Thread: The future of Rifle Ranges.

Originally Posted by Doghead

I may have missed it (or forgotten) - BUT has anybody being injured or killed on a rifle range, OR killed/injured by a stray bullet orginating from a rifle range.

IF NOT - then someone has clearly missed the basic cost-benefit analysis.

Hahahaha, @Doghead, logic or actual risk has almost nothing to do with any of this.

It is simply a massive new bureaucracy - very similar to WorkSafe...

Originally Posted by Doghead

I may have missed it (or forgotten) - BUT has anybody being injured or killed on a rifle range, OR killed/injured by a stray bullet orginating from a rifle range.

IF NOT - then someone has clearly missed the basic cost-benefit analysis.

No they haven't. License holders and clubs pay. If they can't they shut down. That's the goal.

Originally Posted by Doghead

I may have missed it (or forgotten) - BUT has anybody being injured or killed on a rifle range, OR killed/injured by a stray bullet orginating from a rifle range.

IF NOT - then someone has clearly missed the basic cost-benefit analysis.

I believe one fella was killed on NZDF range many many years back and I believe it was some obscure oldschool cartridge,something like a .50 cal buffalo rifle. so not a common occurance.

Originally Posted by Doghead

I may have missed it (or forgotten) - BUT has anybody being injured or killed on a rifle range, OR killed/injured by a stray bullet orginating from a rifle range.

IF NOT - then someone has clearly missed the basic cost-benefit analysis.

You cannot best dumb, and dumb is what it is, ideology not facts.
Good to have some training, although I’ve never had a problem at Taupo, why, because you have to talk to the other shooter there on the day, or going forward becomes dangerous. Met many good guys with a common interest when there.

Originally Posted by Doghead

I may have missed it (or forgotten) - BUT has anybody being injured or killed on a rifle range, OR killed/injured by a stray bullet orginating from a rifle range.

IF NOT - then someone has clearly missed the basic cost-benefit analysis.

NZDA Auckland a long long time ago had someone injure/break a leg by slipping on a muddy slope but never any firearms accidents or ND's causing injury/death.

I've recently inspected three private ranges down our way, two of which are full danger area with 8mm templates - advantage of having private land in mountainous areas.

As was mentioned above; read the NZ Police Range manual, its the bible we check against.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

The danger area template for the .308 up to 8mmate are 400 cartridges was plotted on an scaled photograph of a place of interest. It was very interesting, the 100 metre range was just a tiny patch in one corner. The danger area is 2.9km long and 900 metres wide at its widest and included one public road.

GPC, the 900m width is just (soft) ground ricochet. If you include hard ricochet surfaces, that increases to over 1600m wide.

The blocks on the T6 template are 400x400m squares.

We are going through the process here in wairoa will have a 200m rifle range dtl range and hopefully pistol. Just finalizing the paper work. We have been working with Mike spray and Doug puke

Originally Posted by country cuts

We are going through the process here in wairoa will have a 200m rifle range dtl range and hopefully pistol. Just finalizing the paper work. We have been working with Mike spray and Doug puke

Great effort @country cuts keep us posted and we will be down for a shoot once up and running

Originally Posted by country cuts

We are going through the process here in wairoa will have a 200m rifle range dtl range and hopefully pistol. Just finalizing the paper work. We have been working with Mike spray and Doug puke

Yes well done.
If Wairoa, with it's tiny population, can get their act together then the Napier Hastings area with ten times the population should be able to.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Yes well done.
If Wairoa, with it's tiny population, can get their act together then the Napier Hastings area with ten times the population should be able to.
Regards Grandpamac.

I think something in this discussion has been missed, you also need all "Council Conscents" in place to my knowledge? Whilst many may fall under existing use categories and no problem in some districts where they understand to try and cater for all constients. Other areas the lengths councils have gone to shut clubs has just seemed to fall in line with current govts overall agendas around sports they don't approve of.

Originally Posted by jackson21

I think something in this discussion has been missed, you also need all "Council Conscents" in place to my knowledge? Whilst many may fall under existing use categories and no problem in some districts where they understand to try and cater for all constients. Other areas the lengths councils have gone to shut clubs has just seemed to fall in line with current govts overall agendas around sports they don't approve of.

The range certification process requires the range operator acknowledge they have all necessary Local Territory Consents. For a new permanent range (i.e. doesn't fall under existing use) with build firing lines, berms, buildings, infrastructure, etc. this will likely need building and earthworks consents.
For a new range that just has some target frames out and no substantial infrastructure (i.e. more of a field range) then in many areas shooting is considered a legitimate secondary land use for farmland (i.e. range doesn't change the primary land use in the eyes of the Council hence no consent required.

Overall my view on range certification is that it is bureaucracy because the bureaucracy knows nothing else - it is driven by Police perception and a Government that didn't listen to actual users. Historical incident rates prove existing ranges (including "unofficial" target shooting on farms) don't have problems - and they haven't had a certification regime either. Range certification is therefore a complete waste of taxpayer, and range operator money.

For example how will the effectiveness of the money spent be measured in 5 years time? By a reduced incident rate?
But there isn't a measurable incident rate at the moment?

Originally Posted by Gillie

The range certification process requires the range operator acknowledge they have all necessary Local Territory Consents. For a new permanent range (i.e. doesn't fall under existing use) with build firing lines, berms, buildings, infrastructure, etc. this will likely need building and earthworks consents.
For a new range that just has some target frames out and no substantial infrastructure (i.e. more of a field range) then in many areas shooting is considered a legitimate secondary land use for farmland (i.e. range doesn't change the primary land use in the eyes of the Council hence no consent required.

Overall my view on range certification is that it is bureaucracy because the bureaucracy knows nothing else - it is driven by Police perception and a Government that didn't listen to actual users. Historical incident rates prove existing ranges (including "unofficial" target shooting on farms) don't have problems - and they haven't had a certification regime either. Range certification is therefore a complete waste of taxpayer, and range operator money.

For example how will the effectiveness of the money spent be measured in 5 years time? By a reduced incident rate?
But there isn't a measurable incident rate at the moment?

Totally agree. This should have been a process to encourage people to join clubs & organisations to teach best practices. Using participating users of what would practically work in this country and achieve whatever goal they are trying to achieve?

Cynically to me it is just yet another Trojan horse by bureaucrats in part of a wider agenda to wind down and severely limit firearms use in New Zealand through economics.

Make every part of shooting sports expensive, cumbersome and hard so numbers dwindle over time. Eventually death by a thousand cuts you have a tiny group that politically then you can do what you want with.

Had a few injuries on ranges due to failures, bore plugs and the like and a few near misses with ricochet etc, but by and large ranges are very safe places. A recent occurrence was an incursion by a pig hunter who biffed the dogs over the fence marked with danger no entry signs and wandered onto the range - not much you can do about that sort of stupidity...

You don't I believe need an approved range for "sighting in". Correct me if I'm wrong. Its bin a while since I read the new regs but I believe they only apply to "formal" ranges -the main part of the legal definition of "formal" being around organised membership (Clubs) or public use, and targets being left in place over night, running events etc. If you are just a small group of 2-3 mates and you get together to sight your rifles in (load testing) any sensible gully or big hillside will do. Yes you need legal access on private land. That's a prob in big smokes but that is also why clubs with ranges exist. The well established big city ranges are well and truly across the new requirements.

Its the little clubs in small towns and rural NZ that have the compliance and cost problem. They also often have membership and survival-as-clubs problems. Frankly some would be better off disbanding as an organization with membership etc, stop calling where they shoot a range, and just come together as mates in 2s and 3s to "sight in". Word of mouth will accommodate youngsters starting out needing to "sight in" also. Oh, and don't leave targets up overnight. Probably sell the clubhouse off too, or put some haybales in it. No more AGMs, Incorporated Society Reporting, Club Accounts & Minutes, Elections or AGMs. Just shooting and reloading and hunting. Of course if you love your Club you will get stuck into the now necessary compliance.

My "sighting in" and load dev is done using 6" steel gongs rated for 30 cal @100m. I can hang them on any wire fence. A large sheet of appliance box cardboard held in place with a couple of electric fence standards tells me where I'm missing lol. Or how I'm grouping. Eminently portable. Great with a buddy or two. Can go anywhere I have permission and is sensibly safe to shoot. I shoot same as I do hunting, off sticks, a strainer post, leaning on a tree or off the bonnet of mates truck (don't like scratching mine)

Having said that, I also belong to 3 shooting clubs with 100m, 220m and 700m formal registered ranges, Pistol and NZDA, all with organised shoots. Sometimes tho life is more simple on your own.