Thread: The future of Rifle Ranges.

Many small country clubs will have formed before council amalgamation abolished the old county councils. Finding records for these if they ever existed anyway would be problematic.
Anyway wouldn't these be covered by existing use and grandfather clauses in the RMA if actual documents were needed. Asking as a local club is wondering about this

Greetings again all,
Thank you for all of your responses. A short summary of the current position might be of use.
1. Any ranges for which registration has not been applied for on 24 June this year will be closed. Sighting in in accordance with the Range Manual is still permitted but needs to comply with the manual.
2. The requirements in the Range Manual for range construction like danger areas, backstops etc are largely the same as previous requirements but there are a lot of current ranges that never complied. These are often due to force fitting a range on an unsuitable site.
3. The need to register rifle ranges is new. Pistol ranges have been registered for some time. Registration is partly driven by ensuring ranges are safe and partly by ensuring that the people using them are not nutters.
So our choice is either get behind those that are trying to provide compliant ranges by joining their clubs and helping where we can or bleat about the unfairness of it all. I've made my choice. What about you?
Regards Grandpamac.

It is range certification not registration...

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings again all,
Thank you for all of your responses. A short summary of the current position might be of use.

1. Any ranges for which registration has not been applied for on 24 June this year will be closed. Sighting in in accordance with the Range Manual is still permitted but needs to comply with the manual. Watch this space... As of a couple of weeks ago, Police had only received < 10 applications. This is out of a pool of around 2000 known ranges... Divide that by < 100 volunteer range inspectors and 3 months remaining, and you can start to see the issue... If they do not move the deadline or start accepting what are effectively blank applications, a whole lot of ranges will suddenly become "illegal" post June. I somehow do not see that being politically acceptable...
2. The requirements in the Range Manual for range construction like danger areas, backstops etc are largely the same as previous requirements (not quite, we will have to agree to disagree on this one) but there are a lot of current ranges that never complied (they did not need to). These are often due to force fitting a range on an unsuitable site. What is NEW is that the police definition of what constitutes a "range" is significantly broader than what was previously used.
3. The need to register rifle ranges is new. Pistol ranges have been registered for some time. That was because pistols are/were treated as endorsed firearms, and the only place where they could legally be used is on a certified Pistol NZ / Police range. Registration is partly driven by (ideology) ensuring ranges are safe and partly by ensuring that the people using them are not nutters (irrational fear).

So our choice is either get behind those that are trying to provide compliant ranges by joining their clubs and helping where we can or bleat about the unfairness of it all. I've made my choice. What about you?
Regards Grandpamac.

I've added some comments in red above

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

Many small country clubs will have formed before council amalgamation abolished the old county councils. Finding records for these if they ever existed anyway would be problematic.
Anyway wouldn't these be covered by existing use and grandfather clauses in the RMA if actual documents were needed. Asking as a local club is wondering about this

Marty, check the regional/district plan as well. Facilities for shooting sports are sometimes written into these. I doubt it would be common, but I know of at least one where this is the case....

The NZDA RO course is good I reckon, yes its above the requirement. Instead of just saying oh well everyone who has access is following the rules. It gives something solid
that they can produce if asked, just like any other qualification or induction. Its a tad more time consuming but its the way everything is going so why not
get a head of it.

The original post by GrandpaMac was referring to his use of private land to sight his rifle in. This is not necessarily a "range" in terms of the new legislation.

The Arms Legislation Act 2020 has the following definition:

shooting range—
(a) means a facility (whether indoor or outdoor), or a designated area of land, used by a shooting club or members of the public for the primary purpose of carrying out shooting activities; and
(b) includes any defence area (as that term is defined in section 2(1) of the Defence Act 1990) used by a shooting club.

“shooting club means a voluntary association of people who—
(a) act in accordance with a set of written rules; and
(b) participate in, or intend to participate in, shooting activities on a regular basis”

The new Police Shooting Range Design Manual has the following section on "sighting-in"

8.1 - Sighting-in that is done by an individual or a small group of individuals (but not a shooting club) on a one-of or occasional basis (e.g. before a hunting trip or duck-shooting season), does not have to be done on a range if it can be carried out safely, whether on private or public land with the permission of the landowner or respective controlling authority

I see that COLFO has recently published a legal option by a Lawyer (Grant Fletcher) on what constitutes a range in terms of the Arms Legislation 20202 Act

This legal option only focuses on one key phrase “primary purpose”, when the definition of a shooting range is dependent on the type of user as well as the primary purpose of the land.

In section 38A the interpretation of a shooting range refers to a facility or area “used by a shooting club or members of the public”, and the legal option covered the situation where a shooting club uses private land to conduct some form of target shooting.

However the act does not appear to define exactly who “members of the public” are. For example, if a person obtain a landowners permission to use their land to shoot their rifle at targets on the property is this individual considered to be “members of the pubic? I consider them to be private individual and not a member of the public.

And what about if the land owner has a dedicated area of land for their own target shooting? Are they considered a “member of the public”? if not, then surely their use of the land for shooting cannot be considered a shooting range regardless of what the primary purpose of the land is.

I have asked COLFO to seek clarification on these points.

Had a read of Barristers legal opinion, he seems confused by what new legislation exactly entails?

So how do you think general public will fair, and also the general Police who will enforce a complicated set of rules governing?

Also an added twist is same law may apply quite differently in different parts of the country as it crosses over into local body jurisdiction. Looks a mess.

I would add it might make sense to also include into firearms license training a fairly generic set of range officer rules to operate at a rifle range. Understand they vary but I'm sure some of the larger NZ sporting bodies could agree on a fairly similar base to work from so people learn what to expect early.

In the form "application for certification of a shooting range" in section I item 1 is "I declare that all the information is true and correct"
item 2 is"I declare I have the necessary territorial and regional council consents to operate the shooting range"

This is where it comes unstuck in my opinion.
How many clubs and ranges have any idea if they have such things, and asking councils may well open a can of worms no one would like to deal with.
When this came up for submission I did some background, shooting clubs are not considered in the district plan so a discretionary rather than permitted activity.
Regarding section 10 of the RMA (grandfather clause) use of this to meet obligations was considered unlikely as the operation results in "discharge to air and ground" therefore a full consent would be required. The cost of these requirements based on a project carried out locally in 2017 which was discretionary and therefore notifiable would likely be in the vicinity of $52,000 and opposed it's inclusion.
You are being asked to sign a legal document, what are people doing in regards to this if they don't know their status.

Regarding resource consents for ranges.

Many ranges may fail to meet district plan noise limits.
Existing use rights do not give you a right to exceed noise limits.

It only takes one person to persist with a noise complaint and a range can be shut down until it gets its resource consent allowing it to breach noise limits.

This is a significant risk to ranges as neighbours will change and without a resource consent a range is not protected from a litigious new neighbour.

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Regarding resource consents for ranges.

Many ranges may fail to meet district plan noise limits.
Existing use rights do not give you a right to exceed noise limits.

It only takes one person to persist with a noise complaint and a range can be shut down until it gets its resource consent allowing it to breach noise limits.

This is a significant risk to ranges as neighbours will change and without a resource consent a range is not protected from a litigious new neighbour.

This quite possibility all part of the plan, and very well understood by those drafting it.

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

In the form "application for certification of a shooting range" in section I item 1 is "I declare that all the information is true and correct"
item 2 is"I declare I have the necessary territorial and regional council consents to operate the shooting range"

This is where it comes unstuck in my opinion.
How many clubs and ranges have any idea if they have such things, and asking councils may well open a can of worms no one would like to deal with.
When this came up for submission I did some background, shooting clubs are not considered in the district plan so a discretionary rather than permitted activity.
Regarding section 10 of the RMA (grandfather clause) use of this to meet obligations was considered unlikely as the operation results in "discharge to air and ground" therefore a full consent would be required. The cost of these requirements based on a project carried out locally in 2017 which was discretionary and therefore notifiable would likely be in the vicinity of $52,000 and opposed it's inclusion.
You are being asked to sign a legal document, what are people doing in regards to this if they don't know their status.

The New RMA act that is being pushed through at the moment states that councils wont have to take "previous use" into consideration in the future district plans, so that can mean that ranges that have been in safe operation for 50 plus years could be closed down.
COLFO and NZDA both put in submissions on this issue.

Lastly there has only been talk about centrefire type ranges on this thread. Target shooting NZ have smallbore ranges in halls all over NZ and since police have brought in their new range regulations, a lot of them will be getting closed due to being unable to comply with the new police range templates that they must now adhere to.

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

Lastly there has only been talk about centrefire type ranges on this thread. Target shooting NZ have smallbore ranges in halls all over NZ and since police have brought in their new range regulations, a lot of them will be getting closed due to being unable to comply with the new police range templates that they must now adhere to.

You are not wrong here! TSNZ was caught out a little, I think, when Police changed their approach to the Police Shooting Range Manual in December by no longer recognizing the national shooting organisation manuals to the same level. With that said, I am under the impression the Police Manual is getting an update to include some better guidance for smallbore ranges.

Originally Posted by GDMP

Most rural halls in the past had a small bore range, generally targets (built into the wall?) at one end of the hall and the shooting area underneath the stage.Not sure how much use they see these days but they were much used back in the day.

Greetings,
In an earlier life ,when I worked for a living, I was tasked with regular reporting on condition of Rural Halls in our District. Several had .22 ranges but mostly disused. Some were under the floor with the firing point under the stage, one shot through the hall to butts under the stage and one had a purpose built range next to the hall. The old Napier Deerstalkers Hall had a range under the floor. Small bore was very big after WW2 and indoor ranges popped up everywhere. Today any shooting without a scope other than service rifle seems to struggle.
GPM.

That's where I did my one and only season of small bore shooting.
Runanga hall. Several members shot very well. One notable member, Robert Ward represented NZ on many occasions.
Shot the length of the hall with the targets under the stage. There was the odd bullet hole where it shouldn't have been from noobs not being used to such a light trigger and letting one go before they were ready

Don't know if its been mentioned but the general dis-organisation, mis-management, and interclub fighting is going to contribute to the downfall of some clubs. Aside from opposing the the government overlords we are fighting battles from within to survive as shooting clubs.
Its a sad state but we are not an organised and united front in this space.