• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Colorado Rifle Club Bans Steel Targets on the 1,000 Yard Hi-Power Range

verdugo60

verdugo60

Sergeant
Supporter
Full Member
Minuteman
    • Jul 6, 2010
    2,251
    964
    39
    Denver, CO
    I didn't know where to post this, I just got an email that said CRC is not allowing steel on the High Power berm again!!?

    They vaguely cited "safety reasons." They have doubled in member ship in large part due to the interest from this site and LR shooting on steel, so this should be making a lot of people pissed off. The new board President Steve Fowler is an Aurora PD officer. Don't know anything else about him, but I am not happy about this. All the people I shoot with go there to either shoot steel in the pistol pits or at LR on the High Power range. Yes we can shoot to 500 meters on the silhouette range, but why not on the high power range now?

    I think we should be lobbying for a long range berm being set up somewhere on the property to 1500 meters or more, with permanent quality steel gongs chained and welded to steel posts and all the safety berms needed for the fuddy duds to feel safe. I don't know if this would be the place to organize a petition, but as LR shooters who don't do high power, we need to be heard over there. I realize safety needs to be addressed with farms around and liability these days, we don't want to give any kind of excuse to get the range shut down, but there has to be ways to safely shoot steel past 500 meters.

    In the meantime we should see about getting this ruling overturned. I know Frank was helpful in getting the board to officially state we could shoot steel on the high-power berm, let us know if you need anything from us Frank. I know you have a lot on your plate with the Cup coming up, and the TR stupidity. This hampers our ability to train for the Cup though, this sucks.
     
    Last edited:
    Not to discredit anything Frank did or did not do, but his input was largely ignored when the allowance was first made.

    Did you go to the annual meeting? I was double booked for two annual events or I would have gone. Steve is a good guy, but he was elected to the board, Ruel is still the president.

    Have you volunteered to the board to help or to address the problem that was posed?

    Don't know who you are, but I put in a lot of time at CRC and whining on SH does not do anyone any good. We have been able to get new berms (a 100 and a 200) on the East range and I have inquired twice about a 1000+ berm between the East and Silhouette. That will benefit several disciplines. Asking the question for the rationale, and then providing constructive feedback goes a LONG ways.

    The ruling was made because some idiot put steel on, and another idiot put steel in front of the pits. Bullets were impacting the pits and causing damage. Someone brought it up, and they just made the prohibition. I have made a request to the board to re-address the issue, and I have confidence that they will. I'd just say until you know why the ruling was made, you not label it. Getting mad on the interwebs does not help the cause.
     
    Safety always comes first, then the condition of our range, then being able to do what you enjoy. Get involved with the board to help move along changes you would like to see. Lets keep CRC safe and in good condition, so we can continue to enjoy our sport. Sorry if it in-convinces your way of shooting.
     
    I let my membership expire, opting to spend my money at Pawnee Sportsmans Center. Yes, I could have engaged the board, lobbied, helped build a real steel range.

    Or I can just spend my money where they already have the range I need setup, for essentially the same price. I liked CRC, but it wasn't any closer than PSS, and I never have to worry if it's an even or odd day, or pack up steel.
     
    ..silhouette's up to 500 yards but not 1,000 yard steel. I would think the chance of a ricochet would be greater at a closer distance. I'm just not understanding, edjumicate me!
     
    Mark,

    I am not tuned in at all to the politics of the club. I didn't go to the annual meeting. I just remembered Frank confirming that the board had ok'd steel on the high power range for sure a year or two ago. That sealed the deal for me and I joined to have a place to safely shoot steel at distances of 1000 yards. I can assure you I was not one of these "idiots" putting steel in front of the berm. We put it about halfway up, right in the middle like was asked.

    My comments about how the club has been were because that was the sense I got from when I did member orientation and the current structure. Perhaps I should be more patient and realize that those who have been a part of the club for a long time have built it around their disciplines and have put a lot of work into it.

    I can see how my post would come off as whiney, as I have not participated in club decisions very much, I have been happy to just mind my own business and shoot with my buddies while trying to abide by the rules and still do the style we like. This was the only place I knew to bring up the issue, and also may help other members see the announcement. (which was a concern per the newsletter.)

    Feel free to PM for more info on who I am, I am happy to learn more and possibly get more involved with the board and making decisions. What is the way for these types of issues to be brought up by just "average" members?

    Could you post on what the discourse and timeline for a 1000 yard+ berm has been?

    MarkCO said:
    Not to discredit anything Frank did or did not do, but his input was largely ignored when the allowance was first made.

    Did you go to the annual meeting? I was double booked for two annual events or I would have gone. Steve is a good guy, but he was elected to the board, Ruel is still the president.

    Have you volunteered to the board to help or to address the problem that was posed?

    Don't know who you are, but I put in a lot of time at CRC and whining on SH does not do anyone any good. We have been able to get new berms (a 100 and a 200) on the East range and I have inquired twice about a 1000+ berm between the East and Silhouette. That will benefit several disciplines. Asking the question for the rationale, and then providing constructive feedback goes a LONG ways.

    The ruling was made because some idiot put steel on, and another idiot put steel in front of the pits. Bullets were impacting the pits and causing damage. Someone brought it up, and they just made the prohibition. I have made a request to the board to re-address the issue, and I have confidence that they will. I'd just say until you know why the ruling was made, you not label it. Getting mad on the interwebs does not help the cause.
    Click to expand...
     
    Here, I will make it even easier for you...

    Copy this into the "To" field in your email editor:

    [email protected]

    Then copy the below into the body of the email editor:

    I received the newsletter today and saw that a prohibition of steel on the 1000 yard range was instituted. That does negatively affect the precision and long-range guys that shoot at CRC past 500m.

    I was told, I think by you Denny, that steel must be behind the pits and as close as practical to the berm. That makes sense and I think that should be the rule. Heck, I'll even make a sign to not put steel anywhere on the range except the back berm.

    I would request that the board re-address this issue and make it a restriction instead of a prohibition.

    Please let me know if you have any questions or requests of me.

    Thanks, "Type your own name here"

    Press send. Maybe 8 mouse clicks or so.
     
    The board at CRC has been historically biased against anything but the NRA disciplines . It wasn't all that long ago that " humanoid " targets were prohibited .

    Looks like some jackasses gave them their excuse . I wouldn't hold my breath to them revisiting the issue and changing their minds .
     
    I agree safety needs to come first and obviously protecting the condition of the range. That is frustrating that a select few were hurting the pits by being stupid. I don't think I am the only one this INCONVENIENCES, many people even in my orientation had joined to shoot steel at 1000 yards. I understand needing to address the damage to the pits. Perhaps a simple sign somewhere on the high-power range stating where to put the steel?


    stratton2885 said:
    Safety always comes first, then the condition of our range, then being able to do what you enjoy. Get involved with the board to help move along changes you would like to see. Lets keep CRC safe and in good condition, so we can continue to enjoy our sport. Sorry if it in-convinces your way of shooting.
    Click to expand...
     
    I have been there about 3 years now and was instrumental in getting the precision rifle match started, as well as USPSA, 3Gun, IDPA, Steel Challenge, .22Steel Dogs running. I asked for a reconfiguration of the east berms to have a split berm, a 100 and a 200 yards berm. We also have awnings, a new enclosure, 30K of steel and a lot of other things largely due to increased membership and participation by the practical/tactical crowd. The board knows this, heck they asked for it. Yes, there are several straight line target shooters, but they understand the needs, slowly at times. Sometimes they need to be shown. I have always found them easy to talk to and have been able to get some prohibitions changed to restrictions, with explanation and illustration of the safety. That is really all they want.

    They kind of freaked the first stage of 3Gun they saw, now they don't even come watch.

    It is a process, and they, just like us, like to be treated as reasonable people, not morons. Sometimes, things that are new need an explanation.

    As for the 1K between the Silhouette and the East ranges, the Board had no-one except me ever ask for it. I can see a dirt berm at 700, 900, 1100 in between the silhouette and East range berm 1. Just flatten out the dirt on a common line with the Silhoutte and get 2 pieces of steel hung out on each of those berms. People need to ask to board if that is a possibility. When they keep getting asked, it might happen. If someone has the frontloader and will do the work for no cost, that certainly makes it simpler. As of now, there is no plan. But I have not asked again yet this year. After $300K of dirtwork on the East berms, I figured I would let it sit a while. :)

    As for the 1000 yard steel issue. I posted an e-mail in the sister thread you are more than welcome to copy. I did have a talk with another board member and my explanation seemed reasonable to him. I think several well written requests will get the situation rectified.

    I did report this post to the Mods asking them to merge the two topics.
     
    c ward said:
    The board at CRC has been historically biased against anything but the NRA disciplines . It wasn't all that long ago that " humanoid " targets were prohibited .

    Looks like some jackasses gave them their excuse . I wouldn't hold my breath to them revisiting the issue and changing their minds .
    Click to expand...

    Want to bet me dinner it gets rectified?
     
    Last edited:
    I only go there now for specific reasons, however I will say part of the problem is the individual who do show up at CRC.

    On the one hand, the rule for steel was on the 1000 yard berm only, but I have seen people put the steel on the berms going down the sides in the middle of the range.

    The other issue is, the rule was never explained or told to anyone outside of the few small meetings, so people would show up and find guys shooting steel on the High Power Range and bitch. These people would instantly complain.

    Yes, the CRC Board is not a fan of tactical or steel shooters, and to be frank they squander the possibilities of the High Power which is under used.

    They spent a lot of money revamping the range but did nothing to extend the steel / silhouette range to satisfy those who wanted to shoot farther.

    Back when I first moved here, I tried getting classes set up at CRC and offered up a significant amount of money to them for non-members and a discount for members, and was completely turned down. Several months later I saw them advertise a Conceal Carry Pistol Class and asked how come they could offer a pistol class and I could not offer a rifle class and they just said "Because" I even tried to tell them I would do the classes during the week only and not use any range time during the weekends and still it was a no go from the beginning. If I wanted to hold a match that fit in their box I am fine, but no classes, even with me carrying insurance.

    They are totally squandering that range out there, it gets under used and could be serving the local community much better.
     
    Frank, that is not all completely true. However, since you made that request, things have changed for the better. I know you have ideas and want something done now...I have learned my lesson with clubs over the years...a little patience with the eye on the eventual goal does get results.

    First time I asked for something, I was told no too, but I kept after it and I would say I am close to 85% yes at this point. :) Baby steps.
     
    I asked more than once, and even attended the yearly board meeting... how was it not true, I asked more than once, and offered up a lot to benefit the club.

    What part is not true ?

    When I do go there i am there during the week and spoke to Dennis about it several times, he is club president.
     
    Lowlight said:
    What part is not true ?
    Click to expand...

    Steel on the 1K only at the berm was in the orientation for members who got cleared on the High power range.

    The CCW class was offered as a free class, ie there was no profit derived, it was a member service.

    The CRC board is not anti-tactical, they just don't know. It is new and foreign, so it needs explanation.

    The money spent on the ranges were partially due to the NRA review, and to meet the needs of several disciplines that asked for more range on the East berms. An extension of the Silhouette was considered, but there was a squeaky wheel.

    If more people would tell the board what they want, they would see the need and try to address it.

    Sometimes it is not just who you ask, but how. I got the feedback on your requests when I asked about the outcome. Maybe I am just learning how to be kinder and gentler in my requests. :)
     
    It was free to members, but it still had a fee associated to non members.

    I am not the only one who considers them Anti-tactical, not knowing and shutting down the conversation many consider anti, Chuck above has been around a long time, he posted it first.

    When the board constantly closes the doors, why would people come back to be shut down over and over ?

    Sorry I am not asking again, I pitched my case and it was an immediate "no" as far as the commercial side it, that was the excuse the 3rd time I asked, they said no commercial endeavors on the range, but they were also going to share in that. Matches can be considered a commercial endeavor as they make money too... I can't imagine when the Rocky Mountain Palma was taking place there, no money was exchanged.

    Ask all you like I have a range and have been doing classes for a year and both sides are equally happy in the arrangement, I want to use the F Class range with a Monthly Match, but really have no interest in dealing with the Board... I have a complete match much like Vu & the Sac Valley NRA put on and feel I should not waste my time.
     
    And I was not aware of the orientation regarding steel, however I have seen older members not aware of the rule jump in people's shit about it. I have also seen people put steel on the other berms. I usually distance myself from that type of member. I think I said something once and it didn't go over well but at the same time I wasn't gonna go running to the board.
     
    Not asking you to ask again, I know you have a spot.

    The first time you encountered something hard, did you give up? I would venture that based on who and where you are, the answer is no. You asked a different group and got a yes. That is great, but that does not mean that things, people and perceptions do not change. The Board at CRC is probably the most open to the tactical practical crowd of any membership based range at this point, but it was not without the effort of numerous people, some of whom are on the current board.

    It is just a screen door, you can still talk through it.

    If you decide you want to ask at some point, drop me a line and I am sure that I can get you to the most receptive board member and ease the process for you. You know how to find me. :)
     
    Lowlight said:
    And I was not aware of the orientation regarding steel, however I have seen older members not aware of the rule jump in people's shit about it. I have also seen people put steel on the other berms. I usually distance myself from that type of member. I think I said something once and it didn't go over well but at the same time I wasn't gonna go running to the board.
    Click to expand...

    If somebody is doing something wrong that is harmful to the range, report them. Heck send me the info and I will report them. There have been several memberships pulled when idiots were reported, just have to know who. Getting the bad apples out helps us all.
     
    This is very disappointing. I had planned on attending the meeting on the 18th but then it was changed and I was unable to go.
    I was going to buy a target just for 1000yd shooting. I shoot alone most of the time. I am not comfortable leaving my rifles on the line to run down to the pit to check for hits. Especially after that guys rangefinder went missing a while ago.
     
    I hear almost monthly from the guy's I shoot with about getting hassled about shooting steel on the 1k line with properly positioned plates , both by general membership and people that represent themselves as in authority .

    This is 100% gunclub politics driven by grouchy old asshole syndrome, been watching it there and at AGC since the 90's . I have yet to see either board say they over reacted and take back any of the silliness they've put in place .

    They got their excuse and instead of dealing with the dumb asses and treating everybody else like responsible adults they eliminate it entirely .

    The only reason that any of the changes have been made at CRC starting way back when the cowboy's moved there is money .
     
    Last edited:
    Call them names all you want, but I find a conversation sans accusations has been successful in bringing about change at CRC. Now USPSA...not even going there.
     
    You just said yourself that people have been removed from the membership for infractions .

    Ask yourself why this wasn't handled the same way and just punishing the offenders and not the entire membership .

    This is gunclub politics and them using what happened to do away with something they didn't fully support to begin with .
     
    Mark thanks for your post. Sounds like you are a good ambassador for the more action oriented shooting. I will myself write an email and will ask my buddies to do the same. 1100 yards would be great, if there was room for longer, even better.

    Your points are well received about treating them well, just like anyone else and being civil to work together to make changes.

    Has it really been only three years they have been holding stuff like IDPA?!!

    "USPSA, 3Gun, IDPA, Steel Challenge, .22Steel Dogs running".
     
    MarkCO said:
    I have been there about 3 years now and was instrumental in getting the precision rifle match started, as well as USPSA, 3Gun, IDPA, Steel Challenge, .22Steel Dogs running. I asked for a reconfiguration of the east berms to have a split berm, a 100 and a 200 yards berm. We also have awnings, a new enclosure, 30K of steel and a lot of other things largely due to increased membership and participation by the practical/tactical crowd. The board knows this, heck they asked for it. Yes, there are several straight line target shooters, but they understand the needs, slowly at times. Sometimes they need to be shown. I have always found them easy to talk to and have been able to get some prohibitions changed to restrictions, with explanation and illustration of the safety. That is really all they want.

    They kind of freaked the first stage of 3Gun they saw, now they don't even come watch.

    It is a process, and they, just like us, like to be treated as reasonable people, not morons. Sometimes, things that are new need an explanation.

    As for the 1K between the Silhouette and the East ranges, the Board had no-one except me ever ask for it. I can see a dirt berm at 700, 900, 1100 in between the silhouette and East range berm 1. Just flatten out the dirt on a common line with the Silhoutte and get 2 pieces of steel hung out on each of those berms. People need to ask to board if that is a possibility. When they keep getting asked, it might happen. If someone has the frontloader and will do the work for no cost, that certainly makes it simpler. As of now, there is no plan. But I have not asked again yet this year. After $300K of dirtwork on the East berms, I figured I would let it sit a while. :)

    As for the 1000 yard steel issue. I posted an e-mail in the sister thread you are more than welcome to copy. I did have a talk with another board member and my explanation seemed reasonable to him. I think several well written requests will get the situation rectified.

    I did report this post to the Mods asking them to merge the two topics.
    Click to expand...
    Mark,
    I am a member and would be happy to support your proposal if you are up for pulling together a more coordinated effort. Let me know how I can help.
     
    Mark,

    I think part of the problem is, you believe you have a good relationship with the board or at least part of the board. However what they say and what they do are two different things. While you might open with them, they are less than forthright with others, that is pretty clear as the stories are not isolated incidents.

    I go during the week and go even more so when the weather is bad just hoping to avoid the membership in general. Their are a lot of issues.

    Before the berms were worked on, at the board meeting I attended there was discussion of the ricochets that lead the berm work. I saw one first hand, an it was clearly someone shooting "inside" 100 yards, at the 25 & 50 yard line before the changes. I got my shit jumped on at the board meeting by the 50 yard bench rest guy there who was on the inside. The rounds were clearly skipping and missing both the 100 and 200 yard berm but I was painted as a bad guy because I saw it happen and told them so. That lead to the changes...

    You can say they dismissed my suggestions on a number of things which is fine, I still went and voiced my side of things, both in regards to range safety and other topics.

    At this point I can care less, I mostly use the range specifically for the High Power targets, rarely do I need to use it for anything else. So it's no skin off my ass what they do... but as Chuck has noted I have seen cranky old guys chew out guys who had steel set up properly.

    People get turned off easy, I am one of them, and several things I noted both on the range with the board have turned me off. I will pay my money and continue to support the place, but as far as putting forth any effort... not happening.

    Also you tell them about the broken fence at the gate, I showed up in the snow and saw tracks driving around the gate to by pass unlocking it. People are cutting through the field to the right as there is a hole in the fence.
     
    Email the club President, express your displeasure with the ruling, just do it tactfully and don't throw gas on the fire. His info is on the contact page.

    I sent the following:

    "I heard about this ruling at the recent meeting. I have to express my disapproval of such a decision. I'm told it was made in light of an individual placing steel on the pit and causing strikes and damage to the pit. I find that unacceptable and the individual responsible should be dealt with in a manner that the board sees fit.

    However, a blanket punishment for the rest of us that place steel on the berm for practice of tactical style long range shooting seems unfair. I've been shooting steel on that range for years since you said yourself at my orientation that it was permissible.

    Perhaps where steel is placed needs clarification with the membership to assure no further damage occurs from placing targets near the pits. I must say shooting steel at 1000 was a major draw to CRC amongst the Tactical shooting community. I can't see alienating an entire group over the actions of one foolish shooter.

    Sincerely,

    Me"

    The more they hear about it the better.
     
    Last edited:
    Oh no........

    Haven't been there in a while.

    I remember the days when human silhouette and steel were strictly forbidden and in the rulebook from the late 90's.

    I also remember the backlash that arose when they added the silhouette range; it essentially was the "Class Warfare" in which the Palma and High Power crowd didn't like the looks of the "Tactical" and "Steel Ringing Crowd".

    Then, somehow, the Cowboy action shooting got into the game, and if you don't want lead flying off the range, well, you better build a larger backstop or learn to prone out real quick like. I almost took one while walking out of the Big Bore bunker, right in front of my girlfriend, and when she asked what that noise was, I said, "Nothing hun, just go back and pull targets". Even after contacting Dennis R. little has changed.

    The snobbery at the CRC has always amazed me, ever since day one, in 1998.

    I intentionally go during the week and don't even bother to meet or get to know anyone, as they tend to look askance at me and a few scoped boltguns. They would probably dry heave if I showed up with an AR-15.

    I've been a CRC member for 16 years and have been debating the renewal of my membership.....hmmmm....
     
    Last edited:
    In principle, I probably agree with both Frank and Chuck, but I am not one to stand by and let cranky old guys shove out new members. I will do what I can, and so far it has not been too much of a pain. I will say this...If even the few members here on SH showed up and voted at an annual meeting, the change would happen faster. :)

    If I want to drive my truck down the highway at 75 (in a 75) getting 10 mpg, then that damn Prius should get the heck out of my way. Same for old cranks at gunclubs.

    Some of you might have noticed that drawing from the holster and shooting on the move got "outlawed" on the East range. I got the BOD to agree to a clearance procedure. If you don't have that and want it, let me know and I will get you a clearance taken care of.
     
    Will do. I really like this idea from Mark, though. Seems to me it would be the best all around solution...
    MarkCO said:
    1K between the Silhouette and the East ranges, the Board had no-one except me ever ask for it. I can see a dirt berm at 700, 900, 1100 in between the silhouette and East range berm 1. Just flatten out the dirt on a common line with the Silhoutte and get 2 pieces of steel hung out on each of those berms. People need to ask to board if that is a possibility. When they keep getting asked, it might happen. If someone has the frontloader and will do the work for no cost, that certainly makes it simpler. As of now, there is no plan.
    Click to expand...
    If we make a concerted effort, perhaps we could get this done and solve the issue once and for all.
     
    To those of you who emailed...thanks. Support in numbers is always good.

    As for the Tweener range, I will write something up later and post it here. We can tweak it and when it sounds good, if you like it, send me a PM with your name and member number and I will submit it to the board.
     
    I'm glad to see this thread because I had just drafted an email to Dennis not 2 hours ago. I'm sending it now.

    I had confirmed whether or not I could put steel up on the High Power a couple months ago, just to be sure, and Dennis told me "not on the target pits, on the impact berm is ok." So that's exactly what I did. They mentioned the issue with the guy who damaged the pits with his steel. I was really confused when I saw the notice that steel on the high power is now banned considering I got the "OK" from Dennis not 2 months ago and it seemed to be something that only happened once.

    I mean, hell, if the issue is one jackass putting a steel target on the target pits, I will personally pay for a big sign that says "DONT PUT STEEL TARGETS ON THE TARGET PITS, ONLY ON THE IMPACT BERM" just so we can continue to shoot steel on the high power range.

    Whatever we need to do to get this ruling overturned, count me in 100%. I'll do whatever it takes. If you're a member at CRC and reading this, please email Dennis and respectfully voice your concerns (LawnMM's email is perfect). Dennis' email is on the CRC website.
     
    Here is my email to Mr. Reul.

    Mr. Reul,

    I have been a CRC member going on my 3rd year now. I joined the club to have a place where I could go shoot steel in the pistol berms (east range) and practice "practical" shooting that is fun and that I might actually use as a Concealed Carry Permit holder or in IDPA action style matches.

    I also joined because I heard that it was finally allowed to shoot steel on the 1000 yard high-power range. I brought other guests with me and since then 3-4 of them have joined as well.

    You can imagine that getting the CRC newsletter about the board's decision to disallow steel on the High Power range was extremely disappointing for me and many shooters like me who joined for the primary purpose of shooting steel at long range. From what I understand club membership has doubled in the last few years, and it's obvious there is a gap between the old and new crowd in shooting disciplines and what they want to do at the range. We have always set our steel at the middle of the main berm on the highpower range, per instructions at orientation. I understand some damage was done to the pits from people setting steel in front of them, that is an education and possibly punishment issue, not a reason to eliminate use of the 1000 yard range entirely for LR steel shooters.

    I would like to see this new policy gotten rid of and more club resources going towards action shooting like LR precision matches and a range where we can shoot from holsters without being hassled. I think it's ridiculous, frankly, that we have to get a waver to be able to draw from a holster and shoot. I think this shows an inherent distrust of anything "tactical" and in the membership themselves.

    I have seen on Sniper's Hide that there have been proposals to the board for at least an 1100 yard berm/range between the east berms and the silhouette range. If it could be extended to at least 1500 yards that would be even better, with berms at varying distances and club steel targets erected on each berm (say every few hundred yards from 700-1500 yards.) The steel could be permanently attached so that there would be no issue of targets disappearing. The option to go downrange and paint the steel safely would be important. We could bring our own paint and remind people of the rule against steel core ammo to preserve the targets. At 700 yards even a 300 win mag or 338 lapua would not harm good AR500 plate.

    I appreciate the time and effort you and other members of the board put in and I'm sure have dedicated to CRC in the past. I think the club is in a pivotal place and position right now where it can either embrace and encourage change that has brought in new members and money, or wither and die clinging to the old ways things have been done. It only takes one bad experience for a new member to be turned off and go elsewhere.

    Thanks for your time.
     
    Pawnee Sportsman Center has steel at 1000... Just saying. And Tim might be more willing to allow classes like you mentioned Lowlight.
     
    A couple of things

    - A proposal WAS just submitted prior to this ruling to set up permanent gongs. They could be placed permanently and remove the need and/or ability to use personal steel and set it up in an unsafe manner. This proposal was rejected as part of the recent board ruling. While I do not understand the full argument for this rejection, I believe that they were a mix of concerns over recent damage combined with not knowing how many people would utilize or did utilize the 1000 yard range for this purpose. Which brings me to my second point,

    - The practice of shooting steel at the 1000 yard range is not new. In fact i would suggest the behavior has been widespread since the inception of that range. I myself purchased steel specifically to utilize that range so that i could shoot with a friend without needing to spend half the afternoon in the bunker. The recent damage, I believe is an example of an outlier, a model of poor behavior that is not representative of the majority of the users. In fact this position is only strengthened by the fact that Dennis sent an email stating it was ok. Rather than silence, education as to the proper placement or providing targets would likely go a long way to avoid improper use of the range.

    - Dennis is not the only one on the board. In fact, Dennis might already agree that such a proposal was appropriate. If we want this to be passed by the board, the Entire board needs to know that these feelings exist. They need to know that long range precision is important to the members beyond punching paper. Otherwise proposals, not matter how well written, will continue to be rejected. This is not to accuse the board of malice, but of potential ignorance of how important it is to the members. They can't know unless we tell them, all of them, not just Dennis. All of their contact info is also on the website as well.

    I really think that the board is on our side and want to create a safe environment of both current and former members. I think if they understood how much support there is for long range steel is to the members, we would be able to find resolution. Remember that unless I am mistaken Lowlight is not on the Board at CRC. He may have more pull than some, but if we want the rules to change we need to do something. To put my money were my mouth is, I will be emailing each of the members of the board. I think it would be also appropriate to start a petition to either extend the silhoutte range or place steel at the 1000 yard range. I can either create a google survey or start a written petition to demonstrate our support to the board.
     
    Pawnee is an extra 45 minutes each way for me. That makes an already long day of shooting longer. Would rather work on bettering CRC if they are willing to work with us. I can see both sides but I think as Mark has stated, some civil emails from multiple range members will be a good litmus test of how responsive the board is going to be.
     
    I have zero influence and has been noted, everything I asked for in the past was rejected. The only thing I had happen was an official clarification on the use of steel on the High power range. That was a few years ago.

    Don't look for me to be able to sway anything. They have zero interest in hearing from me again.

    On a personal level I don't even know what was damaged so I can't say one way or another. Unless they caught the member with steel on top or in front of the bunker I would ask for details on how the range was damaged? I didn't see it in the email to say.
     
    The concrete on the pit and at least one of the coverings were damaged and steel was left in front (or maybe it was on top) of the bunker immediately next to the damage. To be honest I think it was just one last straw after seeing some of the other abuses of the range like trash being used as targets and then left on the schuetzen range, damage to fence with obvious tracks around the gate, holes in the 2 inch steel permanent gongs from inappropriate ammo etc..
     
    How about a new club south of Denver? Or seeing if an existing club would go for a long distance steel range to say 1500. I'm tired of fighting the duffers.
     
    Why don't they conduct a survey of members and post the results? Survey Monkey is an easy and free way to get that done. I'd be interested to see how many members shoot steel, want to practice shooting from a holster and would be interested in shooting past 1000.

    Why not put the issues to the membership and see what the consensus is rather than having a few old timers talk to each other and dictate to everybody.
     
    I don't know if you guys have seen this. Here's a 1000 yard ricochet. Almost takes off the guys head. I'm not saying I agree to the ban. I'm thinking about putting a steel target at my brother in laws to shoot 1000 yards. Just thought I'd share the video.

    http://youtu.be/NcJ7w_pXH58


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
    Old video , target is at like 100 yards , and they were shooting at scrap metal of some kind .
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    Q
    Need advice on scope
    Replies
    10
    Views
    498
    Q_Sertorius
    Q
    M
    Suppressors Help Me Choose My Next Can.
    Replies
    86
    Views
    2K
    mebgardner
    M
    Enough Said
    Range Report WHY GRAVITY BALLISTICS?
    Replies
    20
    Views
    1K
    Enough Said
    Enough Said
    Topstrap
    Trying some high end ammo at 300 yards.
    Replies
    3
    Views
    597
    MarkCZ
    M
    K
    716i Tread, scope mounts for a Burris 2-10x42 XTR-II 34mm
    Replies
    10
    Views
    466
    BCP
    BCP
    Top Bottom
    Back