Thread: Otorohanga rifle range closed

Originally Posted by Tentman

Actually the "new" template is way less restrictive and permits alternative approaches that were impossible to get across the line in the recent NRA template days. I found the FSA range guys excellent to deal with, and our recently certified range offers vastly more options that we ever could under NRA e.g. couldn't shoot steel, couldn't shoot a 22-250 (ffs) or 45-70, couldn't shoot a 375 H&H, couldn't use magazines, on it goes. Doing all that stuff now.

The range danger area hasn't changed - but if you have a compliant backstop and can control range floor strike then the older NRA range restriction around muzzle velocities and energy limits can be relaxed. The magazine fed thing came from NRA to assist them controlling their Cone of Fire down to +/-5MIL.

Originally Posted by BSA

Precisely, if it has no permanent fixtures it is not a range. 'Tis a paddock.

That is not the current definition of a range by the Police / FSA... If you want to run an organised shoot or as part of a club then is doesn't matter if there is permanent fixtures or not.

Originally Posted by Basenjiboy

Actually all NZDA permanent Ranges were certified, and NZDA had their own Range Manual - it's referenced in Section 9.1 of the current Police Range Manual.

"Had" being correct... NZDA refer to the Police Range Manual now is my understanding. The Police Range Manual refers to it, but my understanding is it is now defunct.

Originally Posted by Basenjiboy

The other problem was that under the new legislation; the farmers paddock with big bank, if used by an organised group (for example forum members in South Canty) requires that organised group to be an incorporated Shooting Range Operator even if it was 1 annual shoot. There is now a cost to certify 'one off' use ranges, which is a waste of that organised group's time and money

BB.

Yep, as others have said clubs only need to be incorporated if they are selling ammo. Otherwise they don't need to be incorporated - I haven't dealt much with the clubs side of things but my understanding is it is "encouraged" but is not a requirement. Being incorporated has advantages for the committee members to say the least.
And I agree for a "one off" range the cost, and more so the work involved in putting together the RSOs, danger area validation, range inspector, etc. can be pretty onerous.

Originally Posted by 19Badger

Considering the safety record of rifle ranges around the country what problems were these regulations trying to fix?

This I agree with... How would the effectiveness of the range regulations be measured in a few years time? Against an incident rate? There wasn't one to start with? So how would the cost of the range certification regime be justified?