The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

Alexham, yes I have shot on Short Siberia many times and do recognise the importance of a short distance range for the NRA members. However I also recognise the importance of any range for us as NRA members and if it means we have to move to a different location in order for the NRA to make more money then I am all for it. I do agree the change of use for Short Siberia has been poorly publicised so far however if it is indeed to go ahead let's support the move as something positive and look to the future.

For the record I am both an NRA trade and individual member and will do my utmost to continue to support the organisation through bad times as well as good and if this means the short term loss of a range and some disruption and even the NRA becoming even more biased towards the South of England short term then so be it. I see no real alternative right now.

TJC wrote:Prove it was a good business decision if you feel that it was.

No one has lost any facilities - short range shooting will be ( is? ) available, just not on Short Sib Tue-Fri
The NRA will benefit from the income - which will be put to good use helping improve the tired facilities for all of us, which is their core purpose.

Whinging about the facilities at Bisley is virtually a second hobby to people on here.

I often shoot on Short Sib in the week over the summer, so I'm not a dis-interested party. If I find I can't shoot in the week at all at Bisley then I'll be a bit cross about it, but the NRA reps on here insist that won't be the case.

So whats the problem?

Individual wrote: Whinging about the facilities at Bisley is virtually a second hobby to people on here.

Hmm...being a supporter of the NRA and Bisley which I think has an atmosphere second to none, I do not count myself among the people you are referring to. Maybe you ought to have included the word some?

christel wrote:

Individual wrote: Whinging about the facilities at Bisley is virtually a second hobby to people on here.

Hmm...being a supporter of the NRA and Bisley which I think has an atmosphere second to none, I do not count myself among the people you are referring to. Maybe you ought to have included the word some?

Hmm well it's good that you don't.....because I wasn't referring to you as you so rightly point out.

and there's really no need to shout, try bold italics for emphasis.

TJC wrote:Prove it was a good business decision if you feel that it was.

TJC

Just how often have you shot on SB during the period Tuesday-Friday in the last 12 months?

How much revenue did that (if any) bring to the NRA?

It is a no brainer - use of the range by CNC 4 days a week or it left bare with a small handful of shooters across the entire week?

Or should they have left it empty just in case Alex wanted to shoot on there one day!

christel wrote:Better?

Yes

MiLisCer wrote:

TJC wrote:Prove it was a good business decision if you feel that it was.

TJC

Just how often have you shot on SB during the period Tuesday-Friday in the last 12 months?

How much revenue did that (if any) bring to the NRA?

It is a no brainer - use of the range by CNC 4 days a week or it left bare with a small handful of shooters across the entire week?

Or should they have left it empty just in case Alex wanted to shoot on there one day!

I normally only shoot weekdays and quite often there are others there. I frequently take whole days off work to spend 6-8 hours there. The covered bays make it a wonderful facility during winter. My issue is less about myself and more about the concept of taking away a facility without consultation. If they want to make more money then I'd recommend they convert half of century into a riding stable because it will be more profitable. I'm a member of the NRA. I paid my membership expecting certain facilities and if those are taken away I'd like to be told about it and it would be preferential to ask for views. I'm not expecting my way but there is a line that needs to be drawn on what management can and should do without asking members for because without them the club is nothing. It is for exactly this reason that I will not become a life member. There is simply too much risk of change without consultation. If they put a policy in place to review material changes with members then I would re-consider.

One final point I'd like to make is that I understand the need to do this for financial reasons. However, I strongly believe the financial situation is a consequence of a lack of growth in the sport and a lack of actual shooting activity by existing members. I honestly believe that British shooting in general hasn't done nearly enough to rgow the sport over recent years, that the approach to competition and events is stale and moreover has completely failed to learn from other countries about trends and developments that are driving the sport overseas. I don't blame it on legislation, the media or social opinion. I just think the current UK offering we have at the moment is rather dull, isn't progressive and completely fails to attract the next generation of shooters (and i've written on this several times before). If we had something more forward-thinking, then I honestly believe there would be more members and more members shooting = less financial pressure. Leasing out a facility is one way to solve a financial issue but I'd rather see it solved through growth of membership and more shooting activity by those members.

TJC wrote: One final point I'd like to make is that I understand the need to do this for financial reasons. However, I strongly believe the financial situation is a consequence of a lack of growth in the sport and a lack of actual shooting activity by existing members. I honestly believe that British shooting in general hasn't done nearly enough to rgow the sport over recent years, that the approach to competition and events is stale and moreover has completely failed to learn from other countries about trends and developments that are driving the sport overseas. I don't blame it on legislation, the media or social opinion. I just think the current UK offering we have at the moment is rather dull, isn't progressive and completely fails to attract the next generation of shooters (and i've written on this several times before). If we had something more forward-thinking, then I honestly believe there would be more members and more members shooting = less financial pressure. Leasing out a facility is one way to solve a financial issue but I'd rather see it solved through growth of membership and more shooting activity by those members.

I agree 100%

TJC wrote:
I normally only shoot weekdays and quite often there are others there. I frequently take whole days off work to spend 6-8 hours there. The covered bays make it a wonderful facility during winter. My issue is less about myself and more about the concept of taking away a facility without consultation. If they want to make more money then I'd recommend they convert half of century into a riding stable because it will be more profitable. I'm a member of the NRA. I paid my membership expecting certain facilities and if those are taken away I'd like to be told about it and it would be preferential to ask for views. I'm not expecting my way but there is a line that needs to be drawn on what management can and should do without asking members for because without them the club is nothing. It is for exactly this reason that I will not become a life member. There is simply too much risk of change without consultation. If they put a policy in place to review material changes with members then I would re-consider.

One final point I'd like to make is that I understand the need to do this for financial reasons. However, I strongly believe the financial situation is a consequence of a lack of growth in the sport and a lack of actual shooting activity by existing members. I honestly believe that British shooting in general hasn't done nearly enough to rgow the sport over recent years, that the approach to competition and events is stale and moreover has completely failed to learn from other countries about trends and developments that are driving the sport overseas. I don't blame it on legislation, the media or social opinion. I just think the current UK offering we have at the moment is rather dull, isn't progressive and completely fails to attract the next generation of shooters (and i've written on this several times before). If we had something more forward-thinking, then I honestly believe there would be more members and more members shooting = less financial pressure. Leasing out a facility is one way to solve a financial issue but I'd rather see it solved through growth of membership and more shooting activity by those members.

TJC

clapclap clapclap

The NRA needs proactive, positive initiatives. Communication with the members. Nationwide initiatives and support.
Change of mindset, just because one asks a question does not mean one is NRA bashing.