Commercial Ranges

[Daniel11]

As far as I know the military used to certify Ranges, and then stopped doing so. The NRA then 'assumed' responsibility for it, but it seems have no official powers when it comes to private Ranges. I think it is also all tied up in the wording of FAC conditions, with more recent ones referring to 'Ranges with Appropriate financial arrangements' (or similar) rather than the 'approved ranges' of old.
Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than myself could enlighten us on the rules for private ranges?

[snayperskaya]

My local club range which is privately owned says they are "Home Office Approved", hence why I said the Home Office.

[Daniel11]

Fair enough, it seems that there are several people running 'shooting training' in the UK who feel that they do not need the home office's approval, and their local police seem perfectly happy with such an arrangement.

[Daniel11]

Here is the standard FAC condition for target shooting, taken from the most recent HO guidance:

The *calibre *RIFLE/MUZZLE-LOADING PISTOL/REVOLVER and ammunition shall be used
for target shooting, and only whilst a member of *club1, on ranges which are legally and safely
constructed and maintained.

It seems then that there is no requirement for the HO to approve a range, as long as the range is safe.
Having said that, this is dependent on each shooter's FAC, as it seems some have different conditions, and also I suppose that is how it works in theory, in practice Target shooting somewhere not approved by the Home Office might get you in quite a bit of trouble if something went wrong...

[safetyfirst]

Mine says home office approved.

[dromia]

As far as I know the Home Office do not do range certificates but I will be happy to be shown different.

Clubs can be Home Office approved which gives it certain benefits, such as non FAC holding members being able to use firearms.

To be Home Office approved the club, not the range, needs to show it is responsibly constituted and run.

[James K]

I asked a friend in the know and he said the MoD stopped doing civilian ranges many years ago, the NRA can offer advice on range construction but there is currently no national body that certifies private ranges. Seems to be that as long as you have insurance in place you are ok, its probably more to do ith what the insurers now require. 'Home Office' approved is for the club entity not where the club shoots.

[Chapuis]

Who certifies private or commercial ranges these days?

A couple of private consultants who have the relevant technical knowledge and experience. They issue certificates or letters of conformity that indicate that a range is constructed and maintained in accordance with recognised standards in a similar way to a risk assessment. Obviously these guys should be covered by adequate public liability and professional competence insurance. Most of the standards that they work to are broadly in line with the system and standards the army uses which is generally where they obtained their experience.
I believe that they will sometimes work as sub-contractors for the national associations.

As previously mentioned Home Office approval refers to the way a club is run and operates and not how a range is constructed.

[Gaz]

Thinking laterally, then, does the change in the wording of the standard target shooting condition open the way for informal ranges provided the landowner gives permission for its use as a range, e.g. "field firing areas" (X thousand yards in a straight line)

[Chapuis]

Thinking laterally, then, does the change in the wording of the standard target shooting condition open the way for informal ranges provided the landowner gives permission for its use as a range, e.g. "field firing areas" (X thousand yards in a straight line)

Not really because the range needs to have adequate insurance provision in place for target shooting. No insurance company is going to provide cover without first ensuring that the range meets certain accepted standards regarding its construction, in effect certified by a competent person.
Zeroing and reasonable practise with an open certificate, or for that matter on named land, is an entirely different matter.