Hilltop applying for planning for three new ranges

IRLConor

Sparks wrote: »

I seem to remember them winning last year
Plus, when I started shooting, they kicked our asses regularly (well, having two of the three best air rifle shooters in the country shooting in there at the time probably helped a lot )

They didn't engrave their name on the trophies last year. You know what that means: if you didn't write it down it didn't happen!

But seriously, yeah, training shooters for the intervarsity is one of the big drivers to get new shooters shooting in competitions. We'd really love if more universities could/would start clubs, it would make for more interesting competitions.

Inter-club rivalry is a fantastic driver for making people shoot competitively. It's very hard to go from novice to international standard in a vacuum and that's where the club-level competitions really help.

sako

i Apologise if i made direct references to a certain individual in a previous reply.My point was that that individual should submit a more detailed application to secure his venture.My point made about local objection to his venture was reinforced this evening when i met locals while walking.They were seeking signatures for a petition against him.They had over 300 hundred signatures.Us shooters must offer our support to this man to counteract this injustice.
Regards,
SAKO.

Bananaman

300 signatures??

They must have gone far and wide to get that many.

There is no way that 300 people could regard themselves as neighbours of the range. The 300 people who live nearest to it probably wouldn't even know it was there.

I doubt if the club even has that many members - I could be wrong - and they hail from all over the country.

These people may have rented a movie about thermopylae, fell asleep, dreamt of 300 bearded med in thongs and when they woke up there were all a lather got confused and went for a walk.

I know, I know, I'm grasping at straws, but at least my version is sort of believable.

B'Man

rrpc

One of our planning applications attracted some objectors. Bear in mind that this was for a .22 only range.

One particular objector was almost a kilometre behind the firing point in the opposite direction to firing and objected on the basis that .22 bullets would be flying around his garden making it impossible to 'enjoy' said garden.

I have a copy of the objection, so I'm not making this up!

Happily, we had to put in another application (on a technical matter) which was done before the first one had expired and so there were no objections to it. Objectors were busy watching the original one and never spotted the second.

It wasn't me!

rrpc wrote: »

One of our planning applications attracted some objectors. Bear in mind that this was for a .22 only range.

One particular objector was almost a kilometre behind the firing point in the opposite direction to firing and objected on the basis that .22 bullets would be flying around his garden making it impossible to 'enjoy' said garden.

I have a copy of the objection, so I'm not making this up!

Happily, we had to put in another application (on a technical matter) which was done before the first one had expired and so there were no objections to it. Objectors were busy watching the original one and never spotted the second.

Can we frame that objection and put it in the stats office?