@sunperch as always you're my hero. However, I took it as @lpskier just explained.
@lpskier sorry you took my comment as putting you on the spot. Wasn't meant that way but rather to ask if the statement was true and if so, you're opinion based on your expertise. As I've told you in person when we met at Faith Lake, I always read your comments because I respect your opinion (don't always agree w/it but do respect it). Also, I assumed you knew my BOS call tag. I'm Kate's Dad/Tim.
I'm not serious about tournament skiing and only ski the State Championships in order to support the host club. However, I do support Jr. Events in our State. Our event at Faith has grown from 12 participants 3 years ago to 26 this past season w/several non tournament skiers attending (true potential for growth of the sport, imo). In this capacity I feel members like me are a benefit to the organization and essential for it's growth.
It is questionable I will be able to convince the owner's of our lake/facility to continue supporting the Jr. activities we do based on my interpretation of the Safesport requirements/club obligations. My comment/question to you earlier was an attempt to fully understand/clarify why a Government entity would require me to sign away rights. It was posed to you after being told by a 40+ year member of the organization they are done if it is true.
You have done a great job listing facts which are prefaced by the underlining assumption AWSA is under the umbrella of USAwaterski/IWWF. Not wanting to put you on the spot but rather would appreciate your opinion on the following things I think are true/facts:
1. Safesport is required for all sports under the umbella of the NGB. AWSA falls into this category because of it's association w/USAwaterski/IWWF.
2. The primary benefit of AWSA's inclusion w/USAwaterski/IWWF are events such as World's, PanAM games and monetary contributions based on these activities.
3. If a sports entitity doesn't fall under the NGB, Safesport is not required. Obviously, the rule of law still applies but the redundant overreaction by Government, i.e. Safesport isn't required.
4. Based on the above if AWSA breaks away from USAwaterski there will be no Safesport requirement.
No, I'm not convinced AWSA leaving is in the best interest of the sport but I'm not convinced it isn't. What I am convinced of is it is doubtful we will continue growing the sport at our facility as a Sponsoring Club as we've done the last several years.
As things stand now I plan to not pay the $175 club fee and look for alternatives to USAwaterski for our Jr. Event. If a viable alternative presents itself great, we'll continue to hosts events which should indirectly help AWSA. If a viable alternative isn't availble our lake will become another of the many private sites used by very few private owners for their own benefit only.