Field Firing Areas - moving targets

[Swamp Donkey]

When are the NRA and Landmarc going to get together to arrange 'training' on SARTS ? I think that should cover it :)

[Cj10]

Still waiting for Mr Robertson to respond to an age limits issue I raised with him in 2013.

Mr Mercer actually attended our club committee meeting earlier this year to address the above, but subsequently failed to follow up on the actions he agreed the NRA would take forward with Landmarc.

Ceri

Can't comment on what Mr Mercer may or may not have done but can certainly poke Mr Robertson for you!

What's the question?

Karen

I understand the NRA has engaged with the Defence Land Ranges Safety Committee on the subject of young people, ie those aged under 16, having access to MOD ranges via civilian target shooting clubs. The outcome was a broad agreement that there should be no bar on such people from the MOD estate.

Last year I made the point to Iain, and subsequently raised it directly with Andrew Mercer during a face to face meeting, that Landmarc is seeking to impose its own Regional restrictions which are not necessarily in alignment with MOD policy. The age limit issue was one such example where locally a range warden/ safety officer had decided no civilian club members below 18 would be permitted onto MOD. Ranges. After some discussion this was lowered to 16. I asked the NRA on several occasions to intervene and help ensure Regional Landmarc staff complied with national policy. Not sure I, or the club I belong to ever received the support from the NRA Mr Mercer strongly indicated we would get.

Now it would seem the same range warden is enforcing further restrictions, resulting in the loss of access to at least two ranges, as a result of the moving targetry issues outlined above.

My specific questions are,

1. What is being done to address the inconsistencies in age limits across the Landmarc Regions, particularly given the DLRS standpoint of not having a lower age limit, and

2. What will be done to address the issue of Landmarc removing civilian access to MOD ranges where moving targetry is installed?

As I said to Mr Mercer in February he has (had) a great opportunity to demonstrate the NRA is not just Bisley centric, but also invests in the Regions by acting as an advocate with the MOD over the issues we raised directly with him. He acknowledged the importance of growing the NRA's brand in a positive manner, and supporting us would do just that. His subsequent actions, or apparent lack there of have had the opposite effect and, in my opinion caused reputational harm to the NRA brand amongst the 500 plus target shooters I, and fellow committee members represented when we met with him.

Is too much to ask that we actually get a response to emails and letters sent to Mr Mercer and other NRA staff about issues which impact on our club's ability to participate in a sport which his organisation represents, and which requires us to pay in excess of £3000 per annum for the privilege of NRA affiliation?



Ceri

[Cad Monkey]

As far as I understand the reason that civilians have been banned from using some (not all) of the Stanta ranges is down to the classification of the range itself, it's not down to the introduction of to Sarts. Great Carr and Robins Lodge are classified as 'Field Firing Ranges' which means that they are used for anti-aircraft small arms training, anti tank rifles, mortar fire, full auto firearms etc and the current NRA RCO qualification does not cover us for this type of range. The current course covers Gallery, Limited Danger Area (LDA), No Danger Area (NDA) and Barrack Ranges, in line with current MoD requirements, not Field Firing Ranges.

[Cj10]

As far as I understand the reason that civilians have been banned from using some (not all) of the Stanta ranges is down to the classification of the range itself, it's not down to the introduction of to Sarts. Great Carr and Robins Lodge are classified as 'Field Firing Ranges' which means that they are used for anti-aircraft small arms training, anti tank rifles, mortar fire, full auto firearms etc and the current NRA RCO qualification does not cover us for this type of range. The current course covers Gallery, Limited Danger Area (LDA), No Danger Area (NDA) and Barrack Ranges, in line with current MoD requirements, not Field Firing Ranges.

I understand, and agree this issue is around the RCO qualification. Landmarc East (West Tofts) told me these ranges have been withdrawn from civilian usage specifically due to their moving targetry. Our NRA RCO qualification does not cover such a course of fire. (I didn't even know that Great Carr and Robins Lodge in particular had movers. I haven't seen the Great Carr movers for years, and thought they had been removed). In anycase, such targets can be left in the down position and inactive during any course of fire.

We have been denied access to Redan range for nearly a decade, as it cannot be used for an NRA approved course of fire. We used it for practical shotgun, which, at the time, the NRA did not support, and, again, the NRA RCO qualification does not cover any dynamic course of fire.

If Landmarc is suggesting civilians are not permitted on FFAs in their entirety, due to the RCO qualification it has significant implications for large calibre rifle shooting, given all FFAs cleared for 50 BMG are used for other ordance as well.

I have asked Landmarc to put the decision in writing as it varies the terms of our range licence. Will be interesting to see the specifics, and the response we get from the NRA.

Ceri

[John MH]

Ceri

It is not Landmarc who make the rules they are required to follow the direction of the local MoD employed RSU.

All been discussed here before; Use of Electronic Targetry On Mod Ranges

Its a long read but from about page 8 there is information on how and why there are regional variations on what Civilian Clubs are allowed and not allowed to do. There are lots of emotive posts from people clearly miffed about some local arrangements, also lots about their rights of access and use as civilians when if fact they have none. All the current information is there what progress if any has been made in the last 5 months is not which is not surprising as the MoD don't move very fast over this sort of thing and it would most likely be at the bottom of their priority list.

[Cj10]

John,

I know the STANTA ranges in question are due for an imminent SARTS upgrade, but Landmarc are stating the withdrawal of facilities is due to civilian RCOs not being qualified to run courses of fire involving the moving targetry now on these ranges. No mention of SARTS made.

The difficulty is the Landmarc admin staff I converse with have been given a basic explanation by the decision maker, and are not able to offer any detail. The decision maker will not speak to me directly either, nor at this point has he put the reasons in writing. As it is, in effect, a change to our range licence I would assume written notification is reasonable to expect?

The generic issue for me is one of the NRA being made aware of an issue, then failing to communicate progress. Mercer attended a club committee meeting in February of this year, and told us what he was doing to address the age limit issue, amongst other concerns. He was due to meet DLRS members a couple of days later to discuss these exact issues, and promised to feed back the high level outcomes. To date we have head nothing, despite several reminders.

If an organisation responsible for representing you over an issue such as the above fails to communicate progress, even if it just to say discussions are still ongoing people will assume the worst, or that the organisation concerned has simply kicked it into the long grass as it is too difficult to resolve. I'm not sure which is the case with the NRA here and have no confidence it will support us over these regional anomalies, let alone the SARTS issue described in the other thread.

Ceri

[John MH]

Ceri

The RSU is under no obligation to offer an explanation, your Range Licence does not give you any rights to range access or use and if he so please the RSU can deny access in a variety of overt and covert ways, here he seems to have done it overtly in this case.

The progress or not that the NRA have made can most likely be answered by the chap mentioned earlier by Karen.

[Gaz]

The RSU is under no obligation to offer an explanation, your Range Licence does not give you any rights to range access or use and if he so please the RSU can deny access in a variety of overt and covert ways, here he seems to have done it overtly in this case.

In that case, what exactly is the purpose of the range licence?

[John MH]

The current Policy can be found here: Range Safety Policy Letter

Without a Licence a Civilian Club cannot use a specific Range, the Licence when approved does not give any right to use the specified Range but is required if use is granted by the RSU.

[Chapuis]

"In that case, what exactly is the purpose of the range licence?"

Gaz you mustn't confuse a range licence with a lease or rental agreement. There is quite a difference in law which perhaps one of our legal buffs can explain.