There has been a lot of discussion in this section recently about growing both AMA and club membership, and two of the examples you have posted are IMO poster children for how not to grow the hobby. Luckily enough when I started flying early last year I ran into just the opposite. I was welcomed as a visitor to both a club meeting and the flying field before joining and was encouraged to join and become a part.

OTOH, I disagree with your final comment. I don't think that AMA should be able to mandate that clubs accept new members. In the 10 months or so that I've been reading messages here I've heard of several clubs that have closed their membership, and I think that is/should be their decision alone. I can think of any number of reasons that a club would have to limit membership. Most facilities can only handle so many members comfortably, for instance, and may want to insure that those members they do have can be readily accomodated, etc. Bottom line, they are private clubs, should be allowed to run themselves as they see fit, and the less involvement AMA has in the day to day running of any given club the better off they (and all clubs) will be. I guess it boils down to being analogous to the old line about disagreeing with what one says, but defending their right to say it.

My comments are based on a club being operated on privately held land. If on publically owned (city, county, etc) then I would disagree with a closed membership. Even then, though, that should be between the club and the city/county, rather than AMA. The facility where I fly is owned by the county, but leased to the club to operate with the typical requirements for AMA membership for insurance purposes, and it's use is limited to club members. Guests are welcome, and may fly if they hold AMA membership and are accompanied by a member. I don't believe that there are any comments one way or the other in the lease agreement about limiting/not limiting membership, but am not totally sure.