Should there be a CPSA "Targets Only" levy for non-CPSA memb

[Mr Potter]

My two pence worth,

 

I think there is a massive difference between the CPSA and the ground owners and without the grounds the CPSA would cease to exist! If all the grounds withdrew from the CPSA and used a workable classification on the day scheme they might even increase their takings. I probably shoot on average 2 registered shoots a month and non-registered on the other Sundays (English Sporting & occasional FITASC) and I want my CPSA classification probably only so I can shoot the British & English Opens (when they are not on the South coast that is). Where as I send my BASC subscription off willingly it is gnashing teeth time when I'm writing the CPSA cheque cos other than the insurance, which is a fraction of the subscription and which I already have, and the collation of the averages I don't seem to have got much else over the past 20 years.

What have the CPSA done to deserve that levy? The ground organizes, advertises, manages the shoot and sends the results off to HQ, I think they, the ground pay to be trade members of the CPSA and all they get is a good ********** if they are late sending the results in!

So if a non CPSA member turns up at a registered shoot he/she, as long as they can prove they are insured, should be able to shoot birds only for the same price as a CPSA member. If they can't prove or haven't got insurance then they can pay the levy to get the insurance. I am sure that this (without proving the insurance bit) is what happens every month up and down the country, I know it does at least one of my local grounds. A ground owner would be mad to turn customers away and risk not only losing the days income but generating the ill will that will see them never return.

 

Mr Potter

[Nutcracker]

David BASC always has a lot to say about the CPSA, has he joined it or is he trying to swell his own ranks. Great free advertising eh Clayman?

 

I know BASC has more members (I am a member of BASC and CPSA and have been for over 25 years). I am also a competition shooter and a game shot. But I dislike this (what seems to me to be a) underhand stab at CPSA on the excuse of day tickets.

I have watched David BASC on several topics on this site over the weeks and think he likes to obfiscate the truth about CPSA.

Always polite but always pushing information about CPSA whether correct or not........£2million in the bank. We wish.

 

If David BASC was happy that he and BASC speak for the greater shooting community then where is their competition system or are they 'really' only open in the game shooting season? Who is the real National Governing Body for shooting in this country BASC or CPSA + NRA + NSRA?

Numbers are only relevant when serious. I know many game shots who pull their gun out for 2 days and then it is in the safe until the next year and who never would be seen dead shooting a clay.

 

Equally I cannot understand why BASC have 100,000 members and CPSA 26,000.

Could it be that game shots outnumber clay shots in which case one would have to ask why BASC have not been involved in this NATSS amalgamation of shotgun, rifle and pistol bodies.

 

It is a funny old game shooting ..................aint it?

Edited January 24, 2009 by Nutcracker

[David BASC]

Clayman, thanks for clearing up the posit about the cash assets , I think the CPSA total assets are £2m - so sorry for my mistake that they has £2m is cash! Fuddled memory of reading their accounts last year. Sorry if you think I am trying to cloud the truth about the CPSA - this is not the case I can assure you, just stating things form my point of view.

 

Generally we have let members and non members take part in events for the same price- but yes we are introducing price differentials for members and non members

 

Although i am no longer a member (for my reasons) I still think anyone interested in clay shooting / competition shooting should join them.

 

CPSA are the lead body for clay shooting in the UK., NRA leaders for full bore shooting and NSRA leader for small bore shooting.

 

BASC has a much broader remit, with the emphasis on sporting / live quarry shooting, but we do not get involved in competition shooting or rankings as the other three (as above) have already got this in hand. The NTAS thing is aimed just at target shooters- so BASC cannot get involved in this for the same reasons - hope that makes sense.

 

I wish game shooters / live quarry shooters would spend more time clay shooting for two reasons, firstly it would make them better shots, and secondly it would help swell the coffers of the British shooting industry.

 

I do not think game shooters outnumber live quarry shooters, and after all there are many who do both. Why do BASC have 130,000 members and the CPSA 25,000? No idea - I would have to look into the CPSA membership recruitment and retention figures over the last 20 years, and look at their marketing strategy and marketing plans to answer that one.

 

David

Edited January 24, 2009 by David BASC

[David BASC]

Having read through all the postings, I think Claymans last posting starts to make sense, and maybe now I see the real problem.

 

Have the CPSA properly explained why the extra charge is made? What the cash is for etc like Clayman states above? No they have not, so many shooters (like me) just saw this as a money grab by the CPSA for the likes of us that had been shooting birds only for a reduced price.

 

Frankly the communication from the CPSA ot the grounds was not up to code either as I can assure you several grounds i shot at were confused and could not explain what it was all about.

 

Anyway - maybe it is time for the CPSA to re-market themselves to the grounds - I think they need it as the number of registered grounds seems to have dropped off quite a bit over the last 5 years or so, or is it just that the old list of grounds on the CPSA web site listed registered and non registered grounds and the new list is only registered grounds?

 

Anyway, I do not think the CPSA will change their mind, and I think that the CPSA and BASC should do all they can to market clay shooting- at registered and non registered grounds and clubs so people can have plenty of access to shooting clays, good targets, friendly banter, plenty of encouragement and gentle ribbing! You will probably pay less and enjoy yourself just as much if not more.

 

But if you want to shoot national / international competition grade targets you should join CPSA and shoot at their registered shoots.

 

David

[clayman]

Thanks David,

 

I think this Poll and the debate is very telling, and something the CPSA should take note of. I have sent a link to a Director, lets hope the poll and views expressed find their way to the CPSA Board room and are listened too.

 

The CPSA is often accused of not listening, but in truth they do as long as the opinion is properly presented. Mutterings over a full English in the clubhouse dont get heard at HQ.

 

There are some strong views, and interesting solutions, expressed in the debate that follows this poll, and I hope its looked at and action taken. It does seem that neither shooters nor ground owners are overly happy with the present arrangements, and a fix is needed.

[Emmsy]

sadly the CPSA offer very little apart from the registered competitions and some insurance.

when people give up the competitive shooting for whatever reason they tend not to stay as CPSA members.

lets be honest the pull mag is pretty cack, what else do they offer to try and keep the numbers?

[David BASC]

The CPSA play an important roll on the British Shooting Sports Council and they play an important roll in trying to safeguard clay pigeon shooting. This means work with government, local authorities, the police, grounds, members and so on.

 

Remember, the fact you can go clay pigeon shooting today, and at targets to a given standard is very much down to the work of the CPSA.

 

Remember, also that with so little funding for shooting (unlike China for example) the UK still produces more than its fair share of world champions - and all of the sporting fitasc, skeet etc champions have built up their reputation and skill via the CPSA registered shoots.

 

The CPSA have also launched their Academy to try and build even more success for UK shooting.

 

To keep doing this and winning the CPSA needs cash - and due to the lack of tobacco sponsorship I am afraid that the burden of funding the CPSA falls more and more on the members (just like it does with BASC)

 

But I take your point- that if competitive shooting is not your thing the current set up with the CPSA may leave you wondering what else is in it for me?

 

Well lets hear it, what else do you want from the CPSA?

[clayman]

sadly the CPSA offer very little apart from the registered competitions and some insurance.

when people give up the competitive shooting for whatever reason they tend not to stay as CPSA members.

lets be honest the pull mag is pretty cack, what else do they offer to try and keep the numbers?

 

Following Davids statements about the hidden work of the CPSA, one must also remember that their principle reason for existence as an NGB ( National Governing Boday) of a sport is to administer and promote that sport. That means rules book, championships, referees, sponsorship, safety - and thats exactly what they do. Perhaps the problem is that many join the CPSA with other, but vague, concepts about what the CPSA will do for them.

 

Actually, if you check out their articles of association, that define why they exist, they do what the articles proclaim and they do it very well.

 

So when people say the CPSA does little or nothing for them its because they do not partake in the main reason the CPSA exists, registered shoots and classification of shooters.

 

On the other side, however, every single person who pulls the trigger on a clay target gets benefit from the CPSA's existence whether they are a member or not. The lobby and liaison with regulators and authority is on going, time-consuming, and expensive. This is the reason that your hay bale can shoot every other Sunday. Without, for instance, the political lobby applied by the CPSA and other association this would be once a month only today. ( Was it circa 1992 that planners tried to restrict shooting to 12 times a year on farm land?). The CPSA has always opposed and continues to oppose the CIEH noise guidelines. The CPSA produces the framework for which 11.6 permits are granted, and shoots allowed to operate at all, ie safety zones etc.

 

Even those grounds that have no connection, and those shooters who are non-members, almost everything they do or allowed to do is directly because of CPSAs guidelines, research, lobby and training - and yet CPSA often gets no credit and is perceived as "doing nothing".

 

If the CPSA ( and BASC etc) did not exist, the freedom to shoot as we do at present would also not exist.

 

To me, if you shoot clays the CPSA is benefiting you. Just the fact you can walk out and do it at all is largely down to the fact they exist,, so we should be thankful and supportive.

[clayman]

Just a note to say this poll and debate has come to CPSA directors' attention, and will be discussed at board level. Changes in the wind?

[Emmsy]

more like p!ss in the wind

Edited January 27, 2009 by Emmsy

[MC]

If this poll has come to the CPSA directors attention then maybe they should take note that it is "BIRDS ONLY" not targets only and CPSA stands for clay PIGEON shooting association.

 

They are the national body governing clay PIGEON shooting not Clay target shooting

[clayman]

more like p!ss in the wind

 

Thats a pretty unfair comment.

 

The only reason that the Day Ticket scheme came in is because the CPSA openly invited ground owners to discuss their problems and suggest solutions.

 

They listened then.

 

Now the idea has run for three years, some directors have noted our poll and want to bring the concept back to the table for review.

 

They want to listen again.

 

The CPSA does listen if you talk to them, and they are re-active to properly presented opinion.

 

Whatever opinion one may have of them, slagging them does not progress anything.

 

Polls, debate, and talking to staff and directors does invoke thought and progress changes.

[MC]

Clayman,

 

If they want to listen and are genuinely interested in what the average club shooter has to say, Instead of the same old faces that appear month on month in Pull then why doesn't someone from Edmonton house sign up on here like David BASC?

[Catamong]

Clayman,

 

If they want to listen and are genuinely interested in what the average club shooter has to say, Instead of the same old faces that appear month on month in Pull then why doesn't someone from Edmonton house sign up on here like David BASC?

 

Yes, that's a valid point from my "best mate?" MC, it's about time the CPSA started to "think the coffee and smell outside the box", as they say........I'm told they monitor these forums regularly, but it's a pity they don't have a "NigelCPSA" to defend themselves in public.

 

Cat. :wacko:

Edited January 28, 2009 by Catamong

[clayman]

The policy while I was at the CPSA was to not wish to enter public debate through forums, but to invite comment via the regional committees and representations to Directors, and in person at County, Regional, and National AGFMs, plus the ground visits, gamefairs, and direct HQ comms. Some staff and directors may monitor forums, and I tell them about interesting threads - but there is no official voice of CPSA on forums. Indeed, I dont think David is an official voice of BASC, the opinions stated are his personal views, albeit from a BASC employee's point of view.

 

I had suggested CPSA have there own forum on their website, but nobody seemed interested. Possibly unhappy to have members views aired on their own site. Can't imagine why.

 

I'm both a defender and a critic of the CPSA, and I use the channels available to get my views known, and to transport the wider publics views.

[MC]

In other words the CPSA do not want criticism or comments from the rabble. Only from the well known tarp shooters of the north.

 

I am quite sure that some of the comments about BASC get bantered around Marford Mill. The CPSA do not want to get into public debate because they are not interested in the club shooter they are only interested in taking his money.

 

I will throw down the challenge and say that if they are monitoring these forums then one of them should sign up and answer some of their critcis

[Dunkield]

Slight deviation to the main topic.

 

I have always thought I was a B/O muppet, have I been a T/O muppet all along?

[MC]

It depends how much you want to suck up to the CPSA.

 

For me you will always be a BIRDS only muppet.

[David BASC]

I was and will only ever be a BO muppet -

 

I do support the CPSA though and what they are trying to do - if they want to make charges for this, that and the other, then they should be very clear on what the charges are for- that way there will be little confusion as I think there is now.

 

I hope someone form the CPSA either directly or indirectly let us know the outcome of discussions about this.

 

I am not an 'official' BASC spokesperson, the posts are my view on a topic with my BASC hat on. However, as many of you will know, from time to time I will take my hat off - and tell you that, and other times I will post BASC policy, and tell you that.

 

From BASC’s point of view we find forums very important for all sorts of reasons, but not least of all because they give great feedback! (and that's official!)

 

David

[Chard]

I didn't realise there were so many birds only muppets on here

 

I thought it was just me

[paulos]

Birds only Typical of the British "It's the taking part that counts" mentality. There's no wonder kids are getting fatter, nobody wants to win anything anymore!

[MC]

Winning isn't the issue. It is whether the CPSA should charge a levy and no they shouldn't.

[David BASC]

Of course we must encourage new people into competative clay pigeon shooting, for the Olympic and non Olympic disciplines- after all team GB is one of the best in the world when it comes to clay pigeon shooting.

 

BUT to effectively put a price barrier in their way is NOT the way to do it in my opinion.

 

I was in a meeting with the CPSA yesterday and we were discussing how we can encourage more people to take up clay pigeon shooting, especially BACS ‘live quarry’ shooters who do not currently practice (very much) on clays – we want more people shooting clays so they become better shots.

 

And who knows, some of these people may well want to take up more competitive shooting, and maybe they would want to start by shooting a competition course or two to see if they like it before committing to the ‘Full Monty’ of CPSA membership.

 

So come on guys, give these newcomers to competitive shooting a bit of a break and drop the £2.50 - indeed why not make is cheaper for birds only?

 

 

David

[MC]

I do not think they should get it cheaper, they just shouldn't be penalised because they are not members of a certain organisation.

[al4x]

of course they could just say no non members at registered shoots.

 

I know most of my local shoots you either pay your membership yearly or pay an additional amount on the door, otherwise its not exactly an incentive for people to become members.