But I feel that to a certain extent, this is a situation that will either solve itself, or there will be no publicly attended events. Either site organizers and event organizers will secure sufficient insurance, or compensate groups sufficiently, that holding living history events will be economically viable, or they will not exist, except where supported by the philanthropic sentiments of groups choosing to bear the costs themselves.

This leads me to this point, which is: What about living history events for their own sake, held by groups on public (BLM) land, where liability insurance is not an issue. Now, clearly, the public education aspect is lost, but certain other aspects are not, namely the education of each other, and the recreation aspects of what we do are not affected.

The two events cancelled this year were different, the California event had a public interaction aspect, the Massachusetts event was a private one, but on someone elses land.

I don't know how the authorities running the public land would look at the activities - most of us, I think, like the idea of a private event now and again (we do monthly presentations for the public, so getting to do your own thing is attractive)- I suspect eh reaction would be different from State to State, and some would be more open than others.

--------------------

Certainly out west I could see more flexibility and understanding, but in the east it's all controlled by divisions and state government. An example, I looked into accessing some land used by revolutionary re-enactors (for Chef's curiousity, Lincoln & Concord). Because it wasn't revolutionary or civil war, they weren't interested. And insurance was definitely part of the application process.

As for the use of the land, in essence, in these western states, living history groups could go out and rendevous pretty much at will, engaging in whatever activities they please, so long as they do not break the rules regarding land use (fire restrictions which vary from locality and conditions, length of stay, not camping close to water sources).

I probably have a different approach to the whole affair. My reason for doing what I do is wholly selfish; I just like doing it. I don't particularly feel the absolute requirement to educate the public--I consider it a neutral thing. I like associating--and it the truth be told, playing, with friends, so gatherings of like minded persons are preferable, but I have considered the virtue of simply going out with a small group, setting up camp, and enjoying each others' company, the services of a hired musician, good food, good drink, and good play.