Why are the NRAA and SSAA separate ?

We want to hear what your club is doing to bring in new members. Tell us what works, and give credit to those who are making the effort.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
jcinsa
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 4:59 pm
Location: Adelaide Hills

Why are the NRAA and SSAA separate ?

#1 Postby jcinsa » Sat Jan 05, 2013 10:14 pm

I ask this question because it in his post below, Alan states that the SSAA is going ahead in leaps and bounds.

Why is this ? In what way ?

and

Doesn't this provide an opportunity ?

We have a discipline ( and the ranges to shoot it on ) that surely some SSAA members would like to participate in.

It would only take a small number of SSAA members to take up our discipline to make a huge difference to our numbers on the Range.

Obviously SSAA do some things better than the NRAA, and vise versa.

As a relative newcomer to target shooting, and the NRAA, I don't know the reasons why we don't have a much more jointly beneficial relationship with the SSAA.

John
Argue with a fool, and all the casual observer will see is two fools arguing.

bobeager
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: Goulburn NSW Australia

#2 Postby bobeager » Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:23 am

I am a member of both, and are of the oppinion that the "NRAA" and "SSAA" are incompatible. The SSAA has 150,000 plus members who are hunting oriented, a small percentage of which shoot target competitions of various types, and the NRAA is specifically Target oriented with a small proportion who go hunting.

However, financially and politically, the SSAA is significantly stronger.

If the "NRAA" state associations were to ever become merged with the SSAA, I believe fullbore shooting would become just another discipline within the SSAA structure.

In the very long run, good or bad thing, who knows?

johnk
Posts: 2168
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: Brisbane

#3 Postby johnk » Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:55 am

I'm of the same opinion as Bob, but some of the competitive elements of bots regularly cross over. Here in Brisbane, F Class, 1000 yard benchrest, fly & rimfire benchrest are disciplines with members from both. I haven't mentioned 100/200 bench, because although the Elliots & others compete there also, there is not reciprocity.

The essential business of the SSAA is to collect non demanding members to support its infrastructure & competitions & to thus act as a lobby group for shooters IMHO. Bear in mind that it's certainly not a them & us in Brisbane at least. Back when Howard was growing his political dick in 1996/7, all associations on Belmont equally participated in trying to make our case heard & that's still the case.

Barry Davies
Posts: 1124
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:11 pm

#4 Postby Barry Davies » Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:34 am

I have the idea that in Vic the SSAA and VRA have a reciprocating agreement re competition shoots --correct me if I am wrong.
There has been occasions where SSAA members have competed in PM's in Vic and not been members of the VRA.

Otherwise, any SSAA member is free to join the NRAA and State affiliate and thereby compete --if they want to.
No need for the SSAA and NRAA to amalgamate.
Barry

DannyS
Posts: 897
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:33 pm
Location: Hamilton
Contact:

#5 Postby DannyS » Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:05 pm

Hi Barry, I don't know if that is right about PMs. Quite a few years ago Hamilton Rifle Club wanted to host a shoot inviting SSAA and VRA members, the VRA were dead against citing insurance. It got to the stage where the VRA told us they would take our range off us. It was pointed out to them the HRC was an incorporated body and owned the range. It all ended up in HRC breaking away from the VRA, Portland followed.

Times have changed we know have rejoined the VRA but are still affilliated with SSAA.

Maybe things have changed since the above happened.

Cheers
Danny

bobeager
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: Goulburn NSW Australia

#6 Postby bobeager » Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:49 pm

I should have added ...that there are a number of shooters who are in both organisations with the crossover being primarily between F Class Open, 1000yard bench and the 500 metre FLY Shoot. This is a good thing, but these members are probably only say 200 or 300 out of an SSAA membership of 150,000 or so.

Also, my experience has been that the two organisations get on well together at the individual and club level ( I am sure there are exceptions).

Some sort of "national" reciprocal rights argeement would be nice but would be difficult to accomplish as the fullbore membership is actually State based.

aaronraad
Posts: 572
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 3:43 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

#7 Postby aaronraad » Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:37 pm

johnk wrote:The essential business of the SSAA is to collect non demanding members to support its infrastructure & competitions & to thus act as a lobby group for shooters IMHO.


Sounds about right johnk.

Problem is for the SSAA is that membership has swelled and become more demanding. The NRAA facilites are starting to look much more attractive for the SSAA. I don't think it will be too long before a number break-off groups(clubs) start to form focused on particular activities.

It would seem more efficient for the NRAA and State Associations to bring entire clubs into the fold, instead of trying to attract individual members? When the NRAA has the facilites being used or maintained 24/7 then they will know they have reach capacity. :wink:
Be careful what you aim for, you might hit it! Antipodean Industrial - Home of the G7L projectiles

Dave P
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:10 am
Location: Hervey Bay Qld

#8 Postby Dave P » Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:43 pm

Its a funny old world isnt it. The SSAA have the members but not the range facilities and the NRAA have the ranges but not the members.

The key here is not to hard to spot ... the issue of maintaining facilities and securing ongoing usage of ranges is paramount. The invention of or decline of any discipline is not such a big issue IMHO. For example if TR continues on its current path it will eventually die, a long slow painful passing but a passing none the less, if F Open becomes the backbone of the NRAA isnt it simply a case of natural selection. The fact that something exists does not mean it deserves to be saved for eternity.

Now that said I dont want to see any discipline pass away NRAA or SSAA or any other for that matter

How do we attract members or at least participants from SSAA ... heres a few ideas

1. Golf clubs have reciprical right agreements allowing visitors from other specified clubs to play as members, some only a limited number of times per year ... could the NRAA allow SSAA members the same rights say to shoot as members say 3 times a year.
As far as insurance goes (already raised in this thread) I know the NRAA insurance is for NRAA members only and I believe applies only yo matches listed in the SSR's. The SSAA members are covered by SSAA insurance on a range or in a paddock so they are not needing NRAA insurance coverage.

2. The SSAA is limited in ranges and yardages with most ranges being 300m or less and a few 500m. NRAA has many ranges up to and exceeding 1000m which are used on Saturday afternoons most weekends.
Could we run other events ie 1000yd Benchrest is in the SSR's and as such is an NRAA event not SSAA adopt 600 yard BR and run matches on Sundays or Sat morning

3. Many new shoots are coming along involving tactical shooting lets adopt some, we dont have to shoot them but as lng as those running it are qualified (NRAA RO's Course) and its run to suitable rules we can gain more members.

Theres always ways of expanding ... the real question becomes who wants to change things to make it happen. All this can happen around existing NRAA shooting (maybe the odd Saturday arvo will be lost but the always make up days in the calender anyway)

Dave

bsouthernau
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 4:31 pm

#9 Postby bsouthernau » Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:42 am

Barry Davies wrote:I have the idea that in Vic the SSAA and VRA have a reciprocating agreement re competition shoots --correct me if I am wrong.

Barry


My experience is that it's a bit of a one-way street. Certainly SSAA members have participated in service rifle shoots run under the auspices of the VRA for quite a few years now. I'm not so sure about the reverse happening. Mabe they run fly shoots open to all comers?

Barry

higginsdj
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 4:34 pm
Location: Canberra
Contact:

#10 Postby higginsdj » Thu Jan 10, 2013 7:59 am

I am a member of both SSAA and NRAA but I too would caution against amalgamation. SSAA disciplines would swamp NRAA disciplines. At best we would just become another discipline, something else to compete for range time which at best (at least here in ACT) limits range time for any given discipline competition (other than "individual competition') to just once a month. Remember - we are the minority....

Cheers

David

bsouthernau
Posts: 591
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 4:31 pm

#11 Postby bsouthernau » Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:12 am

higginsdj wrote: Remember - we are the minority....

David


And as others have pointed out - competition shooters are a minority within the SSAA. Here in Victoria they have tended to feel neglected by the state administration.

Barry

bobeager
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:29 pm
Location: Goulburn NSW Australia

#12 Postby bobeager » Thu Jan 10, 2013 4:52 pm

It is unfortunate, that in the current socio-political climate, the SSAA is seen as Australia's "Gun Lobby", and the NRAA and its state based members, rightly so, see themselves as the custodians of a Commonwealth Games discipline which has a proud history of international sporting competition.

Chalk and Cheese... but it does not mean that both organisations can't work together to share facilities and make sure that NO RANGE Closes due to lack of use.

Sam Walker
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: Nhulunbuy, in the awesome NT

SSAA/NRAA

#13 Postby Sam Walker » Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:58 am

Interesting - when you look at some of the threads on AHN the SSAA is often criticized for some of their branches/ranges being too fixated on BR and other target disciplines, and not doing enough for hunters ! It seems that more than a few hunters believe the SSAA isn't worth joining - they feel that the SSAA isn't doing enough in the political arena to oppose the anti gun politicians that always seem to get a free run in airing their opinions in the media. Certainly the two orgs are chalk and cheese which doesn't bode well for the future of the shooting sports in our country.
Shooters from all disciplines need to band together for the long term future - or our sport will not be around for future generations to enjoy. While we debate the various pros and cons of either group we are losing sight of the bigger picture. Different strokes for different folks ! The idea that any one form of shooting is somehow more worthy than others is counterproductive. The antis will keep chipping away until there are no shooting sports of any kind.
Sam

Barry Davies
Posts: 1124
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 12:11 pm

#14 Postby Barry Davies » Sat Jan 12, 2013 7:47 am

You know Sam, all of that was said immediately following Port Arthur --15 years ago ( or thereabouts) Did'nt happen then, and won't happen now.
Negative? no. Realistic? yes.

Sam Walker
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: Nhulunbuy, in the awesome NT

..

#15 Postby Sam Walker » Sat Jan 12, 2013 10:04 am

And look what good it did when shooters stuck with that attitude ! As fractured, disparate factions we will be more easily defeated. Easy to say I'm alright Jack, they aren't banning my guns...when only single shot target rifles are left, one day some anti shooting types will start going on about deadly sniper rifles and pointing at F Class. Then perhaps we will be saying we should have stuck together, all shooters, hunters, pistol, rifle, and shotgun.
Sam


Return to “Helping F-Class to Grow”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest