Go for it Rob, you know you'll get support at BCP. Maybe it will even spread down here to the People's Republic of Kalifornia!