ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf
ORIGINAL: abel_pranger
seems reasonable, but why would it not apply to public entities as well as private?
Abel
Good point... public entity vs. private and stated exclusions(or not stated) . The answer may (maybe not a factor for all States) be in the law books some where as it relates to Public Entities and their insurance interaction/subrogation. i.e. IIRC California does not allow such protections for the policy.
In this case, the OP is concerned about his private land interests.
BTW I am not a "Guard House Lawyer"...and I am not giving legal advice. Like someone pointed out earlier...get advice from your lawyer to find out if the AMA policy is good for you and what you are trying to get done. If you a truly worried about your exposure to liability, that is the only real answer as a responsible land owner. For someone to come here proclaim AMA offers a silver bullet to liabilities would be less than accurate. I only offered some other things to consider/question in light of the OP's inquiry...that's all. Here in Texas, we have more protection from recreational activities liabilities on our land than most others do. Your mileage may vary depending on where you live.
You and only you can make the determination for yourself...it is endlessly variable.
LCS-
I think at this point we agree that we do not know whether or not AMA insurance provided to private landowners would cover liability incurred due to the actions of non-AMA flyers.
Given that uncertainty, it would be prudent to assume coverage is
not provided unless/until AMA provides clear indications that it will be covered. For some of us with backgrounds in engineering it's SOP; we generally plan/design to deal with worst case scenarios. YMMV, especially if you are involved in sales/marketing.
Abel