# Do States have the Right to!



## pragmatic_lee

Am I missing something? Not really sure why this should even come into question.


----------



## Spoon13

Absolutely. EVERY State is more than welcome to have an Non-NFAA Guest class, however it is a GUEST class. Participants in that class are NOT eligible for any awards.

I couldn't imagine anybody turning away someone just because they aren't a member of the NFAA. Everyone is welcome to shoot. It just depends on how important the trophy is as to whether or not they have to join.


----------



## psargeant

pragmatic_lee said:


> Am I missing something? Not really sure why this should even come into question.


:nod: Check your e-mail...



Spoon13 said:


> Absolutely. EVERY State is more than welcome to have an Non-NFAA Guest class, however it is a GUEST class. Participants in that class are NOT eligible for any awards.
> 
> I couldn't imagine anybody turning away someone just because they aren't a member of the NFAA. Everyone is welcome to shoot. It just depends on how important the trophy is as to whether or not they have to join.


Might want to be a little more careful in your absolutes...

Check your e-mail too...

As for the original question...

We have always had a Guest class at our State Tournaments member or no...

I know why you're asking though...


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Thanks for the email - I now have a pretty good idea what spurred this question.

Honestly, it's getting harder and harder to stay an NFAA member. :thumbs_do


----------



## Spoon13

My apologies for my response earlier. I was thinking like a rational human being looking out for the welfare of the sport.

Please find it in your heart to forgive me.


----------



## X-Ray

*state rights*

yes the state has the right to have a guest class.


----------



## montigre

Starting to feel like a mushroom here fellas....


----------



## xring1

*dito*



montigre said:


> Starting to feel like a mushroom here fellas....


whats up???


----------



## Shrek XT3000

Yes and in the pass, the club that put on the shoot got to keep 100% of the entry fee.

Jeff


----------



## psargeant

Shrek XT3000 said:


> Yes and in the pass, the club that put on the shoot got to keep 100% of the entry fee.
> 
> Jeff





xring1 said:


> whats up???





montigre said:


> Starting to feel like a mushroom here fellas....





X-Ray said:


> yes the state has the right to have a guest class.


Everyone needs to contact their state director and ask about the most recent RIC comittee ruling.

The shortsightedness of the NFAA never ceases to amaze me...

Several in this thread will do what we can to change what has been done, but it's like trying to get a Gator out of the Mud at the Moo-Tel...even if we had any real kind of say...


----------



## psargeant

Spoon13 said:


> My apologies for my response earlier. I was thinking like a rational human being looking out for the welfare of the sport.
> 
> Please find it in your heart to forgive me.


We forgive you for being at least partially rational...


----------



## south-paaw

where's my email ?? ...:wink:

you know how i like a " good " read..... might even need some hoodidgy input too... LOLOL...

:tongue:...


----------



## STUDENT-ARCHER

why so cryptic...just tell us what has apparently happened...you can even change the names to protect the thin skinned!


----------



## pennysdad

*Guest class is B.S.*

If you are not competeing, whats the point? May as well save the travel expenses, and just go to your local range, and shoot a practice round, cause that's all it really amounts to! It's like asking everyone to go out to dinner, then saying btw, you can't set at the same table as us! I take it, that now they are saying, that you can't have a guest class? That's fine wit me, cause I think it's rediculous to have to shoot as a guest anyway! Open the shoots up to everyone! Hell, Dietmar shoots our National shoots! National, being the key word here, not International? It's ok, to shoot country to country? But not state to state? What's up wit that?


----------



## pragmatic_lee

STUDENT-ARCHER said:


> why so cryptic...just tell us what has apparently happened...you can even change the names to protect the thin skinned!


I don't think it a matter of any of us trying to be cryptic, it's just that the document in question has only been sent to NFAA Directors and has not been made public. At least I can't find it on the NFAA web sight.

Either contact your state director or maybe even the NFAA directly and request a copy of the Word document titled:

Rules Interpretation Committee
August 2, 2010
RIC 2010-6

And while you're at it, you might as the NFAA where in the Constitution/By Laws it states that you *have to be a member* of the NFAA to shoot either the Indoor or Outdoor Nationals and then compare what you find to the ruling referenced above.  :mg:


----------



## psargeant

pennysdad said:


> If you are not competeing, whats the point? May as well save the travel expenses, and just go to your local range, and shoot a practice round, cause that's all it really amounts to! It's like asking everyone to go out to dinner, then saying btw, you can't set at the same table as us! I take it, that now they are saying, that you can't have a guest class? That's fine wit me, cause I think it's rediculous to have to shoot as a guest anyway! Open the shoots up to everyone! Hell, Dietmar shoots our National shoots! National, being the key word here, not International? It's ok, to shoot country to country? But not state to state? What's up wit that?


State to stae shooting by NFAA members is fine...there can still be a guest class that includes NFAA members from other states, members of other IFAA affiliated organizations, it's only the newbies they're trying to keep out...


----------



## red1691

So there has been more behind the seen with the NFAA RIC sense my State Shoot post back in June with the NON-NFAA member Guest Class? When I was racked over the coals for my post!
I Guess they must have the magic wand that make member appear! In Georiga there is only 4 Field ranges left, that I know of and most of them have fallen to 14 targets not the 28 they used to be. And we have to work our butts off just to get people to try Field Archery, and if I am blessed to have a NON-NFAA member show up to shoot a State shoot for the first time, I am not going to tell them NO!
My job is to promote Archery to bring in members, Not say this is a good old boys club, you can't shoot. But that is my opinion,and I am just one!


----------



## Spoon13

pragmatic_lee said:


> I don't think it a matter of any of us trying to be cryptic, it's just that the document in question has only been sent to NFAA Directors and has not been made public. At least I can't find it on the NFAA web sight.
> 
> Either contact your state director or maybe even the NFAA directly and request a copy of the Word document titled:
> 
> Rules Interpretation Committee
> August 2, 2010
> RIC 2010-6
> 
> And while you're at it, you might as the NFAA where in the Constitution/By Laws it states that you *have to be a member* of the NFAA to shoot either the Indoor or Outdoor Nationals and then compare what you find to the ruling referenced above.  :mg:



I take it you couldn't find it either. I know you looked.


----------



## Spoon13

red1691 said:


> So there has been more behind the seen with the NFAA RIC sense my State Shoot post back in June with the NON-NFAA member Guest Class? When I was racked over the coals for my post!
> I Guess they must have the magic wand that make member appear! In Georiga there is only 4 Field ranges left, that I know of and most of them have fallen to 14 targets not the 28 they used to be. And we have to work our butts off just to get people to try Field Archery, and if I am blessed to have a NON-NFAA member show up to shoot a State shoot for the first time, I am not going to tell them NO!
> My job is to promote Archery to bring in members, Not say this is a good old boys club, you can't shoot. But that is my opinion,and I am just one!


But you are not alone.:nono:


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Spoon13 said:


> I take it you couldn't find it either. I know you looked.


SPaaw says the RIC rulings are on the NFAA site - I asked him to "show me".


----------



## Spoon13

pragmatic_lee said:


> SPaaw says the RIC rulings are on the NFAA site - I asked him to "show me".


I was actually referring to the rule that requires membership.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Spoon13 said:


> I was actually referring to the rule that requires membership.


Didn't find that either. Have you got a response yet?

Red - I tried to find the thread where you were "racked over the coals", can you provide a link?


----------



## red1691

I hope this works, this should be it!



http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1247326&highlight=GA.+state+Field


----------



## pragmatic_lee

red1691 said:


> I hope this works, this should be it!
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1247326&highlight=GA.+state+Field


 There's only 3 posts in that thread and they were all made by you


----------



## psargeant

red1691 said:


> So there has been more behind the seen with the NFAA RIC sense my State Shoot post back in June with the NON-NFAA member Guest Class? When I was racked over the coals for my post!
> I Guess they must have the magic wand that make member appear! In Georiga there is only 4 Field ranges left, that I know of and most of them have fallen to 14 targets not the 28 they used to be. And we have to work our butts off just to get people to try Field Archery, and if I am blessed to have a NON-NFAA member show up to shoot a State shoot for the first time, I am not going to tell them NO!
> My job is to promote Archery to bring in members, Not say this is a good old boys club, you can't shoot. But that is my opinion,and I am just one!


PM sent...I need your e-mail address...It will then become perfectly clear...


----------



## psargeant

pragmatic_lee said:


> There's only 3 posts in that thread and they were all made by you


Probably got a pm...:noidea:???


----------



## red1691

I had phone calls and email from state director and State Officers, that thy said came from NFAA Office to SE director to them! Telling me I could not do this! In a state forum gon.com state officers went on the form to change what I posted there!!


----------



## SCarson

Spoon13 said:


> I was actually referring to the rule that requires membership.


Well, got some good news (sorta) and some bad news.

Bad news: For the National tournaments, it states that membership is required on the registration form. For the Sectionals, it states on the form that Guest Class is "For members outside of Section", which implies a membership requirement even though it does not state it explicitly.

Good news (sorta): There is nothing that I can find in either NFAA or NCFAA Constitution/By-laws that states membership is required to SHOOT AS A GUEST in a State Championship, only that no OFFICIAL awards will be given in the Guest class.


----------



## SCarson

I think I found the sticking point from the NFAA C/B-Ls under Association Membership:

III.B.2
2.5 Must offer one Indoor State Championship and one Outdoor State Field Championship tournament per year using official NFAA rules, rounds and targets. These tournaments must require NFAA membership.

However, 2 paragraphs down, the following is stated:

2.7 NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.
2.7.2 Special events conducted in conjunction with Bowhunter Jamborees and
Bowhunter Education programs.
2.7.3 The issuance of non-competitive state association memberships.
2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.

Intentionally confusing and open to interpretation? Your guess is as good as mine.


----------



## SonnyThomas

SCarson said:


> I think I found the sticking point from the NFAA C/B-Ls under Association Membership:
> 
> III.B.2
> 2.5 Must offer one Indoor State Championship and one Outdoor State Field Championship tournament per year using official NFAA rules, rounds and targets. These tournaments must require NFAA membership.
> 
> However, 2 paragraphs down, the following is stated:
> 
> 2.7 NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
> 2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.
> 2.7.2 Special events conducted in conjunction with Bowhunter Jamborees and
> Bowhunter Education programs.
> 2.7.3 The issuance of non-competitive state association memberships.
> 2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.
> 
> Intentionally confusing and open to interpretation? Your guess is as good as mine.


The above basically has been in effect for some years.
2.5 Speaks for itself and then it doesn't. Basically, the state has to put on a Indoor and a Field Championship which must follow NFAA rules. Now, to win awards one must be a NFAA member. By 2.7 allows the state to waive NFAA membership - this permitting guests.

A few years back Illinois permitted non-NFAA members to compete in it's 3D championship. I understand this Championship was a Open Championship to promote NFAA membership. It did not to my knowledge. The IAA has since eliminated the 3D Championship.

I'm glad our club withdrew from the NFAA.


----------



## Ron Meadows

Can someone tell me why I need to renew my NFAA membership? What a load!! I'm beginning to think that any organization is bad.......the VBA up here sucks and I can't see much difference between it and the NFAA......anybody have a convincing argument to the contrary??


----------



## red1691

*Interpretations?*



SCarson said:


> I think I found the sticking point from the NFAA C/B-Ls under Association Membership:
> 
> III.B.2
> 2.5 Must offer one Indoor State Championship and one Outdoor State Field Championship tournament per year using official NFAA rules, rounds and targets. These tournaments must require NFAA membership.
> 
> However, 2 paragraphs down, the following is stated:
> 
> 2.7 NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
> 2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.
> 2.7.2 Special events conducted in conjunction with Bowhunter Jamborees and
> Bowhunter Education programs.
> 2.7.3 The issuance of non-competitive state association memberships.
> 2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.
> 
> Intentionally confusing and open to interpretation? Your guess is as good as mine.


Yes, that was my point for our guest class, in their words! I'm glad someone else found it! Of course again that's my interpretation!


----------



## Spoon13

SCarson said:


> Well, got some good news (sorta) and some bad news.
> 
> Bad news: For the National tournaments, it states that membership is required on the registration form. For the Sectionals, it states on the form that Guest Class is "For members outside of Section", which implies a membership requirement even though it does not state it explicitly.
> 
> Good news (sorta): There is nothing that I can find in either NFAA or NCFAA Constitution/By-laws that states membership is required to SHOOT AS A GUEST in a State Championship, only that no OFFICIAL awards will be given in the Guest class.


BDC-8-1980 states that what is written in the C/B-Ls is to be used for interpretation and not the intent of the rules. If it isn't in the C/B-Ls, it can't be used.



SCarson said:


> I think I found the sticking point from the NFAA C/B-Ls under Association Membership:
> 
> III.B.2
> 2.5 Must offer one Indoor State Championship and one Outdoor State Field Championship tournament per year using official NFAA rules, rounds and targets. These tournaments must require NFAA membership.
> 
> However, 2 paragraphs down, the following is stated:
> 
> 2.7 NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
> 2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.
> 2.7.2 Special events conducted in conjunction with Bowhunter Jamborees and
> Bowhunter Education programs.
> 2.7.3 The issuance of non-competitive state association memberships.
> 2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.
> 
> Intentionally confusing and open to interpretation? Your guess is as good as mine.


The unfortunate part about that is the RIC specifically mentioned 2.7.4 in it's ruling and that it doesn't apply because of the NFAA's Sanctioning of the tournament superseding the State.



SonnyThomas said:


> The above basically has been in effect for some years.
> 2.5 Speaks for itself and then it doesn't. Basically, the state has to put on a Indoor and a Field Championship which must follow NFAA rules. Now, to win awards one must be a NFAA member. By 2.7 allows the state to waive NFAA membership - this permitting guests.
> 
> A few years back Illinois permitted non-NFAA members to compete in it's 3D championship. I understand this Championship was a Open Championship to promote NFAA membership. It did not to my knowledge. The IAA has since eliminated the 3D Championship.
> 
> I'm glad our club withdrew from the NFAA.



My biggest point has been that the NFAA "Officially" recognizes "Guest Class" shooters, without ANY requirement, at some of it's National Tournaments in the C/B-Ls. How can it then go back and stipulate that the State Associations/Organizations must adhere to a higher standard than it holds itself. Now that there is a formal RIC ruling, there is a place to reference that Non members are NOT allowed to shoot at a State Championship. Whereas before there was not grounds for the ruling.

It's just making up the rules as they see fit.


----------



## FS560

Sometimes I question the ability of some state directors, RIC members, and some councilmen to display a reasonable command of the written english language.

Many of these people do not seem to understand the difference between NFAA members competing in the tournament and non-member guests just shooting for no awards whatsoever.

That RIC ruling is just for that ruling by a that state director and it is likely to be overturned by the board of directors in February 2012.

If it comes up in Virginia, I will rule that guests may shoot but not for any awards. Also that there is no guest class because that would imply awards for such guest class. There being no guest awards, there is no guest class. Those guests just pay their money, shoot, and that is it, period.

In reality, guests should not be listed on the shoot roster at all. Since the Virginia Field Archery Association does not take a cut of the registration fees, there is no reason to even list guests on the shoot report.


----------



## reylamb

Help me out here red, what GBAA member has any authority on gon?

Fact is, if Georgia has made a determination that guests can not shoot at GBAA events.......is it a wonder why the GBAA is dying and needs new leadership?

Alright, who has a copy of the RIC they can email to me? [email protected] frankly, the least amount I have to talk to the Georgia folks the better my day will be.


----------



## TNMAN

*Interpretation*

Rules are subject to interpretation, hence the RIC. Many NFAA rules are not easily read or understood. My interpretation is that NFAA membership is required at State indoor and outdoor championships, but is not required at any other State level event. In those "other" State level events where NFAA membership may be waived, the non-members must shoot in a guest division and not compete for awards. Only in the special events for membership promotion may a non-NFAA member compete for awards. The intent would be more easily understood if 2.74 was revised to read "In guest divisions not shooting for awards at State level events, not including State indoor and outdoor championships." 

My interpretation in no way endorses the practice of turning away shooters. Guest should be welcome at the state level if membership is to be promoted. Those few who would take advantage of this hospitality would not stay as members anyway.


----------



## CHPro

> Hell, Dietmar shoots our National shoots! National, being the key word here, not International?


Are you certain that Dietmar is not a member of the NFAA? I know he was several years back when he first competed as a pro at Indoor Natls. In fact, there are several of our northern neighbors who are NFAA members and affiliated with a State sanctioned NFAA organization.

Just to bring up a counterpoint....do you really think offering a "guest" class, even for no awards, is promoting the NFAA and your State organization and getting these people to join? I should think that that job should be getting done at the local level and the allowed State level promo shoots. Get them interested first and then tout the advantages of joining the NFAA so the person has a next level to look forward to. Don't you really think you're just hurting your State org by allowing a guest class? Consider maybe 20%-33% of your State's membership has the opportunity or desire to attend a Sectional or National level tournament where NFAA membership is required. What is to keep a majority of the other 67%-80% who are shooting your State tournaments now from dropping their State/NFAA membership if they can shoot the same tournament as a guest? Fewer members, less membership fees coming into the state, less money for the state to spend hosting quality tournaments. Not to mention fewer members resulting in less voting power to try making changes to the National org.

Like I said, just offering up a counterpoint. I'd be really interested in hearing from states who have had a guest class for the last several years at their required State Field Championship and the successes this class has had in terms of increasing their NFAA member base. i.e. any tracking being done to show how many of these guests have joined your state org after the event, or are you just happy to collect their money for entry fees. If the latter, how about considering hosting a State Open Field Championship (no membership required) a month or two before your NFAA State Field Championship and use that as a promo to garner more members who in turn may then show up at the NFAA State Championship? Tossing out ideas .

>>-------->


----------



## I BOW 2

Deitmar has been a Michigan member for a few yaers now. Ken


----------



## psargeant

CHPro said:


> Are you certain that Dietmar is not a member of the NFAA? I know he was several years back when he first competed as a pro at Indoor Natls. In fact, there are several of our northern neighbors who are NFAA members and affiliated with a State sanctioned NFAA organization.
> 
> Just to bring up a counterpoint....do you really think offering a "guest" class, even for no awards, is promoting the NFAA and your State organization and getting these people to join? I should think that that job should be getting done at the local level and the allowed State level promo shoots. Get them interested first and then tout the advantages of joining the NFAA so the person has a next level to look forward to. Don't you really think you're just hurting your State org by allowing a guest class? Consider maybe 20%-33% of your State's membership has the opportunity or desire to attend a Sectional or National level tournament where NFAA membership is required. What is to keep a majority of the other 67%-80% who are shooting your State tournaments now from dropping their State/NFAA membership if they can shoot the same tournament as a guest? Fewer members, less membership fees coming into the state, less money for the state to spend hosting quality tournaments. Not to mention fewer members resulting in less voting power to try making changes to the National org.
> 
> Like I said, just offering up a counterpoint. I'd be really interested in hearing from states who have had a guest class for the last several years at their required State Field Championship and the successes this class has had in terms of increasing their NFAA member base. i.e. any tracking being done to show how many of these guests have joined your state org after the event, or are you just happy to collect their money for entry fees. If the latter, how about considering hosting a State Open Field Championship (no membership required) a month or two before your NFAA State Field Championship and use that as a promo to garner more members who in turn may then show up at the NFAA State Championship? Tossing out ideas .
> 
> >>-------->


Interesting points and worth thinking about, and believe me I have.

I think the right direction lies in the strength of the organization and field archery in general. When field archery was the "King of the Hill" this kind of thinking worked just fine. It may still even work in places where there is a strong group of field shooters, available ranges and workers, and tournaments to shoot in. Unfortunately I'm not aware of any place like that right now...

The NFAA's biggest problem is that the folks in leadership positions seemingly cannot/will not admit that we are not the big game in town anymore...There is still incentive to join the organization as guest class does not and will not shoot for awards. You want to be called state champion, join the organization...otherwise, pay your money and shoot as a guest. We even have a provision for guests to pay an increased fee that goes directly to the range. All of the ranges pass on collecting it...

I simply do not see how any rule that limits participation in any of our field archery events is a good thing. Here in NC, as long as I am leading the charge, we will *never turn a shooter away* for not having the right membership or affiliation. Those that come all seem to come back, and when they do, thats when they decide to join. 

There just simply aren't more than 1 or 2 folks who are serial "guests", and the ones that are in this state are that way in protest. They still pay their NCFAA dues...


----------



## psargeant

reylamb said:


> Help me out here red, what GBAA member has any authority on gon?
> 
> Fact is, if Georgia has made a determination that guests can not shoot at GBAA events.......is it a wonder why the GBAA is dying and needs new leadership?
> 
> Alright, who has a copy of the RIC they can email to me? [email protected] frankly, the least amount I have to talk to the Georgia folks the better my day will be.


E-mail sent...


----------



## psargeant

FS560 said:


> Sometimes I question the ability of some state directors, RIC members, and some councilmen to display a reasonable command of the written english language.
> 
> Many of these people do not seem to understand the difference between NFAA members competing in the tournament and non-member guests just shooting for no awards whatsoever.
> 
> *That RIC ruling is just for that ruling by a that state director and it is likely to be overturned by the board of directors in February 2012.*
> If it comes up in Virginia, I will rule that guests may shoot but not for any awards. Also that there is no guest class because that would imply awards for such guest class. There being no guest awards, there is no guest class. Those guests just pay their money, shoot, and that is it, period.
> 
> In reality, guests should not be listed on the shoot roster at all. Since the Virginia Field Archery Association does not take a cut of the registration fees, there is no reason to even list guests on the shoot report.


I hope you're right...might restore a little bit of my faith in the common sense of this organization...but I won't count on it...


----------



## CarlV

psargeant said:


> I simply do not see how any rule that limits participation in any of our field archery events is a good thing. Here in NC, as long as I am leading the charge, we will *never turn a shooter away* for not having the right membership or affiliation.


 Here in the UP of MI we have turned potential shooters away from shooting in the Championships. They just wanted to try it and didn't care about any award or trophy. They went on to competing in 3D events regularly instead. I was the one that asked them to come and try it and I had to "eat" that invite. It isn't like we have so many shoots around here that they could pick another one to try easily I wholeheartedly agree with you on not turning anyone away from any shoot.

I'd be more than happy to lead them along in how the shoot runs and shoot next to them.


----------



## red1691

I have had new shooters that will come and shoot at the Club level, have a good time and say they liked the shoots, But when you try to get them to join NFAA and shoot a State Shoot they say I am not good enough to shoot at State, they forget it's not just about the scores, it's about having a good time, meeting new people and just being there! Heck I was't good enough the first 15 years much less now! I just like to have a good time.
We have to find a way to make it easy to make the cross over..
At least that's my 2 cents...


----------



## Spoon13

CHPro said:


> Are you certain that Dietmar is not a member of the NFAA? I know he was several years back when he first competed as a pro at Indoor Natls. In fact, there are several of our northern neighbors who are NFAA members and affiliated with a State sanctioned NFAA organization.
> 
> Just to bring up a counterpoint....do you really think offering a "guest" class, even for no awards, is promoting the NFAA and your State organization and getting these people to join? I should think that that job should be getting done at the local level and the allowed State level promo shoots. Get them interested first and then tout the advantages of joining the NFAA so the person has a next level to look forward to. Don't you really think you're just hurting your State org by allowing a guest class? Consider maybe 20%-33% of your State's membership has the opportunity or desire to attend a Sectional or National level tournament where NFAA membership is required. What is to keep a majority of the other 67%-80% who are shooting your State tournaments now from dropping their State/NFAA membership if they can shoot the same tournament as a guest? Fewer members, less membership fees coming into the state, less money for the state to spend hosting quality tournaments. Not to mention fewer members resulting in less voting power to try making changes to the National org.
> 
> Like I said, just offering up a counterpoint. I'd be really interested in hearing from states who have had a guest class for the last several years at their required State Field Championship and the successes this class has had in terms of increasing their NFAA member base. i.e. any tracking being done to show how many of these guests have joined your state org after the event, or are you just happy to collect their money for entry fees. If the latter, how about considering hosting a State Open Field Championship (no membership required) a month or two before your NFAA State Field Championship and use that as a promo to garner more members who in turn may then show up at the NFAA State Championship? Tossing out ideas .
> 
> >>-------->



I understand you are just providing food for thought so I am not really arguing with you, but supporting the argument in general.

While I know what you are saying, I would have to agree with Sarge that the number of people that shoot regularly as a guest aren't doing it to take advantage of the system, it's more of a civil disobedience thing. I would be willing to wager that the majority of shooters Nationwide that would shoot at a State Championship as a guest, will eventually become members of the NFAA and State Org. However, I will also say that the majority of shooters that get turned away simply because they don't "belong", don't return either.

I've had 2 people approach me this week and ask me when I was going to "One of the Field thingys again?" Unfortunately the next shoot I go to will probably be our State Championship. The good part is that we won't have to turn them away (like we were going to anyway) because the 3D club we belong to is hosting a Hunter Challenge shoot that weekend and they can't be there.

Any archery organization regardless of whether it's a 3D org or the NFAA, needs to realize that archers don't grow on trees and that they are pulling from a VERY small portion of the populous. If they want to continue to grow or at least maintain what they have, they need to become "inclusive" rather than "exclusive". This is a hobby to the vast majority of people that shoot. Nobody wants to be told that the money they want to spend to enjoy themselves is "Not Welcome".


----------



## PAUL PUGLISI

I believe that the botttom line is we need shooters. if that requires a guest class than that is what needs to be done. I can not see where turning anyone away from a shoot is in any way a good thing. As far as no guest class at a state shoot, is it better for a new shooter to have their first experiance at a state shoot with 50 people there or a local shoot with 5 people there? Remember some of these shooters have been to shots with over 1000 shooters. I believe that a positive first experience is the best way to attract new shooters. For example, the local IPSC club has a policy that if you are new to the sport and it is your first shoot it is free. Anything to get people out and shooting needs to be the rule not the exception. For what it is worth.


----------



## psargeant

CarlV said:


> Here in the UP of MI we have turned potential shooters away from shooting in the Championships. They just wanted to try it and didn't care about any award or trophy. They went on to competing in 3D events regularly instead. I was the one that asked them to come and try it and I had to "eat" that invite. It isn't like we have so many shoots around here that they could pick another one to try easily I wholeheartedly agree with you on not turning anyone away from any shoot.
> 
> *I'd be more than happy to lead them along in how the shoot runs and shoot next to them.*


 I do it every chance I get...

I can't believe the leadership in your state was that short sighted, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised in light of recent events...

I you can, please tell those folks they're welcome at the NCFAA State Championship and Field Archery Derby for all the shooting (both arrows and BS) they can handle...


----------



## webb babcock

Here is a little thought for you to bounce around,in virginia the state nfaa affiliation vfaa[ virginia field archery association], will allow anybody who is a member of the nfaa [no matter what state he is from ] shoot for our nfaa state championship awards. If he is a non nfaa member, he can shoot for a non nfaa award as a guest. This would be for our outdoor spring nfaa & fall nfaa state championship shoots.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

webb babcock said:


> Here is a little thought for you to bounce around,in virginia the state nfaa affiliation vfaa[ virginia field archery association], *will allow anybody who is a member of the nfaa [no matter what state he is from ] shoot for our nfaa state championship awards.* If he is a non nfaa member, he can shoot for a non nfaa award as a guest. This would be for our outdoor spring nfaa & fall nfaa state championship shoots.


Kudos to VA, but I'm pretty sure that is a direct violation of the NFAA C/BL


----------



## psargeant

pragmatic_lee said:


> Kudos to VA, but I'm pretty sure that is a direct violation of the NFAA C/BL


I have had that arguement with somebody in Va before and while that may be up for debate. It would definitely be a violation for say me to shoot in Va's State Shoot and NC's state shoot in the same year though...here it is...Page 11 paragraph 10 of the constitution and by-laws:

Adjacent NFAA affiliated states shall be authorized to arrive at unilateral or reciprocal nonresident
membership arrangements. Resident as being defined as from the state through
which the Member’s NFAA card is drawn. NFAA members may join as many affiliated
states, if accepted, as they wish. However, they may only shoot in the Sectional and the
State Championship of the resident state for championship awards. The member must
notify NFAA Headquarters in writing when changing residence. NFAA members may
compete for awards in only one Indoor, one Outdoor and one 3-D Sectional; *and only one
Indoor, one Outdoor and one 3-D State tournament per calendar year. *The member may
shoot as a guest at any other time. Members may be privileged to change their state of
residence two times during a calendar year.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

psargeant said:


> I have had that arguement with somebody in Va before and while that may be up for debate. It would definitely be a violation for say me to shoot in Va's State Shoot and NC's state shoot in the same year though...


Yea, I know you can not possess more than 1 NFAA State Championship, but I seem to remember something else in the C/BL about this.


----------



## Spoon13

psargeant said:


> I have had that arguement with somebody in Va before and while that may be up for debate. It would definitely be a violation for say me to shoot in Va's State Shoot and NC's state shoot in the same year though...





pragmatic_lee said:


> Yea, I know you can not possess more than 1 NFAA State Championship, but I seem to remember something else in the C/BL about this.


The C/BL states that you are supposed to shoot in the State Championship in the State of your residence but are allowed to shoot in any other State Championship as a "Guest" and NOT be eligible for awards.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Spoon13 said:


> The C/BL states that you are supposed to shoot in the State Championship in the State of your residence but are allowed to shoot in any other State Championship as a "Guest" and NOT be eligible for awards.


Yea, I just went and re-read and couldn't find what I was thinking of.


----------



## Spoon13

pragmatic_lee said:


> Yea, I just went and re-read and couldn't find what I was thinking of.


I'm starting to get there. Every time something like this mess comes up and I have to do a little research I get more and more familiar with the rules so I can remember them. One of these days I won't have to go back and look.


----------



## watermedic23

The only way that I see to have guests at State level shoots is the host club holds a club shoot at the same time and has a fun or guest class.

For the record Reylamb, the GBAA has not turned away any shooter for any tournament in at least the last 3 years. I can not speak for the prior years. I do know that our membership has almost doubled in the time that the current board has been in place.

Too bad that people such as yourself work to destroy an organization that you haven't even participated in and no nothing of the current board or how they stand on the important issues on archery in the state of Georgia.:thumbs_do


----------



## field14

In order for Dietmar to compete for the CHAMPIONSHIP AWARDS at the NFAA Nationals and Sectionals, he MUST be a paid up member of the NFAA AND a fully paid up member of the NFAA Pro's as well.
Otherwise, he cannot compete for the awards.

At Vegas, a person doesn't have to be a member of ANY organization in order to compete...but Vegas is NOT and NFAA Sanctioned tournament, it is run by the WAF.

You CAN be a member of more than ONE State Association, but you must choose which ONE STATE you are "affiliated with" for State Championships, and if the two states are in different sections...then you must also choose which ONE State you are affiliated with that is in the ONE Sectional that you want to compete for Sectional Championships in.
If you compete in an NFAA Sanctioned State Championship in the other state, then you are a GUEST...same as if in the Sectionals.

You can only be a STATE or a SECTIONAL Champion in ONE State or Section, and cannot go from State to state and Section to Section and continue to reap up (or try to, anyways) State Championships and/or Sectional Championships. ONE State and ONE Sectional.

I do agree, however, on the local level, that turning away non-NFAA members is just plain stupid...and for what? Cuz the people might just possible win a measly two-bit trophy or medal and take it away from a local hot-dog "clicque" member...and as a result, the hosting club loses not just the one or two they turn away...but ALL of their friends and associates to boot? This is committing suicide on the local level, IMHO.

However, ONE shot, and after that, then they either pay a higher shooting entry fee to compete, OR, they join up, in order to continue to be eligible for the awards given to the PAID UP MEMBERS.
None of this "free-loading" stuff, more than ONE time.
field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## rock monkey

lets change the organization in question and kind of hypothetically discuss it.

since 3D is the reigning popular venue, that is what will be used.


a national ASA/IBO shoot. for the discussion, i will use me as the guest/visitor. for the sake of discussion i am not a member of any 3D org.

the shoot is in nelsonville, i register as the non-member in the pro class, i pay my entry dues and a little more because of my guest/visitor status. i go on to set the course on fire, blow em away in the shoot-down and take the big pie plate and check home.

dues paying pros and non-pros scream bloody murder because how could a guest/visitor just walk in and 'steal' the tournament?

that is the whole reason for the guest/visitor class. to allow current members of the org to compete for the rights to be champion.


the nfaa NEEDS to make one solid and near-lawyer proof definition of guest/visitor and have a class for them. over 18 and under 18. entrants shoot within their age group and gender but only get listed in over 18 or under 18.

one possibility is the winner gets a certificate but no hardware or money. just a thank you for playing and a coupon from the state for a reduced state dues next calender year should they choose to join. they are only eligible for the discounted rate ONE time.

states and the nfaa NEED to grow. pushing people away isnt the way to do it. the 'tell 2 friends' game goes on for a very long time. the time for protecting your own little corner of the pond is over. if this policy stays in effect, there wont be any fish and there wont be a pond.


----------



## pennysdad

*No to mention*



rock monkey said:


> lets change the organization in question and kind of hypothetically discuss it.
> 
> since 3D is the reigning popular venue, that is what will be used.
> 
> 
> a national ASA/IBO shoot. for the discussion, i will use me as the guest/visitor. for the sake of discussion i am not a member of any 3D org.
> 
> the shoot is in nelsonville, i register as the non-member in the pro class, i pay my entry dues and a little more because of my guest/visitor status. i go on to set the course on fire, blow em away in the shoot-down and take the big pie plate and check home.
> 
> dues paying pros and non-pros scream bloody murder because how could a guest/visitor just walk in and 'steal' the tournament?
> 
> that is the whole reason for the guest/visitor class. to allow current members of the org to compete for the rights to be champion.
> 
> 
> the nfaa NEEDS to make one solid and near-lawyer proof definition of guest/visitor and have a class for them. over 18 and under 18. entrants shoot within their age group and gender but only get listed in over 18 or under 18.
> 
> one possibility is the winner gets a certificate but no hardware or money. just a thank you for playing and a coupon from the state for a reduced state dues next calender year should they choose to join. they are only eligible for the discounted rate ONE time.
> 
> states and the nfaa NEED to grow. pushing people away isnt the way to do it. the 'tell 2 friends' game goes on for a very long time. the time for protecting your own little corner of the pond is over. if this policy stays in effect, there wont be any fish and there wont be a pond.


You can also compete, and potentially win as many diferent state championships as you feel like! P.S. Nobody ever said Deitmar wasn't an NFAA member, just a resident of another country!


----------



## DBLLNGR

CarlV said:


> Here in the UP of MI we have turned potential shooters away from shooting in the Championships. They just wanted to try it and didn't care about any award or trophy. They went on to competing in 3D events regularly instead. I was the one that asked them to come and try it and I had to "eat" that invite. It isn't like we have so many shoots around here that they could pick another one to try easily I wholeheartedly agree with you on not turning anyone away from any shoot.
> 
> I'd be more than happy to lead them along in how the shoot runs and shoot next to them.



I had never shot at a field event and I went to one for the first time and had a blast I am not able to shoot enough tournaments to qualify for the championship due to my wedding next week (day of the shoot) but the guys running the championship the weekend of the 28th told me I was more than welcome to come shoot it I just dont qualify for the trophy BIG WOOP to me sho there is one club that dont turn anyone away. and carlv knows who they are great club!!!


----------



## rock monkey

Deitmar winning vegas shouldnt be that difficult to figure out. vegas IS NOT a nfaa run event and membership to any org is not a requirement. ya pays your money and takes ya chances.

my hypothetical example is reflective of a state/sectional/national level nfaa shoot. being in the great lakes section, i could shoot in all 5 of the state tourneys. without the rule limiting me from shooting for awards in my resident state, i could theoretically be the champ in all 5 states. is that fair? no it isnt. not to anyone in a neighboring state. why not lower the rim height and play against 3rd graders just to say you can take it to the hoop and slam all day?

i agree with the part of only being able to win and be awarded in my resident state's tournaments.

the part i disagree upon is that states are turning away anyone without any affiliation to any org or the nfaa. how will the sport grow if people that are open minded and interested stopped from having their curiosity satisfied? a happy camper tells a few, an unhappy camper tells EVERYONE.

money is money, if an org doesnt want your money then they have no right to complain about how short(in the books) they're going to be


----------



## SuperX

States can have any NFAA round as a state championship, it doesn't have to be the blue face or the field, it could be the multi-color and the international round that require NFAA membership to shoot (or any of the other NFAA rounds). Just a point of interest 

Deitmar is a NFAA member - have to be to shoot pro division.

Jim is right about the english language 

I too wish someone would just post the real situation so we can all stop bashing the NFAA for things they didn't do and focus on the things they did do.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

field14 said:


> In order for Dietmar to compete for the CHAMPIONSHIP AWARDS at the NFAA Nationals and Sectionals, he MUST be a paid up member of the NFAA AND a fully paid up member of the NFAA Pro's as well.
> Otherwise, he cannot compete for the awards.
> 
> At Vegas, a person doesn't have to be a member of ANY organization in order to compete...but Vegas is NOT and NFAA Sanctioned tournament, it is run by the WAF.
> 
> You CAN be a member of more than ONE State Association, but you must choose which ONE STATE you are "affiliated with" for State Championships, and if the two states are in different sections...then you must also choose which ONE State you are affiliated with that is in the ONE Sectional that you want to compete for Sectional Championships in.
> If you compete in an NFAA Sanctioned State Championship in the other state, then you are a GUEST...same as if in the Sectionals.
> You can only be a STATE or a SECTIONAL Champion in ONE State or Section, and cannot go from State to state and Section to Section and continue to reap up (or try to, anyways) State Championships and/or Sectional Championships. ONE State and ONE Sectional.
> 
> I do agree, however, on the local level, that turning away non-NFAA members is just plain stupid...and for what? Cuz the people might just possible win a measly two-bit trophy or medal and take it away from a local hot-dog "clicque" member...and as a result, the hosting club loses not just the one or two they turn away...but ALL of their friends and associates to boot? This is committing suicide on the local level, IMHO.
> 
> However, ONE shot, and after that, then they either pay a higher shooting entry fee to compete, OR, they join up, in order to continue to be eligible for the awards given to the PAID UP MEMBERS.
> None of this "free-loading" stuff, more than ONE time.
> field14 (Tom D.)


*
Thank you Field....:wink:

When I first tried to shoot a Championship I ran into a little controversary...Who Meeee???... 

I reside in South Carolina....was...""WAS"" a NFAA member in North Carolina...I shot my first State Championship in South Carolina as I was told I had to shoot in the state that I resided in. Then I got the call too late that was not correct and could have shot in North Carolina.

Now I am just one of those "Civil Disobedients" :grin: and a 'Contributor" to my beloved North Carolina friends....*


----------



## red1691

*Missing the Point!*

All I am asking about is A non-NFAA Guest Class at a state shoot, for Newbies and first timers to help convence them they are good enough to shoot in a State Tournament. Not competing for any State Championships just a Guest class for non-NFAA members!
It is getting hard to get shooters out to State Target Shoots any more, and I do not and will not turn shooters away.....
And yes it is about the money! If a club can not make a profit, on a State shoot than they will not want to hold them any more!!!!!!!


----------



## GOT LUCKY

red1691 said:


> All I am asking about is A non-NFAA Guest Class at a state shoot, for Newbies and first timers to help convence them they are good enough to shoot in a State Tournament. Not competing for any State Championships just a Guest class for non-NFAA members!
> It is getting hard to get shooters out to State Target Shoots any more, and I do not and will not turn shooters away.....
> And yes it is about the money! If a club can not make a profit, on a State shoot than they will not want to hold them any more!!!!!!!


*There should be no issue if the hosting club wants to hold a side venue and offer a guest class....or cow chip tossing class for that matter.....

Heyy guys what do you think.... North Carolina could be the first at the Championships at Yadkinville in a couple of weeks.....Tim's got plenty of "tossers"!!! .....and if they want to offer a trophy for that....what is the problem???

GEEESSsshhhhhhh.....sounds like too much power hungry control management going on somewhere......*
.


----------



## field14

red1691 said:


> All I am asking about is A non-NFAA Guest Class at a state shoot, for Newbies and first timers to help convence them they are good enough to shoot in a State Tournament. Not competing for any State Championships just a Guest class for non-NFAA members!
> It is getting hard to get shooters out to State Target Shoots any more, and I do not and will not turn shooters away.....
> And yes it is about the money! If a club can not make a profit, on a State shoot than they will not want to hold them any more!!!!!!!



I agree with you on this. However, there is a growing contingent of "shooters" that think they should be able to just waltz in and compete for the Official State Championships and not have to belong to any association at all. Just walk in, plop down the SAME amount of entry fee as a PAYING MEMBER of the Associations, and be eligible for the same awards. 
THAT is what I'm strongly opposed to. Either those "free-loaders" pay an ADDITIONAL FEE, OR...they are a PAID UP member of the NFAA; otherwise, they can shoot (NEVER turn them away totally!!) in the guest class, but they will NOT receive State Championship awards.

Now, an idea would be to allow them to compete across PAID UP MEMBERSHIP..in any association. That is, to say that if they want to shoot an NFAA State Championship...and they are PAID UP MEMBERS of the IBO, or the ASA, then fine and dandy. Pay the normal entry fee and compete for those official awards. 

What I'm against are those that want to compete for the same awards...and not belong to ANY association nor be affiliated with any organized archery activity...other that to just waltz in and expect to pay the same fees as those that support organized archery...and compete for the same awards.

There has to be laterality here...but....

field14 (Tom D.)


----------



## psargeant

pennysdad said:


> You can also compete, and potentially win as many diferent state championships as you feel like! P.S. Nobody ever said Deitmar wasn't an NFAA member, just a resident of another country!


Actually no you can't...NFAA constitution clearly states that you may only compete in 1 state indoor and 1 state outdoor...


----------



## CarlV

DBLLNGR said:


> I had never shot at a field event and I went to one for the first time and had a blast I am not able to shoot enough tournaments to qualify for the championship due to my wedding next week (day of the shoot) but the guys running the championship the weekend of the 28th told me I was more than welcome to come shoot it I just dont qualify for the trophy BIG WOOP to me sho there is one club that dont turn anyone away. and carlv knows who they are great club!!!


THat's because our championships are the UP championships, DBLLNGR. (Upper Penninsula) of Michigan. I understand that any of the National FAA sponsered shoots won't allow guests. Maybe it's the STATE shoots, I'm getting myself confused.

Us "Yoopers" won't turn ANYONE away. The guys from WI are probably going to come shoot our championship with us, at least J.R. is. We will all have real good time and some of the guys/gals will even win a trophy (WHOOPTY DOO) and more importaintly, bragging rights for a year  Heck, I've been chasing Fast Arrow (Dave S.) for 3 years now and he's staying 4-8 points ahead of me so there's no chance of ME winning anything unless he has a bow malfunction, and then it wouldn't really count anyways. Then there's the Heilischeim boys, no one in our class can beat those two athletes anyways.

I'm haveing fun typing this all out here. Kind of like we should all be doing at the shoots - having fun! Turn guests away if a club/orginization wants to - send them our way, we'll let them shoot UPFAA shoots anytime.

Hey, what's the dress code for your wedding next Sat?


----------



## psargeant

SuperX said:


> States can have any NFAA round as a state championship, it doesn't have to be the blue face or the field, it could be the multi-color and the international round that require NFAA membership to shoot (or any of the other NFAA rounds). Just a point of interest
> 
> Deitmar is a NFAA member - have to be to shoot pro division.
> 
> Jim is right about the english language
> 
> I too wish someone would just post the real situation so we can all stop bashing the NFAA for things they didn't do and focus on the things they did do.


AT won't let me upload the file...

It was a RIC ruling that non-NFAA members cannot be allowed to shoot in state championship shoots, even in guest class...

Contact your director...he should be able to supply a copy.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Here is the RIC in PDF format


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Here is a copy of my post over in the NFAA Pro forum. 

Frankly I can see both sides of this and neither has a thing to do with someone paying NFAA dues or not.

1) I'd hate to see anyone not be allowed to shoot. If they've made to effort to come out, then let's please not send them home without letting them shoot - just pay the "guest/visitor" fee.

2) Any of you that know me or have shot with me know that I will make an extra effort to personally welcome a new person when they show up at my home club (Durham County Wildlife Club DCWC). In fact, I will usually group myself with that person/persons to ascertain that they are properly shown how the game is played AND to be sure they do not take the wrong route off the range should they need/want to leave early. But if this is the State Championship, even as a rank amateur, I'd kinda hate to be grouped with someone that has possibly never shot a Field round before. It's one thing to be certain a newbie shoots the fans and walk ups correctly at regular tournament, but at the State level no one should be strapped with the added responsibility of watching out for someone else.

So no, I don't want to see anyone turned away from any shoot, but if it is a State level shoot, then any visitors/guests should NOT be grouped with those in competition.


----------



## psargeant

pragmatic_lee said:


> Here is a copy of my post over in the NFAA Pro forum.
> 
> Frankly I can see both sides of this and neither has a thing to do with someone paying NFAA dues or not.
> 
> 1) I'd hate to see anyone not be allowed to shoot. If they've made to effort to come out, then let's please not send them home without letting them shoot - just pay the "guest/visitor" fee.
> 
> 2) Any of you that know me or have shot with me know that I will make an extra effort to personally welcome a new person when they show up at my home club (Durham County Wildlife Club DCWC). In fact, I will usually group myself with that person/persons to ascertain that they are properly shown how the game is played AND to be sure they do not take the wrong route off the range should they need/want to leave early. But if this is the State Championship, even as a rank amateur, I'd kinda hate to be grouped with someone that has possibly never shot a Field round before. It's one thing to be certain a newbie shoots the fans and walk ups correctly at regular tournament, but at the State level no one should be strapped with the added responsibility of watching out for someone else.
> 
> So no, I don't want to see anyone turned away from any shoot, but if it is a State level shoot, then any visitors/guests should NOT be grouped with those in competition.


I usually try to group the newbies with either myself, or someone who is in a class all their own...

My scores definitely suffer when ushering a new shooter around a course, but oh well, it's worth it to me anyway...there are plenty of other ways to help my scores suffer...


----------



## pragmatic_lee

psargeant said:


> I usually try to group the newbies with either myself, or someone who is in a class all their own...
> 
> My scores definitely suffer when ushering a new shooter around a course, but oh well, it's worth it to me anyway...there are plenty of other ways to help my scores suffer...


Sarge, I know you know what I meant, but let me clarify what I said a little. I "love" explaining the game to a newbie and jump on the opportunity to do so; however, at a State Championship level no one should be given that responsibility if they are shooting for an award - not even the Host.


----------



## psargeant

pragmatic_lee said:


> Sarge, I know you know what I meant, but let me clarify what I said a little. I "love" explaining the game to a newbie and jump on the opportunity to do so; however, at a State Championship level no one should be given that responsibility if they are shooting for an award - not even the Host.


I know exactly what you meant, but you also know that I would rather help somebody get started and interested in our game than win a trophy...state shoot or not...

Heck the 2 best attended shoots I go to each year have no awards...If that is the only reason you're going...


----------



## red1691

*I rather help too!*



psargeant said:


> I know exactly what you meant, but you also know that I would rather help somebody get started and interested in our game than win a trophy...state shoot or not...
> 
> Heck the 2 best attended shoots I go to each year have no awards...If that is the only reason you're going...


This year at our state field I took 3 first time shooters with me (they were 3 good looking ladys) lucky me!!! I wanted them to have a good time, and learn the ins and outs of a field round, and they enjoyed it greatly and are ready to do it again.
That means a lot to me when you can take someone a round the first time and they say, thats the most fun I've had shooting in a while! Lets do it again!


----------



## psargeant

red1691 said:


> This year at our state field I took 3 first time shooters with me (they were 3 good looking ladys) lucky me!!! I wanted them to have a good time, and learn the ins and outs of a field round, and they enjoyed it greatly and are ready to do it again.
> That means a lot to me when you can take someone a round the first time and they say, thats the most fun I've had shooting in a while! Lets do it again!


:nod::thumb: at least someone gets it...


----------



## Kstigall

I'm in agreement with FS560. 

Bring a guest to the Virginia State Championship and they will shoot. However, they can not win a Virginia Field Archery Assoc. or NFAA award simply because they aren't members of either org.

Where does it precisely say non-members can't be on the course? Just call it the "invitational" class and be done with it.


----------



## psargeant

Kstigall said:


> I'm in agreement with FS560.
> 
> Bring a guest to the Virginia State Championship and they will shoot. However, they can not win a Virginia Field Archery Assoc. or NFAA award simply because they aren't members of either org.
> 
> Where does it precisely say non-members can't be on the course?  Just call it the "invitational" class and be done with it.


Read the attachment in post #69....threatens to pull charter for lack of compliance even...

State tournaments must require NFAA membership...


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Kstigall said:


> I'm in agreement with FS560.
> 
> Bring a guest to the Virginia State Championship and they will shoot. However, they can not win a Virginia Field Archery Assoc. or NFAA award simply because they aren't members of either org.
> 
> *Where does it precisely say non-members can't be on the course?*  Just call it the "invitational" class and be done with it.


Where does it say it? It says it precisely in RIC2010-6. My question is: "Is RIC2010-6 a valid interpretation of the current NFAA Constitution / By Laws"?

Personally I do NOT think it is, but like so many other things in these documents, the points/counter points could easily be interpreted either way. If I understand the By Laws correctly this RIC will stand as is until the next Board meeting (2012). If upheld, it will become part of the Constitution.

If I'm wrong, someone please explain my mis-interpretation of this:
<quote>
RULINGS: Decisions rendered shall be final in all matters for which an interpretation is requested. All rulings of the Rules Interpretation Committee shall be sent to each member of the Board of Directors within twenty (20) days and also published in the official publication. If a ruling by the Rules Interpretation Committee is not adopted and placed into the contents of the NFAA Constitution and By-laws at the following Board meeting the ruling will automatically become null and void.
</quote>


EDIT: The paragraph I quoted above is a prime example of what I mean about different interpretations of the contents of the Constitution / By Laws. Some might say that the paragraph above is ONLY applicable to "new archery equipment", because it was indented to the same level as Article IX Section B2. My contention is that it was meant to be part of Section B, not just B2, but that could easily be interpreted either way.


----------



## psargeant

field14 said:


> *I agree with you on this. However, there is a growing contingent of "shooters" that think they should be able to just waltz in and compete for the Official State Championships and not have to belong to any association at all. Just walk in, plop down the SAME amount of entry fee as a PAYING MEMBER of the Associations, and be eligible for the same awards.
> THAT is what I'm strongly opposed to.* Either those "free-loaders" pay an ADDITIONAL FEE, OR...they are a PAID UP member of the NFAA; otherwise, they can shoot (NEVER turn them away totally!!) in the guest class, but they will NOT receive State Championship awards.
> 
> Now, an idea would be to allow them to compete across PAID UP MEMBERSHIP..in any association. That is, to say that if they want to shoot an NFAA State Championship...and they are PAID UP MEMBERS of the IBO, or the ASA, then fine and dandy. Pay the normal entry fee and compete for those official awards.
> 
> What I'm against are those that want to compete for the same awards...and not belong to ANY association nor be affiliated with any organized archery activity...other that to just waltz in and expect to pay the same fees as those that support organized archery...and compete for the same awards.
> 
> There has to be laterality here...but....
> 
> field14 (Tom D.)


Tom...

In this thread or the other one, I don't think anybody is advocating fro that...


----------



## Spoon13

pragmatic_lee said:


> Where does it say it? It says it precisely in RIC2010-6. My question is: "Is RIC2010-6 a valid interpretation of the current NFAA Constitution / By Laws"?
> 
> Personally I do NOT think it is, but like so many other things in these documents, the points/counter points could easily be interpreted either way. If I understand the By Laws correctly this RIC will stand as is until the next Board meeting (2012). If upheld, it will become part of the Constitution.
> 
> If I'm wrong, someone please explain my mis-interpretation of this:
> <quote>
> RULINGS: Decisions rendered shall be final in all matters for which an interpretation is requested. All rulings of the Rules Interpretation Committee shall be sent to each member of the Board of Directors within twenty (20) days and also published in the official publication. If a ruling by the Rules Interpretation Committee is not adopted and placed into the contents of the NFAA Constitution and By-laws at the following Board meeting the ruling will automatically become null and void.
> </quote>
> 
> 
> EDIT: The paragraph I quoted above is a prime example of what I mean about different interpretations of the contents of the Constitution / By Laws. Some might say that the paragraph above is ONLY applicable to "new archery equipment", because it was indented to the same level as Article IX Section B2. My contention is that it was meant to be part of Section B, not just B2, but that could easily be interpreted either way.



BINGO!!!!!

The way the rules read, there is NO black and white foundation for the RIC to base this ruling. The Constitution and By-Laws says EXPLICITLY "The written word and not the intent be used to interpret the Constitution and
By-laws items." That being the case, show me where it states you have to be a member to shoot Outdoor or Indoor Nationals. I know everybody "understands" you have to be and it really does make sense, but where in the C/B-Ls is it WRITTEN???  I can't find it. 

I would also like to know what is the point behind making this ruling?? Where is the negative impact of allowing Non-NFAA members to shoot in the State Championships in a "Guest" class, not eligible for ANY awards?? Truthfully,. how many shooters are ACTUALLY shooting those tournaments that are NOT members?? Of that VERY small number of shooters, how many are doing so just to take "advantage" of the State Org.?? How many of those shooters are potential members of the State Org/NFAA??


----------



## Kstigall

psargeant said:


> Read the attachment in post #69....threatens to pull charter for lack of compliance even...
> 
> State tournaments must require NFAA membership...


I'll try to be more clear.
During a "State Championship" if you do not acknowledge a "guest" class then no NFAA rules are being broken. Let's say 4 guys head out onto the range. They all shoot their arrows at the target. Scores are recorded. At the end 3 guys hand in their "NFAA state championship" score cards and the 4th hands his club score card to a club officer. Where is the NFAA rule infraction? These guys weren't shooting "together" they just so happened to be on the course at the same time. An NFAA director can't make a ruling if there isn't an "issue" to be ruled upon.


----------



## rock monkey

let the nfaa pull the charter, it only cuts their own throat. who's gonna want to be a part of a national group that cant find their buttox with both hands glued to it?

not my fault the secret society in charge is more concerned with their own special club than they are with the true mission of the nfaa.....to promote and foster the growth of archery.


----------



## TNMAN

*No Eazy Button*

Will having a separate but concurrent promotional club tournament (same site same time) for non-NFAA members satisfy the NFAA rules? Are legal issues involved? Will not complying and having a non-member class or having a "separate but concurrent" shoot incurr additional liability in case of an accident? Will the ambiguity in 2.7.4 be removed if the RIC ruling is approved by the Directors? More to this than meets the eye at a glance.


----------



## SuperX

psargeant said:


> Read the attachment in post #69....threatens to pull charter for lack of compliance even...
> 
> State tournaments must require NFAA membership...


The way I read the rules, for the two shoots (one indoor one outdoor) required for the state to uphold their end of the NFAA charter agreement the state org can not allow non-NFAA members to shoot (in any class). 

However, for any other indoor our outdoor state championship you have using NFAA rounds, you can have a non-NFAA guest class and non-NFAA members can shoot but not for awards.

In short, 2 NFAA state shoots a year are reserved soley for the NFAA members in every state but they states can have as many more as state shoots as they want that are not reserved for NFAA members only.

MN has 2 NFAA outdoor shoots - the Field which is their charter shoot, and an 810 which is a membership driver for them. Other states do this as well.


----------



## psargeant

Kstigall said:


> I'll try to be more clear.
> During a "State Championship" if you do not acknowledge a "guest" class then no NFAA rules are being broken. Let's say 4 guys head out onto the range. They all shoot their arrows at the target. Scores are recorded. At the end 3 guys hand in their "NFAA state championship" score cards and the 4th hands his club score card to a club officer. Where is the NFAA rule infraction? These guys weren't shooting "together" they just so happened to be on the course at the same time. An NFAA director can't make a ruling if there isn't an "issue" to be ruled upon.


:wink: I'm now officially picking up what you're laying down...


----------



## psargeant

rock monkey said:


> let the nfaa pull the charter, it only cuts their own throat. who's gonna want to be a part of a national group that cant find their buttox with both hands glued to it?
> 
> not my fault the secret society in charge is more concerned with their own special club than they are with the true mission of the nfaa.....to promote and foster the growth of archery.


Now that right there is some forward thinking...


----------



## Spoon13

psargeant said:


> :wink: I'm now officially picking up what you're laying down...


Wow you're slow.


----------



## pennysdad

*Yeah, yeah!*



psargeant said:


> Actually no you can't...NFAA constitution clearly states that you may only compete in 1 state indoor and 1 state outdoor...


I know! Trust me I know! I was referring to the IBO reference, that was made! One of the few orgs. that aint afraid to let the best shooter win!


----------



## pennysdad

*good Lord!*

3 pages of this! Has anyone concluded anything? It is becoming quite obvious, why Target Archery attendance is dropping!


----------



## Rolo

pragmatic_lee said:


> Personally I do NOT think it is, but like so many other things in these documents, the points/counter points could easily be interpreted either way. If I understand the By Laws correctly this RIC will stand as is until the next Board meeting (2012). If upheld, it will become part of the Constitution.
> 
> If I'm wrong, someone please explain my mis-interpretation of this:
> <quote>
> RULINGS: Decisions rendered shall be final in all matters for which an interpretation is requested. All rulings of the Rules Interpretation Committee shall be sent to each member of the Board of Directors within twenty (20) days and also published in the official publication. If a ruling by the Rules Interpretation Committee is not adopted and placed into the contents of the NFAA Constitution and By-laws at the following Board meeting the ruling will automatically become null and void.
> </quote>
> 
> 
> EDIT: The paragraph I quoted above is a prime example of what I mean about different interpretations of the contents of the Constitution / By Laws. Some might say that the paragraph above is ONLY applicable to "new archery equipment", because it was indented to the same level as Article IX Section B2. My contention is that it was meant to be part of Section B, not just B2, but that could easily be interpreted either way.


Admittedly, I ain't an expert with the NFAA Const and BLs (not that it is even possible) but here may be a possible solution, or at least a way to make sure it is addressed at the anual meeting:

It is my understanding that the RIC was made for one state, and that until it is recognized, it only applies to that state. An opposite (and IMO logical) RIC from another state creates 2 competing RICs, neither of which can become final without a discussion and action. At the very least, the issue will get finally and formally decided (not that I hold out for a lot of common sense to be involved).


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Rolo said:


> Admittedly, I ain't an expert with the NFAA Const and BLs (not that it is even possible) but here may be a possible solution, or at least a way to make sure it is addressed at the anual meeting:
> 
> It is my understanding that the RIC was made for one state, and that until it is recognized, it only applies to that state. * An opposite (and IMO logical) RIC from another state creates 2 competing RICs, neither of which can become final without a discussion and action.* At the very least, the issue will get finally and formally decided (not that I hold out for a lot of common sense to be involved).


Things that make you go hmmmmm. :thumbs_up


----------



## Rolo

pragmatic_lee said:


> Things that make you go hmmmmm. :thumbs_up


It's similar to waiting for another Federal Circuit Court to mak a ruling opposite the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to get it to the Supremes. The Supremes, more often than not, tell the 9th Circuit that they got it wrong.


----------



## Spoon13

Rolo said:


> Admittedly, I ain't an expert with the NFAA Const and BLs (not that it is even possible) but here may be a possible solution, or at least a way to make sure it is addressed at the anual meeting:
> 
> It is my understanding that the RIC was made for one state, and that until it is recognized, it only applies to that state. An opposite (and IMO logical) RIC from another state creates 2 competing RICs, neither of which can become final without a discussion and action. At the very least, the issue will get finally and formally decided (not that I hold out for a lot of common sense to be involved).


The problem with that logic is that there is ONLY one Rules Interpretation Committee. Even if another State were to ask for a ruling, the same folks will be making the same ruling in regards to the same subject.

The question I have is, what do we do if the RIC gets it WRONG??


----------



## Indianbullet

To bad common sense isn't common anymore..............


----------



## TNMAN

Spoon13 said:


> The problem with that logic is that there is ONLY one Rules Interpretation Committee. Even if another State were to ask for a ruling, the same folks will be making the same ruling in regards to the same subject.
> 
> The question I have is, what do we do if the RIC gets it WRONG??


page 22. "All rulings of the Rules Interpretation Committee shall be sent to each member of the Board of Directors within twenty (20) days and also published in the official publication. If a ruling by the Rules Interpretation Committee is not adopted and placed into the contents of the NFAA Constitution and By-laws at the following Board meeting the ruling will automatically become null and void."

Not over yet. Its up to the directors.


----------



## Spoon13

TNMAN said:


> page 22. "All rulings of the Rules Interpretation Committee shall be sent to each member of the Board of Directors within twenty (20) days and also published in the official publication. If a ruling by the Rules Interpretation Committee is not adopted and placed into the contents of the NFAA Constitution and By-laws at the following Board meeting the ruling will automatically become null and void."
> 
> Not over yet. Its up to the directors.


The unfortunate part of that is the fact that there isn't another BOD meeting for 18 months. So until then we have to live with a ruling that is wrong and shouldn't be there.


----------



## SuperX

Spoon13 said:


> The unfortunate part of that is the fact that there isn't another BOD meeting for 18 months. So until then we have to live with a ruling that is wrong and shouldn't be there.


The BOD can function via electronic means as needed. Have you even read the constitution and by-laws?


----------



## Spoon13

SuperX said:


> The BOD can function via electronic means as needed. Have you even read the constitution and by-laws?


I have. Thank you for asking though.


----------



## SuperX

Spoon13 said:


> I have. Thank you for asking though.


The answer to every question I have read in this thread that you asked is in there. Maybe we need more pictures? :tongue::wink:


----------



## Spoon13

SuperX said:


> The answer to every question I have read in this thread that you asked is in there. Maybe we need more pictures? :tongue::wink:


Well riddle me this Batman. The question that seems to be at the heart of the matter is why and that isn't in there. 

Article III, Paragraph B, Section 2, Sub Section 2.5, the rule in question does state that each State org must hold an Indoor and Outdoor State Championship in order to maintain it's Charter and it's participants must be NFAA members. Sub Section 2.7.4 states that membership can be waived in a Guest class that is not eligible for awards. If the participants in WI were in fact shooting in a Guest class, not eligible for awards, then no rules were broken and the State Director and the RIC are wrong 

So why on Earth would an RIC, make a ruling that is contrary to what is written EXPLICITELY in the Constitution and By-Laws?? 

Your turn.


----------



## SuperX

Spoon13 said:


> Well riddle me this Batman. The question that seems to be at the heart of the matter is why and that isn't in there.
> 
> Article III, Paragraph B, Section 2, Sub Section 2.5, the rule in question does state that each State org must hold an Indoor and Outdoor State Championship in order to maintain it's Charter and it's participants must be NFAA members. Sub Section 2.7.4 states that membership can be waived in a Guest class that is not eligible for awards. If the participants in WI were in fact shooting in a Guest class, not eligible for awards, then no rules were broken and the State Director and the RIC are wrong
> 
> So why on Earth would an RIC, make a ruling that is contrary to what is written EXPLICITELY in the Constitution and By-Laws??
> 
> Your turn.


Because as the WI Director said, it was one of the 2 shoots required in III B 2.5 which are only open to NFAA members, period. As I pointed out in a different post, a state can have many NFAA State Outdoor or Indoor championships... Multicolor (Vegas) round and 5-spot blueface indoors and even Flint. Outdoors we have the Field, 900, 810, Lake of the Woods, International, 600, classic 600, etc. They are listed in article VI ). 

For the other outdoor state championships which do not count toward the state affiliation requirements, the state can wave NFAA membership for a guest class that doesn't shoot for awards.

Unless I misread the RIC ruling, they just upheld III B 2.5 as the director indicated.

All teasing aside, it is a very complicated document. I know there is work underway to separate policy from rules and make the rules simpler. It will be great when that happens :thumbs_up

Volunteering to serve in the NFAA is a big committment in time, money and passion. It doesn't help archery at all to call them to task for it - even when they make mistakes... which in this case I don't think they did.


----------



## CHPro

Exactly correct Crystal. The WI Board and Director ruled exactly as you described and we then submitted our ruling to the RIC because we had heard of other states having guest classes at their State field and wanted to confirm whether our decision was correct.

I believe for those familiar with the evolution of the cited rules the only interpretation can be that the 2 required tournaments needed to comply with the NFAA charter have to be closed to NFAA members only. I believe it used to be all State Championships using NFAA sanctioned rounds had to be closed to NFAA members only. Some states started to get around this by hosting only non-sanctioned rounds for their state championships which certainly doesn't do anything to promote NFAA. Hence the NFAA rules/by-laws were revised by the BOD to require 2 tournaments, one indoor and one outdoor, be offered in order to comply with charter requirements. Only those two tournaments were to require NFAA membership to participate, allowing the states to then host additional State Championships using sanctioned NFAA rounds and allowing non-NFAA members to participate as guests instead of being excluded.

The ruling and questions in WI came up due to questions raised prior to this year's State Field by someone who had read the rules and interpretted as some of your states apparently have. The WI Board proactively ruled and responded to the person. As far as I know in all my time spent on the WI Board we have never had to "turn away" non-NFAA member archers at the door for our State Field or State Indoor because we advertise well in advance that NFAA membership is required for those two tournaments and that seems to suffice in minimizing confusion and drop-ins by non-members.

>>------>


----------



## psargeant

SuperX said:


> Because as the WI Director said, it was one of the 2 shoots required in III B 2.5 which are only open to NFAA members, period. As I pointed out in a different post, a state can have many NFAA State Outdoor or Indoor championships... Multicolor (Vegas) round and 5-spot blueface indoors and even Flint. Outdoors we have the Field, 900, 810, Lake of the Woods, International, 600, classic 600, etc. They are listed in article VI ).
> 
> For the other outdoor state championships which do not count toward the state affiliation requirements, the state can wave NFAA membership for a guest class that doesn't shoot for awards.
> 
> Unless I misread the RIC ruling, they just upheld III B 2.5 as the director indicated.
> 
> *All teasing aside, it is a very complicated document.* I know there is work underway to separate policy from rules and make the rules simpler. It will be great when that happens :thumbs_up
> 
> *Volunteering to serve in the NFAA is a big committment in time*, money and passion. It doesn't help archery at all to call them to task for it - even when they make mistakes... which in this case I don't think they did.





CHPro said:


> Exactly correct Crystal. The WI Board and Director ruled exactly as you described and we then submitted our ruling to the RIC because we had heard of other states having guest classes at their State field and wanted to confirm whether our decision was correct.
> 
> I believe for those familiar with the evolution of the cited rules the only interpretation can be that the 2 required tournaments needed to comply with the NFAA charter have to be closed to NFAA members only. I believe it used to be all State Championships using NFAA sanctioned rounds had to be closed to NFAA members only. Some states started to get around this by hosting only non-sanctioned rounds for their state championships which certainly doesn't do anything to promote NFAA. Hence the NFAA rules/by-laws were revised by the BOD to require 2 tournaments, one indoor and one outdoor, be offered in order to comply with charter requirements. Only those two tournaments were to require NFAA membership to participate, allowing the states to then host additional State Championships using sanctioned NFAA rounds and allowing non-NFAA members to participate as guests instead of being excluded.
> 
> The ruling and questions in WI came up due to questions raised prior to this year's State Field by someone who had read the rules and interpretted as some of your states apparently have. The WI Board proactively ruled and responded to the person. As far as I know in all my time spent on the WI Board we have never had to "turn away" non-NFAA member archers at the door for our State Field or State Indoor because we advertise well in advance that NFAA membership is required for those two tournaments and that seems to suffice in minimizing confusion and drop-ins by non-members.
> 
> >>------>


Let's just assume for a minute that the rules are as air tight as you guys think they are. Do you really think turning away shooters, or advertising that they aren't welcome is the right thing to do?

For a long time this "rule" wasn't exactly enforced. If the NFAA takes a hard line on this with the state associations, it will only be their own throat they're cutting...

Maybe in some of your states Field archery and the NFAA are alive, well and strong, but I would wager that isn't the case more often than not.... 

Bullying people into joining to even shoot (not compete mind you..., shoot) in a state tournament just re-enforces the snob perception we fight against, and turns people off...

Just my opinion probably, but we will lose more potential members that way than we'll ever gain...

And just so you all know...spoon is doing his part here in NC...It takes no less time and dedication to run a state association...

BTW- I still don't see how our State championship is anything but a State level event...we get nothing from the NFAA to support it...I'm certainly not advocating letting non-members shoot for awards...


----------



## Spoon13

SuperX said:


> Because as the WI Director said, it was one of the 2 shoots required in III B 2.5 which are only open to NFAA members, period. As I pointed out in a different post, a state can have many NFAA State Outdoor or Indoor championships... Multicolor (Vegas) round and 5-spot blueface indoors and even Flint. Outdoors we have the Field, 900, 810, Lake of the Woods, International, 600, classic 600, etc. They are listed in article VI ).
> 
> For the other outdoor state championships which do not count toward the state affiliation requirements, the state can wave NFAA membership for a guest class that doesn't shoot for awards.
> 
> Unless I misread the RIC ruling, they just upheld III B 2.5 as the director indicated.
> 
> All teasing aside, it is a very complicated document. I know there is work underway to separate policy from rules and make the rules simpler. It will be great when that happens :thumbs_up
> 
> Volunteering to serve in the NFAA is a big committment in time, money and passion. It doesn't help archery at all to call them to task for it - even when they make mistakes... which in this case I don't think they did.


Glad to know we were teasing.

Believe me, I know what it takes to serve the NFAA. It's not any different than any other organization comprised of volunteers doing the majority of the work. None at all. I have lots of respect for each and every one of the current Directors and Councilmen. However giving them a free pass just because they are volunteers is not in the best interest of the sport. If a Director or Councilman is wrong, it needs to be brought up and fixed for the betterment of the sport.

I don't believe in the _Animal Farm_ method of rules interpretation. ALL rules are equal, no rule is any more important than another. 

Any State Championship is a State level shoot, hence the name "State Championship". Rule 2.5 does require membership to participate in the two required State Championships, no one can argue that point. However 2.7.4 expressly states that membership can be waived at the State level in a "Guest" class not eligible for awards. Under NO circumstances should a person that has not paid dues to the NFAA/State Org be eligible for awards and the title of Champion. That is reserved for the membership. 

So where is it stated that 2.5 is more important than 2.7.4?? The good book explicitely states in BDC-8-1980 that ONLY the written word and not the intent can be used when interpretting the rules, so where is the WRITTEN WORD?? 

The reality in all of this is that will affect a VERY small amount of shooters. I know that and so does everybody else. But if somebody new shows interest in our sport, we need to strike while the iron is hot. If we tell them "Great, glad you are interested, but you can't come this weekend, it's a members only shoot." they are gonna lose interest starting IMMEDIATELY. I've had two members in my 3D club ask me when I ws going to another one of those "Field thingys". Unfortunately my next shoot is our State Championship but I wouldn't tell those guys they can't come for Love nor Money. The good part is my 3D club has a shoot both days that weekend so it is a moot point. But I wouldn't turn them away. Where is the good in that?? Any opportunity to introduce a new shooter to Field archery should be taken advantage of regardless of when it happens. 

Somebody show me the black and white and I'll gladly admit I was wrong and show no hard feeling to the one that proves it. But until then, the good book says it's allowed and the WI State Director and the RIC got it wrong.


----------



## kidnutso

Spoon13 said:


> Somebody show me the black and white and I'll gladly admit I was wrong and show no hard feeling to the one that proves it. But until then, the good book says it's allowed and the WI State Director and the RIC got it wrong.


Spoon, I definitely agree with you. My "interpretation" of Paragraphs 2.5 and 2.7 (especially 2.7.4) is that you can have non-NFAA members shooting at the two State Championship shoots required for Association Memberships. But unfortunately, it appears that RIC is not considering these two shoots are State Level. In my honest opinion, this is what needs to be clarified in the C/BL. Are these two shoots "State Level" or not. I believe they are because later on in the C/BL there are sections refering to Sectional Level and National Level. 

And if you read further to Paragraph 2.8 - it says, and I quote, "The special events listed in paragraphs 2.7.1 and 2.7.2 above shall be limited to state sponsored events and shall not exceed five per year. So I believe that paragraph 2.7.4 DOES apply to Paragraph 2.5. 

However, Paragraph 2.11 reads, "Refer all instances of questionable interpretation to their NFAA Director. The Director thereupon makes a ruling and then forwards his/her interpretation to the Rules Interpretaion Committee.

That's what was done in the case of WI. And the RIC came back and supported WI Director decision. So regardless of what you and I believe, RIC's ruling, at least until it can be overruled and possibly the C/BL ammended at the Director's meeting in 2012, will be the governing factor as far as the NFAA is concerned.

And the RIC ruling further states that if a State Association is in violation of the NFAA Rules, they face possible expulsion from the NFAA. And it can happen. I know of a specific example, but I won't elaborate. All it would take to get your State Association in hot water would be for a member who believes that the rules say a non-member cannot shoot at your State Shoot, and that member to report to the NFAA that your Association allowed non-members to shoot in the NFAA required shoot.

So until a favorable ruling or and ammendment to the C/BL is made, our state is going to abide by the RIC Ruling. I don't agree with it, but there are a lot of rules I don't agree with, but I abide by them.


----------



## SuperX

psargeant said:


> Let's just assume for a minute that the rules are as air tight as you guys think they are. Do you really think turning away shooters, or advertising that they aren't welcome is the right thing to do? I do not think that we are talking about making archers unwelcome for the 2 shoots we are talking about. Other organizations require membership to participate and the NFAA is no different. Requiring membership is a far cry from "adverstising that they aren't welcome".
> 
> For a long time this "rule" wasn't exactly enforced. If the NFAA takes a hard line on this with the state associations, it will only be their own throat they're cutting... The rule was enforced and lead to the loss of NFAA charter for at least 2 states who were not willing to follow it (MN & PA) in just the last 10 years. I also think VA had an issue there but I am not sure.
> Maybe in some of your states Field archery and the NFAA are alive, well and strong, but I would wager that isn't the case more often than not....
> 
> Bullying people into joining to even shoot (not compete mind you..., shoot) in a state tournament just re-enforces the snob perception we fight against, and turns people off... Bullying is inflamitory and why I jumped in - vilifying the NFAA without the facts or the truth in the guise of "helping grow archery" does no good at all. If you or anyone reading this wants to help, then join and become part of the organization and work to change it. I wish people would turn their powers to good instead of trying to tear down the largest archery organization in the US. What you all think that will accomplish is beyond me.
> Just my opinion probably, but we will lose more potential members that way than we'll ever gain...
> Members of what? I argue if they aren't members now and we don't require them to be members in order to shoot, they won't ever be members.
> And just so you all know...spoon is doing his part here in NC...It takes no less time and dedication to run a state association...
> Wait till spoon gets harpooned anonymously for his hard work - as you and he seem intent on doing to the NFAA volunteers. I bet he doesn't last long when his efforts are largely criticized and made to seem unimportant by the know-it-alls on the internet.
> 
> BTW- I still don't see how our State championship is anything but a State level event...we get nothing from the NFAA to support it...I'm certainly not advocating letting non-members shoot for awards...You obviously don't know what you get from the NFAA for the shoot, so to you it seems like nothing.


Comments inline above. Sorry for being harsh but your constant complaining and misrepresentation of the facts has worn me out.


----------



## SuperX

Spoon13 said:


> Glad to know we were teasing.
> 
> Believe me, I know what it takes to serve the NFAA. It's not any different than any other organization comprised of volunteers doing the majority of the work. None at all. I have lots of respect for each and every one of the current Directors and Councilmen. However giving them a free pass just because they are volunteers is not in the best interest of the sport. If a Director or Councilman is wrong, it needs to be brought up and fixed for the betterment of the sport.
> 
> I don't believe in the _Animal Farm_ method of rules interpretation. ALL rules are equal, no rule is any more important than another.
> 
> Any State Championship is a State level shoot, hence the name "State Championship". Rule 2.5 does require membership to participate in the two required State Championships, no one can argue that point. However 2.7.4 expressly states that membership can be waived at the State level in a "Guest" class not eligible for awards. Under NO circumstances should a person that has not paid dues to the NFAA/State Org be eligible for awards and the title of Champion. That is reserved for the membership.
> 
> So where is it stated that 2.5 is more important than 2.7.4?? The good book explicitely states in BDC-8-1980 that ONLY the written word and not the intent can be used when interpretting the rules, so where is the WRITTEN WORD??
> 
> The reality in all of this is that will affect a VERY small amount of shooters. I know that and so does everybody else. But if somebody new shows interest in our sport, we need to strike while the iron is hot. If we tell them "Great, glad you are interested, but you can't come this weekend, it's a members only shoot." they are gonna lose interest starting IMMEDIATELY. I've had two members in my 3D club ask me when I ws going to another one of those "Field thingys". Unfortunately my next shoot is our State Championship but I wouldn't tell those guys they can't come for Love nor Money. The good part is my 3D club has a shoot both days that weekend so it is a moot point. But I wouldn't turn them away. Where is the good in that?? Any opportunity to introduce a new shooter to Field archery should be taken advantage of regardless of when it happens.
> 
> Somebody show me the black and white and I'll gladly admit I was wrong and show no hard feeling to the one that proves it. But until then, the good book says it's allowed and the WI State Director and the RIC got it wrong.


you were shown, you won't admit it, you are wrong. Get over it... and no I am not teasing.


----------



## Spoon13

SuperX said:


> Comments inline above. Sorry for being harsh but your constant complaining and misrepresentation of the facts has worn me out.


I'm not concerned about being "harpooned anonymously" because I know that if I adhere to the written rules and act with the best interest of archery and the NCFAA, I am safe. However if I were to do something wrong, I would EXPECT to have it pointed out to me regardless of the fact that I am a volunteer. 

You shouldn't comment on the character of people you do not know. You grossly underestimate the person you are dealing with and for that you should be ashamed. 



SuperX said:


> you were shown, you won't admit it, you are wrong. Get over it... and no I am not teasing.


NOBODY has shown me anything. I have read the Constitution and By-Laws. There is NOWHERE that prohibits the inclusion of a Guest class at the State level. Quite the contrary, it expressly INCLUDES it in BLACK and WHITE. To use the words of one of my FAVORITE Councilmen(I can't believe I get to say this), "If you want to change the rules, submit an agenda item and it will be discussed at the Annual Meeting". The BLACK and WHITE says that the WI Director and the RIC are wrong. And the fact that they are volunteers should have ABSOLUTELY NO bearing on the decision.

You wanna prove me wrong, break out the book and show me the rule!!! I've said before, if you can show me, I'll apologize and we'll still be friends. Until then, I stand my ground.


----------



## psargeant

SuperX said:


> Comments inline above. Sorry for being harsh but your constant complaining and misrepresentation of the facts has worn me out.


Crystal;

You're certainly entitled to your mis-imformed opinion about me and spoon...Before you go talking about what I don't do and don't know, you should most certainly learn to read a signature line in a post on AT...

It is exactly an attempt at bullying...pay up or you can't play...that is making archers unwelcome period, any argument to the contrary is simply bunk...and CHPro stated his state advertised a members only shoot...how is that misrepresenting the facts? 

No one is advocating allowing guests to compete for awards like a paying member. If they want to do that, they're just going to have to pony up...

I could understand turning away non-members in favor of members if the course was full, or the facility couldn't handle it, but when is the last time you saw that on a field course???

I still am waiting for someone to give me a good reason not to allow non-member guests to shoot...you say they will never join. Well the results here in NC are quite to the contrary of that.

And again, before you say join up and do something...learn to read.....

I won't argue with you anymore about this...

Oh...the PSAA and VBA are doing just fine BTW.....


----------



## pragmatic_lee

Spoon / Sarge, it's becoming more and more obvious that if you're a state association President, Secretary/Treasurer, or VP then your "volunteer service" is of no consequence to those who are burdened with the much more important and meaningful task of volunteering on a national level.


----------



## kidnutso

SuperX said:


> Comments inline above. Sorry for being harsh but your constant complaining and misrepresentation of the facts has worn me out.





SuperX said:


> BTW- I still don't see how our State championship is anything but a State level event...we get nothing from the NFAA to support it...I'm certainly not advocating letting non-members shoot for awards...You obviously don't know what you get from the NFAA for the shoot, so to you it seems like nothing.


SuperX,

Don't get me wrong guy, I'm not arguing with you or anyone else. Although I don't agree with the interpretation of the rules, I will live by the ruling of the RIC until it can hopefully be brought up again at the 2012 Directors meeting. But instead of making a comment like you did above, how about telling us what we get from the NFAA for the State Championships. I don't know either, and I would like to know. I know my club (as a host has to purchase targets, and then our State Organization discounts part of that when we report the proceeds to the state; we have to provide our own scorecards for the state and we have to provide our own registration forms. I don't know about the medals and awards (our State Treasurer takes care of that), but I'm assuming our state has to pay for those as well. That I could be wrong about. But I would like to know just what the NFAA does give us toward the two annual NFAA required State Shoots. 

Thanks.


----------



## kidnutso

kidnutso said:


> SuperX,
> 
> Don't get me wrong guy,


Sorry Super X. I hadn't read your profile before I posted. I guess based on your name, you're not a guy.


----------



## Rolo

Adding to the confusion, what is the interpretation if the local club hosting the state championship NFAA recognized grand puhba shoot(s) decides to have a side, club shoot? The local clubs, that generally do most of the work for the state shoot (at least in my neck o the woods). Their ranges are used. They maintain the ranges. Even let the guests shoot the targets they bought.

Would this be a violation of the RIC? They wouldn't even be shooting the NFAA grand uuhba state championship shoot.

What if the state championship shoot is being held at a public range? The state cannot tell the public they cannot shoot at the public range. If the public shoots at the public range and keeps score during the state championship shoot, will the state lose its charter?

So if I understand the RIC, and its possible interpretations, if a non-member shoots an arrow during a state championship, then the state can lose its charter. Or, so long as the non-member is not shooting the state championship shoot, the state has no problems, even if the non-member shoots an arrow or 2 and keeps score? 

Or is the NFAA now telling the local clubs, that are its base, what they can and cannot do with their local clubs if they are gracious enough to host a state championshiop shoot?


----------



## SuperX

kidnutso said:


> SuperX,
> 
> Don't get me wrong guy, I'm not arguing with you or anyone else. Although I don't agree with the interpretation of the rules, I will live by the ruling of the RIC until it can hopefully be brought up again at the 2012 Directors meeting. But instead of making a comment like you did above, how about telling us what we get from the NFAA for the State Championships. I don't know either, and I would like to know. I know my club (as a host has to purchase targets, and then our State Organization discounts part of that when we report the proceeds to the state; we have to provide our own scorecards for the state and we have to provide our own registration forms. I don't know about the medals and awards (our State Treasurer takes care of that), but I'm assuming our state has to pay for those as well. That I could be wrong about. But I would like to know just what the NFAA does give us toward the two annual NFAA required State Shoots.
> 
> Thanks.


Kid, you misquoted me - I didn't say anything before the last ... and no Problem on getting my gender wrong, on the internet nobody knows if you are a skirt 

regarding waiting to 2012, as I stated before, electronic voting on these types of issues has been enabled for directors for at least a couple years. When I was director we got emails from the RIC periodically and dealt with their issues in a timely manner. Please don't propogate this as being an issue, it isn't.

The NFAA sanctions the shoots much as the PGA sanctions golf events. Directors will inspect the range for safety and "certify" that it is safe enough to hold a tournament on... this can go a long way to helping the local club regarding liability in the event of an accident related to shooting. The NFAA also works for us on hunting issues and to promote archery as a sport, acting as the central agency pulling together the rules and games of the sport we all profess to love. This gives us a level playing field for all archers across the world to compare themselves against. Imagine if the IBO or ASA or NFAA didn't exist... would anyone really play the same games, shoot from the same distances or know which ring was the 14 ring? Seems silly now because that infrastructure is in place but if we lost our central organizing ability, then archery would be fragmented and become 50 things to 50 people. At least now we all share the same vocabulary and understand when someone says they shot a 60X game it wasn't on a 80cm field face at 20ft. There is a low cost liability insurance available from the NFAA that is on par with other such policies in the market as well.

I think of the NFAA, ASA and IBO as on par with orgainizations like the PGA, NFL or MLB - it is just that we as archers don't play our games on TV or on such a grand scale as they do. Even the US Open requires PGA membershp to try out for... what's up with that? Maybe we should go to their membership and complain why the local golfer can't just show up and shoot at their tournaments!

FYI, I am no longer a director in the NFAA though I was and saw how dedicated these guys are and how much time and money and passion it takes to do a good job there. I doubt anyone who hasn't done their 2 years as a director really has a clue about what it takes to contribute at that level. I greatly appreciate state involvement and have been on the board of 2 different state orgs in my 8 years shooting a bow, I don't discount it at all, but I have also watched many people quit because they didn't get the help and support they needed or the credit they deserved. That sad story is rampant in archery organizations and clubs across the US. 98% of the members shoot and 2% of the members do all the work. I think we shouldn't be picking on the 2% for no reason because we need them to put on our events... not because I think that they deserve some free pass for being wrong.


----------



## SuperX

pragmatic_lee said:


> Spoon / Sarge, it's becoming more and more obvious that if you're a state association President, Secretary/Treasurer, or VP then your "volunteer service" is of no consequence to those who are burdened with the much more important and meaningful task of volunteering on a national level.


I know from being a board member in WA and MN and from being a member of 4 different clubs, just what it takes. Can you match my experience by having also been an NFAA director to support your comments and refute my statements with any authority? This is the kind of misinformed harrassment and bullying that I think demeans the sport and the contributions these guys make. 

Been there, done that, and I have loads of love for anyone in the 2% who dedicate themselves to working to better our sport, including you guys, but it isn't apples to apples. At least in my opinion.

OK, I have said my piece. I'm done - take it to PM if you must "imform" me


----------



## kidnutso

Sounds like a director talking. :wink: JK.

Thanks for your inputs.


----------



## psargeant

kidnutso said:


> SuperX,
> 
> Don't get me wrong guy, I'm not arguing with you or anyone else. Although I don't agree with the interpretation of the rules, I will live by the ruling of the RIC until it can hopefully be brought up again at the 2012 Directors meeting. But instead of making a comment like you did above, how about telling us what we get from the NFAA for the State Championships. I don't know either, and I would like to know. I know my club (as a host has to purchase targets, and then our State Organization discounts part of that when we report the proceeds to the state; we have to provide our own scorecards for the state and we have to provide our own registration forms. I don't know about the medals and awards (our State Treasurer takes care of that), but I'm assuming our state has to pay for those as well. That I could be wrong about. But I would like to know just what the NFAA does give us toward the two annual NFAA required State Shoots.
> 
> Thanks.


As far as specifically for a State Championship, we get very little from the NFAA. We use an NFAA logo sticker on our plaques (which they give us...thanks) , and we also buy State Champion patches from the NFAA ... 

Our state organization and local clubs provide the targets, the rest of the awards, the promotion, the manpower, and know how...hence my ascertation that it really isn't a Nationally sponsored event.


----------



## psargeant

SuperX said:


> I know from being a board member in WA and MN and from being a member of 4 different clubs, just what it takes. Can you match my experience by having also been an NFAA director to support your comments and refute my statements with any authority? This is the kind of misinformed harrassment and bullying that I think demeans the sport and the contributions these guys make.
> 
> Been there, done that, and I have loads of love for anyone in the 2% who dedicate themselves to working to better our sport, including you guys, but it isn't apples to apples. At least in my opinion.
> 
> OK, I have said my piece. I'm done - take it to PM if you must "imform" me


Its good to know just how important we are...

Have you ever cut a field archery course out of the raw woods with just a 6 year old to help you?

I better stop now:mad2:


----------



## Rolo

So, can the local club hosting the shoot have a side shoot that is its and its alone? Would this be a violation of the RIC?



SuperX said:


> Even the US Open requires PGA membershp to try out for... what's up with that? Maybe we should go to their membership and complain why the local golfer can't just show up and shoot at their tournaments!


Perhaps when the national or state associations begin paying the bills for the target buts, ranges, equipment, and supplying the manpower to the state championships, it will be an apples to apples comparison.


----------



## kidnutso

SuperX said:


> Kid, you misquoted me - I didn't say anything before the last ... and no Problem on getting my gender wrong, on the internet nobody knows if you are a skirt
> 
> regarding waiting to 2012, as I stated before, electronic voting on these types of issues has been enabled for directors for at least a couple years. When I was director we got emails from the RIC periodically and dealt with their issues in a timely manner. Please don't propogate this as being an issue, it isn't.


I don't remember this RIC ruling on the WI director's decision being sent out to the State Directors for an "electronic" vote.


----------



## Spoon13

SuperX said:


> Kid, you misquoted me - I didn't say anything before the last ... and no Problem on getting my gender wrong, on the internet nobody knows if you are a skirt
> 
> regarding waiting to 2012, as I stated before, electronic voting on these types of issues has been enabled for directors for at least a couple years. When I was director we got emails from the RIC periodically and dealt with their issues in a timely manner. Please don't propogate this as being an issue, it isn't.
> 
> The NFAA sanctions the shoots much as the PGA sanctions golf events. Directors will inspect the range for safety and "certify" that it is safe enough to hold a tournament on... this can go a long way to helping the local club regarding liability in the event of an accident related to shooting. The NFAA also works for us on hunting issues and to promote archery as a sport, acting as the central agency pulling together the rules and games of the sport we all profess to love. This gives us a level playing field for all archers across the world to compare themselves against. Imagine if the IBO or ASA or NFAA didn't exist... would anyone really play the same games, shoot from the same distances or know which ring was the 14 ring? Seems silly now because that infrastructure is in place but if we lost our central organizing ability, then archery would be fragmented and become 50 things to 50 people. At least now we all share the same vocabulary and understand when someone says they shot a 60X game it wasn't on a 80cm field face at 20ft. There is a low cost liability insurance available from the NFAA that is on par with other such policies in the market as well.
> 
> I think of the NFAA, ASA and IBO as on par with orgainizations like the PGA, NFL or MLB - it is just that we as archers don't play our games on TV or on such a grand scale as they do. Even the US Open requires PGA membershp to try out for... what's up with that? Maybe we should go to their membership and complain why the local golfer can't just show up and shoot at their tournaments!
> 
> FYI, I am no longer a director in the NFAA though I was and saw how dedicated these guys are and how much time and money and passion it takes to do a good job there. I doubt anyone who hasn't done their 2 years as a director really has a clue about what it takes to contribute at that level. I greatly appreciate state involvement and have been on the board of 2 different state orgs in my 8 years shooting a bow, I don't discount it at all, but I have also watched many people quit because they didn't get the help and support they needed or the credit they deserved. That sad story is rampant in archery organizations and clubs across the US. 98% of the members shoot and 2% of the members do all the work. I think we shouldn't be picking on the 2% for no reason because we need them to put on our events... not because I think that they deserve some free pass for being wrong.



I gotta say, you're not helping yourself here Crystal. Since you likened the NFAA to the PGA, lets bring out the facts.

The US Open is sanctioned by the PGA but it's rules are governed by the USGA, a completely different organization. Kinda like the NFAA and the State Orgs huh?? To participate in the US Open, all one has to do is to win or finish high enough in a US Open Qualifier, pay the entry fee and viola, you are in. No membership necessary. You can even win money as long as you announce prior to the tournament that you are a Pro and no longer an Amateur. 

Very few of the PGA Tour Pros are PGA members as it is NOT required to be on Tour. All they have to do is go to Qualifying School and get their card. 

The PGA Tour has 4 Major events, all governed by different Organizations. The aforementioned USGA governs the US Open, Augusta National governs The Masters, The Royal and Ancient governs The Open Championship, and the PGA actually governs the PGA Championship. Go figure.


Just thought I'd state the facts since those seem to be important and in question.


----------



## brtesite

SuperX said:


> Kid, you misquoted me - I didn't say anything before the last ... and no Problem on getting my gender wrong, on the internet nobody knows if you are a skirt
> 
> regarding waiting to 2012, as I stated before, electronic voting on these types of issues has been enabled for directors for at least a couple years. When I was director we got emails from the RIC periodically and dealt with their issues in a timely manner. Please don't propogate this as being an issue, it isn't.
> 
> The NFAA sanctions the shoots much as the PGA sanctions golf events. Directors will inspect the range for safety and "certify" that it is safe enough to hold a tournament on... this can go a long way to helping the local club regarding liability in the event of an accident related to shooting. The NFAA also works for us on hunting issues and to promote archery as a sport, acting as the central agency pulling together the rules and games of the sport we all profess to love. This gives us a level playing field for all archers across the world to compare themselves against. Imagine if the IBO or ASA or NFAA didn't exist... would anyone really play the same games, shoot from the same distances or know which ring was the 14 ring? Seems silly now because that infrastructure is in place but if we lost our central organizing ability, then archery would be fragmented and become 50 things to 50 people. At least now we all share the same vocabulary and understand when someone says they shot a 60X game it wasn't on a 80cm field face at 20ft. There is a low cost liability insurance available from the NFAA that is on par with other such policies in the market as well.
> 
> I think of the NFAA, ASA and IBO as on par with orgainizations like the PGA, NFL or MLB - it is just that we as archers don't play our games on TV or on such a grand scale as they do. Even the US Open requires PGA membershp to try out for... what's up with that? Maybe we should go to their membership and complain why the local golfer can't just show up and shoot at their tournaments!
> 
> FYI, I am no longer a director in the NFAA though I was and saw how dedicated these guys are and how much time and money and passion it takes to do a good job there. I doubt anyone who hasn't done their 2 years as a director really has a clue about what it takes to contribute at that level. I greatly appreciate state involvement and have been on the board of 2 different state orgs in my 8 years shooting a bow, I don't discount it at all, but I have also watched many people quit because they didn't get the help and support they needed or the credit they deserved. That sad story is rampant in archery organizations and clubs across the US. 98% of the members shoot and 2% of the members do all the work. I think we shouldn't be picking on the 2% for no reason because we need them to put on our events... not because I think that they deserve some free pass for being wrong.


Folks, in addition to what X has said, it happens to be a requirement of the state to belong to the NFAA. It has nothing to do with what are you going to get out of it. It is just a flat out requirement. By the way , that rule was put in by the states thru their directors.
No different than all the requirements you put on your members to belong to your state or your club.
If you have a requirement to work a farmers land in order to hunt, your non hunting member must also work , or not join your club.


----------



## JawsDad

I have to say, archery sure seems to put the fun in dysfunctional. At least when it comes to organizations and events.. :doh:


I guess we might have been open to get kicked in the pooper when we hosted our state shoot a month or so ago. We allowed a couple of fun rounds to be shot. We were ignorant of the rule(s) I will admit. But at the end of the day, having a couple of fund rounds on the range did not bother the masses (23 shooters) that showed to participate for awards.

There were a sum total of 2, count 'em, 2 field tournaments in our state this year. One of those was simply a half a field round so I don't even know if it should count, and it was not even a state or nationally affiliated event. Getting someone that came out to shoot some 3D, or something else, and decided to try a field round during the state tourney was a big plus in our eyes. Talking them into paying to join NFAA, OSAA and then pay the entry fee would have resulted in them leaving the range without having shot an arrow.


Rules or not, I guess ignorance was bliss in this case.


----------



## Rolo

brtesite said:


> By the way , that rule was put in by the states thru their directors.


Trying to understand the rationale of the RIC, so please bear with me:

When was this rule (actually 2 "conflicting" rules) first enacted? What was the intent of those who enacted it? Was there any discussion of the question that was eventually submitted for an RIC about this very issue at the time it was enacted?

The issue appears to be whether a non-member can shoot at the same venue that a state shoot is being conducted at. There does not seem to be an issue of whether or not the non-member is eligible for any award, just whether they can shoot their bow at a shoot?

Was the original intent of the rule to say that non-members are absolutely prohibited from shooting at the event, or that they were prohibited from participating in the event? 

If the original intent was to absolutly prohibit, then the RIC is correct. If the original intent was to allow shooting as a guest, but prohibit from taking part in the sanctioned shoot, then the RIC got it wrong. Unfortunately, and this may be much of the problem, there isn't much of an explanation of the reasoning that was used to arrive at the RIC, and it appears that little thought was given to what was actually intended by the rule(s) when they were adopted.

Agree or disagree with the ruling, I as a member sure would like to know what the reasoning was for the decision, and how it was arived at.


----------



## brtesite

Rolo said:


> Trying to understand the rationale of the RIC, so please bear with me:
> 
> When was this rule (actually 2 "conflicting" rules) first enacted? What was the intent of those who enacted it? Was there any discussion of the question that was eventually submitted for an RIC about this very issue at the time it was enacted?
> 
> The issue appears to be whether a non-member can shoot at the same venue that a state shoot is being conducted at. There does not seem to be an issue of whether or not the non-member is eligible for any award, just whether they can shoot their bow at a shoot?
> 
> Was the original intent of the rule to say that non-members are absolutely prohibited from shooting at the event, or that they were prohibited from participating in the event?
> 
> If the original intent was to absolutly prohibit, then the RIC is correct. If the original intent was to allow shooting as a guest, but prohibit from taking part in the sanctioned shoot, then the RIC got it wrong. Unfortunately, and this may be much of the problem, there isn't much of an explanation of the reasoning that was used to arrive at the RIC, and it appears that little thought was given to what was actually intended by the rule(s) when they were adopted.
> 
> Agree or disagree with the ruling, I as a member sure would like to know what the reasoning was for the decision, and how it was arived at.


Unfortunately , the intent has nothing to do with it. The RIC can only go by the written word since the intentions good or bad when it was written probably has been forgotten.


----------



## SuperX

Spoon13 said:


> I gotta say, you're not helping yourself here Crystal. Since you likened the NFAA to the PGA, lets bring out the facts.
> 
> The US Open is sanctioned by the PGA but it's rules are governed by the USGA, a completely different organization. Kinda like the NFAA and the State Orgs huh?? To participate in the US Open, all one has to do is to win or finish high enough in a US Open Qualifier, pay the entry fee and viola, you are in. No membership necessary. You can even win money as long as you announce prior to the tournament that you are a Pro and no longer an Amateur.
> 
> Very few of the PGA Tour Pros are PGA members as it is NOT required to be on Tour. All they have to do is go to Qualifying School and get their card.
> 
> The PGA Tour has 4 Major events, all governed by different Organizations. The aforementioned USGA governs the US Open, Augusta National governs The Masters, The Royal and Ancient governs The Open Championship, and the PGA actually governs the PGA Championship. Go figure.
> 
> 
> Just thought I'd state the facts since those seem to be important and in question.


I know I promised I was done but you're right Spoonie, I meant USGA not PGA... my bad.


----------



## Rolo

brtesite said:


> Unfortunately , the intent has nothing to do with it. The RIC can only go by the written word since the intentions good or bad when it was written probably has been forgotten.


Which results in an interpretation of a rule that may have been misinterpreted. If there is no understanding of why a rule(s) was adopted, it cannot be interpreted. Legislative history is a common tool used by courts when trying to figure out what a legislative body intended. This is especially true if there are competing laws, and the intepretation of the words are in conflict.

Which to some degree is what is present here...there are 2 different rules, and either result can result from an interpretation of one or both of the rules. It appears only one rule was analyzed, and the other not. Which is also the problem when a rationale for the ruling is not provided.


If the rule was obvious, there shouldn't have been a need for an RIC. It wasn't, so an RIC was issued, but without an explanation of why and how it was reached. I am not saying the RIC was right or wrong (I have a personal opinion but that may be dependant on my questions posed above).

Can the host club have a side shoot that is not part of the state sanctioned shoot at the same time?


----------



## ceebee

Oh I love this argument. Brings back the fusses we used to have about amateur and non amateur back in the sixtys, and the one about the one foot against the shooting stake,(which one). However it has always been NFAA members only at state championship shoots, or has been for the last fourty plus years. I as a NFAA member can travel out of my home state and shoot in another state's championship tournament, but can not compete for state champion of that state. 
ceebee


----------



## OneBowTie

*I think CLINK said it best- " I KNOW NOTHING"*

Its amazing how so many will allow their pants or panties to get all knotted up over language......language that was put in place by either themselves or those volunteers who came before them.

Its easy to get frustrated with language....happens all the time.....not just in archery, but life

If you as archers really want to HAVE FUN and enjoy the sport..... you gotta learn to roll better...... and I aint talking about Hoods style of rolling

Sometimes you just have to imPROvise.... and make decisions that are good for the advancement and PROmotion of YOUR SPORT and EVENT/TOURNEY'S



psargeant said:


> it's only the newbies they're trying to keep out...


don't let anyone keep the NEWBIES out....welcome them with open arms and figure out a way to allow them to shoot



SCarson said:


> I think I found the sticking point from the NFAA C/B-Ls under Association Membership:
> 
> III.B.2
> 2.5 Must offer one Indoor State Championship and one Outdoor State Field Championship tournament per year using official NFAA rules, rounds and targets. These tournaments must require NFAA membership.
> 
> However, 2 paragraphs down, the following is stated:
> 
> 2.7 NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
> 2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.


looks to me like any officer of the org on hand could/would simply invoke rule 2.7.1 for every event you host..... after all..... don't you want to PROmote membership anytime you are hosting a event??????



Ron Meadows said:


> Can someone tell me why I need to renew my NFAA membership? What a load!!


because your and everyone else's membership is what will ultimately make a good or bad organization..... and as things appear to be going in archery..... sooner then later there won't be much ORGANIZED archery available out there



FS560 said:


> Sometimes I question the ability of some state directors, RIC members, and some councilmen to display a reasonable command of the written english language.
> 
> Many of these people do not seem to understand the difference between NFAA members competing in the tournament and non-member guests just shooting for no awards whatsoever.
> 
> That RIC ruling is just for that ruling by a that state director and it is likely to be overturned by the board of directors in February 2012.
> 
> If it comes up in Virginia, I will rule that guests may shoot but not for any awards. Also that there is no guest class because that would imply awards for such guest class. There being no guest awards, there is no guest class. Those guests just pay their money, shoot, and that is it, period.
> 
> In reality, guests should not be listed on the shoot roster at all. Since the Virginia Field Archery Association does not take a cut of the registration fees, there is no reason to even list guests on the shoot report.


Thats why many ARCHERS from outside of VA show up for ORGANIZED shoots in VA....cuz we know that we will always be welcome



CHPro said:


> Just to bring up a counterpoint....do you really think offering a "guest" class, even for no awards, is promoting the NFAA and your State organization and getting these people to join? I should think that that job should be getting done at the local level and the allowed State level promo shoots. Get them interested first and then tout the advantages of joining the NFAA so the person has a next level to look forward to. Don't you really think you're just hurting your State org by allowing a guest class? Consider maybe 20%-33% of your State's membership has the opportunity or desire to attend a Sectional or National level tournament where NFAA membership is required. What is to keep a majority of the other 67%-80% who are shooting your State tournaments now from dropping their State/NFAA membership if they can shoot the same tournament as a guest? Fewer members, less membership fees coming into the state, less money for the state to spend hosting quality tournaments. Not to mention fewer members resulting in less voting power to try making changes to the National org.
> 
> Like I said, just offering up a counterpoint. I'd be really interested in hearing from states who have had a guest class for the last several years at their required State Field Championship and the successes this class has had in terms of increasing their NFAA member base. i.e. any tracking being done to show how many of these guests have joined your state org after the event, or are you just happy to collect their money for entry fees. If the latter, how about considering hosting a State Open Field Championship (no membership required) a month or two before your NFAA State Field Championship and use that as a promo to garner more members who in turn may then show up at the NFAA State Championship? Tossing out ideas .
> 
> >>-------->


pretty sure that NFAA has some reciPROcal agreements with IFAA, and the Canadian Organization for the allowance of each other members to compete in each others NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS......



field14 said:


> In order for Dietmar to compete for the CHAMPIONSHIP AWARDS at the NFAA Nationals and Sectionals, he MUST be a paid up member of the NFAA AND a fully paid up member of the NFAA Pro's as well.
> Otherwise, he cannot compete for the awards.
> 
> At Vegas, a person doesn't have to be a member of ANY organization in order to compete...but Vegas is NOT and NFAA Sanctioned tournament, it is run by the WAF.
> 
> You CAN be a member of more than ONE State Association, but you must choose which ONE STATE you are "affiliated with" for State Championships, and if the two states are in different sections...then you must also choose which ONE State you are affiliated with that is in the ONE Sectional that you want to compete for Sectional Championships in.
> If you compete in an NFAA Sanctioned State Championship in the other state, then you are a GUEST...same as if in the Sectionals.
> 
> You can only be a STATE or a SECTIONAL Champion in ONE State or Section, and cannot go from State to state and Section to Section and continue to reap up (or try to, anyways) State Championships and/or Sectional Championships. ONE State and ONE Sectional.
> 
> I do agree, however, on the local level, that turning away non-NFAA members is just plain stupid...and for what? Cuz the people might just possible win a measly two-bit trophy or medal and take it away from a local hot-dog "clicque" member...and as a result, the hosting club loses not just the one or two they turn away...but ALL of their friends and associates to boot? This is committing suicide on the local level, IMHO.
> 
> However, ONE shot, and after that, then they either pay a higher shooting entry fee to compete, OR, they join up, in order to continue to be eligible for the awards given to the PAID UP MEMBERS.
> None of this "free-loading" stuff, more than ONE time.
> field14 (Tom D.)


geez Field..... why you gotta be so hard on ONE



GOT LUCKY said:


> *
> 
> Now I am just one of those "Civil Disobedients" :grin: and a 'Contributor" to my beloved North Carolina friends....*


what she said



Kstigall said:


> I'll try to be more clear.
> During a "State Championship" if you do not acknowledge a "guest" class then no NFAA rules are being broken. Let's say 4 guys head out onto the range. They all shoot their arrows at the target. Scores are recorded. At the end 3 guys hand in their "NFAA state championship" score cards and the 4th hands his club score card to a club officer. Where is the NFAA rule infraction? These guys weren't shooting "together" they just so happened to be on the course at the same time. An NFAA director can't make a ruling if there isn't an "issue" to be ruled upon.


its a sad day when Kstigall has to CLARIFY things.....



Rolo said:


> It's similar to waiting for another Federal Circuit Court to mak a ruling opposite the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to get it to the Supremes. The Supremes, more often than not, tell the 9th Circuit that they got it wrong.


thats why you law jockeys make the big bucks:tongue:



Indianbullet said:


> To bad common sense isn't common anymore..............


I'd like to know when it ever was common



CHPro;1058556580
I believe for those familiar with the evolution of the cited rules the only interpretation can be that the 2 required tournaments needed to comply with the NFAA charter have to be closed to NFAA members only. I believe it used to be all State Championships using NFAA sanctioned rounds had to be closed to NFAA members only. Some states started to get around this by hosting only non-sanctioned rounds for their state championships which certainly doesn't do anything to promote NFAA. Hence the NFAA rules/by-laws were revised by the BOD to require 2 tournaments said:


> archery wishes it has all the "PROblems" WI archers have:wink:
> 
> If all states could emulate WI committment to archers..... we would be complaining about getting bumped on the line by the archer next to us:thumbs_up
> 
> 
> 
> pragmatic_lee said:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoon / Sarge, it's becoming more and more obvious that if you're a state association President, Secretary/Treasurer, or VP then your "volunteer service" is of no consequence to those who are burdened with the much more important and meaningful task of volunteering on a national level.
> 
> 
> 
> Ha.... without you 2% ers..... there would'nt be nobody with their collective heads up their arse's nationally
> 
> 
> 
> SuperX said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kid, you misquoted me - I didn't say anything before the last ... and no Problem on getting my gender wrong, on the internet nobody knows if you are a skirt
> 
> regarding waiting to 2012, as I stated before, electronic voting on these types of issues has been enabled for directors for at least a couple years. When I was director we got emails from the RIC periodically and dealt with their issues in a timely manner. Please don't propogate this as being an issue, it isn't.
> 
> The NFAA sanctions the shoots much as the PGA sanctions golf events. Directors will inspect the range for safety and "certify" that it is safe enough to hold a tournament on... this can go a long way to helping the local club regarding liability in the event of an accident related to shooting. The NFAA also works for us on hunting issues and to promote archery as a sport, acting as the central agency pulling together the rules and games of the sport we all profess to love. This gives us a level playing field for all archers across the world to compare themselves against. Imagine if the IBO or ASA or NFAA didn't exist... would anyone really play the same games, shoot from the same distances or know which ring was the 14 ring? Seems silly now because that infrastructure is in place but if we lost our central organizing ability, then archery would be fragmented and become 50 things to 50 people. At least now we all share the same vocabulary and understand when someone says they shot a 60X game it wasn't on a 80cm field face at 20ft. There is a low cost liability insurance available from the NFAA that is on par with other such policies in the market as well.
> 
> I think of the NFAA, ASA and IBO as on par with orgainizations like the PGA, NFL or MLB - it is just that we as archers don't play our games on TV or on such a grand scale as they do. Even the US Open requires PGA membershp to try out for... what's up with that? Maybe we should go to their membership and complain why the local golfer can't just show up and shoot at their tournaments!
> 
> FYI, I am no longer a director in the NFAA though I was and saw how dedicated these guys are and how much time and money and passion it takes to do a good job there. I doubt anyone who hasn't done their 2 years as a director really has a clue about what it takes to contribute at that level. I greatly appreciate state involvement and have been on the board of 2 different state orgs in my 8 years shooting a bow, I don't discount it at all, but I have also watched many people quit because they didn't get the help and support they needed or the credit they deserved. That sad story is rampant in archery organizations and clubs across the US. 98% of the members shoot and 2% of the members do all the work. I think we shouldn't be picking on the 2% for no reason because we need them to put on our events... not because I think that they deserve some free pass for being wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> even in todays down economy..... you have golf clubs out there commanding 500k for membership.....
> 
> I will know when archery has arrived..... when on my auto gps it offers archery in the recreation section next to the golf section.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SuperX said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know from being a board member in WA and MN and from being a member of 4 different clubs, just what it takes. Can you match my experience by having also been an NFAA director to support your comments and refute my statements with any authority? This is the kind of misinformed harrassment and bullying that I think demeans the sport and the contributions these guys make.
> 
> Been there, done that, and I have loads of love for anyone in the 2% who dedicate themselves to working to better our sport, including you guys, but it isn't apples to apples. At least in my opinion.
> 
> OK, I have said my piece. I'm done - take it to PM if you must "imform" me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> we need the 2% ers way more then we need the national volunteers..... when we can't offer anything locally, there won't be much down the road to attract nationally......
Click to expand...


----------



## south-paaw

WOW... a fly-by poster... or is it as guest poster... or is it Guest Poster.... or 

Guest Member.... or non-guest-non member poster.. 

.:tongue::tongue:


----------



## SuperX

OneBowTie said:


> we need the 2% ers way more then we need the national volunteers..... when we can't offer anything locally, there won't be much down the road to attract nationally......


ok again I get sucked back in but who can resist the chance to respond to a Bowtie drive-by?

Totally agree OBT, the clubs and shops are the backbone of archery.

Let me ask the state prez this, what does the state do for the clubs? why should they even bother joining the state org? Why should anyone join the state org, what do they offer the individual archer? Heck, Is there even a reason for a state org without a national org?


----------



## GOT LUCKY

psargeant said:


> Let's just assume for a minute that the rules are as air tight as you guys think they are. Do you really think turning away shooters, or advertising that they aren't welcome is the right thing to do?
> 
> For a long time this "rule" wasn't exactly enforced. If the NFAA takes a hard line on this with the state associations, it will only be their own throat they're cutting...
> 
> Maybe in some of your states Field archery and the NFAA are alive, well and strong, but I would wager that isn't the case more often than not....
> 
> Bullying people into joining to even shoot (not compete mind you..., shoot) in a state tournament just re-enforces the snob perception we fight against, and turns people off...
> 
> Just my opinion probably, but we will lose more potential members that way than we'll ever gain...
> 
> And just so you all know...spoon is doing his part here in NC...It takes no less time and dedication to run a state association...
> 
> BTW- I still don't see how our State championship is anything but a State level event...we get nothing from the NFAA to support it...I'm certainly not advocating letting non-members shoot for awards...



:clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:

*and for Spoon too ...:wink:

GREAT JOB BOYS!!!!

This "EXCLUSIVE CLUB" mentality the NFAA keeps pushing isn't working anymore to bring in new members!!

The proof is in the numbers......declining numbers.....so it is time for a change!!!
.....and without a MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE to steer those numbers back into a postive direction.......wellllll NEVERMIND....I have said enough on that topic.*
.


----------



## psargeant

OneBowTie said:


> Its amazing how so many will allow their pants or panties to get all knotted up over language......language that was put in place by either themselves or those volunteers who came before them.
> 
> Its easy to get frustrated with language....happens all the time.....not just in archery, but life
> *
> If you as archers really want to HAVE FUN and enjoy the sport..... you gotta learn to roll better...... *and I aint talking about Hoods style of rolling
> 
> Sometimes you just have to imPROvise.... and make decisions that are good for the advancement and PROmotion of YOUR SPORT and EVENT/TOURNEY'S
> 
> 
> 
> *don't let anyone keep the NEWBIES out....welcome them with open arms and figure out a way to allow them to shoot*
> 
> 
> *looks to me like any officer of the org on hand could/would simply invoke rule 2.7.1 for every event you host..... after all..... don't you want to PROmote membership anytime you are hosting a event??????*
> 
> 
> because your and everyone else's membership is what will ultimately make a good or bad organization..... and as things appear to be going in archery..... sooner then later there won't be much ORGANIZED archery available out there
> 
> 
> 
> Thats why many ARCHERS from outside of VA show up for ORGANIZED shoots in VA....cuz we know that we will always be welcome
> 
> 
> 
> pretty sure that NFAA has some reciPROcal agreements with IFAA, and the Canadian Organization for the allowance of each other members to compete in each others NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS......
> 
> 
> 
> geez Field..... why you gotta be so hard on ONE
> 
> 
> 
> what she said
> 
> 
> 
> its a sad day when Kstigall has to CLARIFY things.....
> 
> 
> 
> thats why you law jockeys make the big bucks:tongue:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know when it ever was common
> 
> 
> 
> archery wishes it has all the "PROblems" WI archers have:wink:
> 
> If all states could emulate WI committment to archers..... we would be complaining about getting bumped on the line by the archer next to us:thumbs_up
> 
> 
> 
> Ha.... without you 2% ers..... there would'nt be nobody with their collective heads up their arse's nationally
> 
> 
> 
> even in todays down economy..... you have golf clubs out there commanding 500k for membership.....
> 
> I will know when archery has arrived..... when on my auto gps it offers archery in the recreation section next to the golf section.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we need the 2% ers way more then we need the national volunteers..... when we can't offer anything locally, there won't be much down the road to attract nationally......


Right on OBT...all archers are always welcome at one of our tournaments...

But you musta missed what this controversy is all about 2.7.1 was deemed to be not applicable at the required 2 tournaments a year...

NFAA says we can't allow it...

Not changing what we do here in NC...just have to be a bit more creative...


----------



## pragmatic_lee

SuperX said:


> ok again I get sucked back in but who can resist the chance to respond to a Bowtie drive-by?
> 
> Totally agree OBT, the clubs and shops are the backbone of archery.
> 
> Let me ask the state prez this, what does the state do for the clubs? why should they even bother joining the state org? Why should anyone join the state org, what do they offer the individual archer? Heck, Is there even a reason for a state org without a national org?


What does the State do for the Clubs? 

Here's a few off the top of my head that instantly come to mind.

Organize both an indoor and outdoor schedule of State shoots that prevent conflicts between member clubs and possible other shoots that may interest the members.

Maintain and pay for a web site of current schedules, news, results, etc.

Maintain and use an email list of the membership.

Pay for and furnish target faces for all State sponsored shoots if requested by the club.

Pay for and furnish all awards for Championship shoots. An expense that has been known to cost more than the shoot took in. We do NOT skimp on awards!

Go on sight and inspect/approve both indoor and outdoor courses/ranges.

Go on sight and assist/advise individuals/clubs on building courses/ranges.

WELCOME VISITORS WITH OPEN ARMS!


----------



## GOT LUCKY

SuperX said:


> Originally Posted by psargeant
> Let's just assume for a minute that the rules are as air tight as you guys think they are. Do you really think turning away shooters, or advertising that they aren't welcome is the right thing to do?
> 
> I do not think that we are talking about making archers unwelcome for the 2 shoots we are talking about. Other organizations require membership to participate and the NFAA is no different. Requiring membership is a far cry from "adverstising that they aren't welcome".
> 
> For a long time this "rule" wasn't exactly enforced. If the NFAA takes a hard line on this with the state associations, it will only be their own throat they're cutting...
> 
> The rule was enforced and lead to the loss of NFAA charter for at least 2 states who were not willing to follow it (MN & PA) in just the last 10 years. I also think VA had an issue there but I am not sure.
> Maybe in some of your states Field archery and the NFAA are alive, well and strong, but I would wager that isn't the case more often than not....
> 
> Bullying people into joining to even shoot (not compete mind you..., shoot) in a state tournament just re-enforces the snob perception we fight against, and turns people off...
> 
> Bullying is inflamitory and why I jumped in - vilifying the NFAA without the facts or the truth in the guise of "helping grow archery" does no good at all. If you or anyone reading this wants to help, then join and become part of the organization and work to change it. I wish people would turn their powers to good instead of trying to tear down the largest archery organization in the US. What you all think that will accomplish is beyond me.
> 
> Just my opinion probably, but we will lose more potential members that way than we'll ever gain...
> 
> Members of what? I argue if they aren't members now and we don't require them to be members in order to shoot, they won't ever be members.
> 
> And just so you all know...spoon is doing his part here in NC...It takes no less time and dedication to run a state association...
> 
> *Wait till spoon gets harpooned anonymously for his hard work - as you and he seem intent on doing to the NFAA volunteers. I bet he doesn't last long when his efforts are largely criticized and made to seem unimportant by the know-it-alls on the internet.*
> 
> BTW- I still don't see how our State championship is anything but a State level event...we get nothing from the NFAA to support it...
> 
> I'm certainly not advocating letting non-members shoot for awards...You obviously don't know what you get from the NFAA for the shoot, so to you it seems like nothing.
> 
> 
> Comments inline above. Sorry for being harsh but your constant complaining and misrepresentation of the facts has worn me out.



*I am tired of hearing over and over again about "ALL of the HARD WORK" being done.....

THEY ARE FAILING WITH THEIR EFFORTS-----THE DECLINING MEMBERSHIP NUMBERS ARE PROOF!!!

I know of no other business/organization that just because you are "working hard---but failing at your job......keeps doing the same thing ....unless that is/was their intent. *

.


----------



## psargeant

pragmatic_lee said:


> What does the State do for the Clubs?
> 
> Here's a few off the top of my head that instantly come to mind.
> 
> Organize both an indoor and outdoor schedule of State shoots that prevent conflicts between member clubs and possible other shoots that may interest the members.
> 
> Maintain and pay for a web site of current schedules, news, results, etc.
> 
> Maintain and use an email list of the membership.
> 
> Pay for and furnish target faces for all State sponsored shoots if requested by the club.
> 
> Pay for and furnish all awards for Championship shoots. An expense that has been known to cost more than the shoot took in. We do NOT skimp on awards!
> 
> Go on sight and inspect/approve both indoor and outdoor courses/ranges.
> 
> Go on sight and assist/advise individuals/clubs on building courses/ranges.
> 
> WELCOME VISITORS WITH OPEN ARMS!


Among other things...

Thanks Lee...


----------



## SuperX

pragmatic_lee said:


> What does the State do for the Clubs?
> 
> Here's a few off the top of my head that instantly come to mind.
> 
> Organize both an indoor and outdoor schedule of State shoots that prevent conflicts between member clubs and possible other shoots that may interest the members.
> 
> But wait, the NFAA does that but you think that is unfair or not valuable? How does the state differ? Can out of state members come in and shoot for awards without being a member?
> Maintain and pay for a web site of current schedules, news, results, etc.
> 
> But wait, the NFAA does that too. Again, you don't see the value there. Why should the clubs suddenly see value in what the states do if the states don't see value in the same information posted for states, sectionals and nationals?
> Maintain and use an email list of the membership.
> 
> so the state sends email... most probably consider it spam.
> Pay for and furnish target faces for all State sponsored shoots if requested by the club.
> 
> As does the NFAA
> Pay for and furnish all awards for Championship shoots. An expense that has been known to cost more than the shoot took in. We do NOT skimp on awards!
> 
> As does the NFAA
> 
> Go on sight and inspect/approve both indoor and outdoor courses/ranges.
> 
> Balony - there is no such thing as a state inspection for ranges outside of what the NFAA does for the member sates. There is no such thing as a "state approved" range. I would like to see how that holds up in court, I am betting it won't. (oh but the NFAA does do that for the states and provides insurance that covers the liability of the clubs AND the NFAA inspector)
> Go on sight and assist/advise individuals/clubs on building courses/ranges.
> 
> Based on what standards? What is the state guideline for building a safe range? Would it by chance be the guidelines posted by the NFAA? Hmmm?
> 
> WELCOME VISITORS WITH OPEN ARMS!


so basically the state provides exactly what the NFAA does minus the insurance and the magazine and the rules and definitions of the games and the range safety guidelines and the sectional shoots, etc.. 

How much does it cost for a club to be chartered by the state in NC and what does the club get for that money? I mean what does the club who is not hosting the state championship get?

How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot... by the way I am just getting warmed up if you want me to bash the value of the state orgs more, just go review the old NFAA bashing threads cause that is where most of my arguments would come from. When you bash the NFAA for essentially standing by the rules voted in by the states themselves, you just bash yourself. The NFAA is nothing but a collection of state organizations


----------



## SuperX

GOT LUCKY said:


> *I am tired of hearing over and over again about "ALL of the HARD WORK" being done.....
> 
> THEY ARE FAILING WITH THEIR EFFORTS-----THE DECLINING MEMBERSHIP NUMBERS ARE PROOF!!!
> 
> I know of no other business/organization that just because you are "working hard---but failing at your job......keeps doing the same thing ....unless that is/was their intent. *
> 
> .


Simmer down missy nobody asked you 

How are state memberships proceeding? Are they going down too? Are clubs and shops not folding left & right around the country? How are the states preserving the field ranges in their borders?

Physician heal thyself before you profess you can heal anyone else


----------



## brtesite

SuperX said:


> so basically the state provides exactly what the NFAA does minus the insurance and the magazine and the rules and definitions of the games and the range safety guidelines and the sectional shoots, etc..
> 
> How much does it cost for a club to be chartered by the state in NC and what does the club get for that money? I mean what does the club who is not hosting the state championship get?
> 
> How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot... by the way I am just getting warmed up if you want me to bash the value of the state orgs more, just go review the old NFAA bashing threads cause that is where most of my arguments would come from. When you bash the NFAA for essentially standing by the rules voted in by the states themselves, you just bash yourself. The NFAA is nothing but a collection of state organizations



Crystal, Go Girl


----------



## rock monkey

SuperX said:


> so basically the state provides exactly what the NFAA does minus the insurance and the magazine and the rules and definitions of the games and the range safety guidelines and the sectional shoots, etc..
> 
> How much does it cost for a club to be chartered by the state in NC and what does the club get for that money? I mean what does the club who is not hosting the state championship get?
> 
> How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot... by the way I am just getting warmed up if you want me to bash the value of the state orgs more, just go review the old NFAA bashing threads cause that is where most of my arguments would come from. *When you bash the NFAA for essentially standing by the rules voted in by the states themselves, you just bash yourself. The NFAA is nothing but a collection of state organizations*



ok, then let us see the accountability of votes from the states.
article V paragraph C 1.1.1 

if we are to have an interest in how our state's delegates represent us, we want to see how they actually voted. if they are voting special interest, counter to what the membership wants, we have a right and a responsibility to know.

if you want to get absolutely specific, i want to know WHO was present and how they voted for the maximum arrow diameter during the regular meeting and i want to know WHO was present and voted at the emergency meeting that changed the vote of the regular meeting. as a member at that time, i do have the right to see those minutes because it directly affected me.

dont tell me to read the C/BL, i already have and i have pointed out NUMEROUS points of deficiencies and delinquencies within the upper echelon of the NFAA's ruling party. we can play that game again. all i need to do is dig out my old posts.......isnt that what you said yourself?


----------



## SuperX

rock monkey said:


> ok, then let us see the accountability of votes from the states.
> article V paragraph C 1.1.1
> 
> if we are to have an interest in how our state's delegates represent us, we want to see how they actually voted. if they are voting special interest, counter to what the membership wants, we have a right and a responsibility to know.
> 
> if you want to get absolutely specific, i want to know WHO was present and how they voted for the maximum arrow diameter during the regular meeting and i want to know WHO was present and voted at the emergency meeting that changed the vote of the regular meeting. as a member at that time, i do have the right to see those minutes because it directly affected me.
> 
> dont tell me to read the C/BL, i already have and i have pointed out NUMEROUS points of deficiencies and delinquencies within the upper echelon of the NFAA's ruling party. we can play that game again. all i need to do is dig out my old posts.......isnt that what you said yourself?


RM, in my 2 years as a director I did see information collected on who voted for what in a roll-call vote but generally the voting didn't require that as it was obvious from a voice vote that one side or another had won. Whether that information is published or not I don't know - I used to record all roll-call votes in my notes when I was director, but I wasn't director when the original rules were voted in or when the arrow size ruling was made/unmade & made again. Any vote that wasn't a roll-call won't have any record of the individual state's voting so I don't know how to keep you from believing that it was a conspiracy against the states - oh wait, it was the states that voted that in not some mythical "ruling party" so they must be consipring against themselves! 

You don't need to convince me that the rules are so badly written that it is hard to understand their meaning. That doesn't mean there is NO meaning in them, just that you have to engage more than a little brain power to understand them. Talk to your director about specific rule meanings and they can tell you or find out for you.


----------



## psargeant

SuperX said:


> so basically the state provides exactly what the NFAA does minus the insurance and the magazine and the rules and definitions of the games and the range safety guidelines and the sectional shoots, etc..
> 
> *How much does it cost for a club to be chartered by the state in NC and what does the club get for that money? I mean what does the club who is not hosting the state championship get?*
> How does it feel when the shoe is on the other foot... by the way I am just getting warmed up if you want me to bash the value of the state orgs more, just go review the old NFAA bashing threads cause that is where most of my arguments would come from. When you bash the NFAA for essentially standing by the rules voted in by the states themselves, you just bash yourself. The NFAA is nothing but a collection of state organizations


Its good to know that the NFAA does so much of this stuff for the clubs... Once again, you fail to read and just start spouting off...

I guess all of our jobs just got easier guys...Nfaa is taking care of all of it for the clubs...

They're writing the check for the targets...

They're going to set the schedule...

They're paying for awards...etc...

Can you tell me where I can send the bill...???

I know I promised to stay out of it, but I just can't after that rant...

In answer to your questions:
We collect a total of $10 a year from the clubs for charters...the rest of the $40 or so in charter fees goes to the NFAA...

For that the clubs get from the NCFAA:
Promotion on our website and in any other way we can support them... I've never seen anything about a local shoot on the NFAA website, have you?
Insurance coverage when hosting NCFAA shoots that the NCFAA pays for (I'll give you that we get this through the NFAA's policy, but we could get it elsewhere).
Officers at nearly every shoot running the show and if they're not officers, they've been shown how to do it by one.
A portion of the entry fee at every shoot held at their facility. 

So what do they really get from the NFAA?
A range affiliation certificate (after a *state officer *does a range inspection. This costs $15 and goes to the NFAA not to the state).
Right to buy insurance they can get cheaper from the ASA.

I sure understand all of the arguments you're making. I've been using those exact things to keep the dedicated group of field archers in this state that do all the work placated and willing to re-new their NFAA charters for 3 years now. Every year I have a harder and harder time convincing them that it's worth it...

The 3 folks you're attacking in this thread do more work to support field archery and the NCFAA (and by extension the NFAA) than anybody else in NC. 

BTW our NFAA Director gave up Spoon's position because it was too much work......he wanted to stay involved, but needed something that required less of a time committment.... 

Our membership is fine...we have 3 more 14 target field ranges now than we did 5 years ago...

Now, I'm not arguing the merits of the system anymore (unless there are more attacks forthcoming), back to the topic who thinks this ruling is good for Field archery?


----------



## SuperX

brtesite said:


> Crystal, Go Girl


Mike, I find that now that my rotator cuff and general LOFT has removed me from organized competitive archery, I am able to speak my mind much more freely! 

FYI to the tin-foil briggade... I am not a NFAA director or on any state boards any more, anything I say should be seen as coming from me and not from my state or national org. (Even if Mike does agree with me from time to time :angel


----------



## Spoon13

Back on Topic folks. This thread is about the fact that there are several of us that feel as though the Rules Interpretation Committee got it WRONG when they handed down their ruling and that the ruling is contrary to what is WRITTEN in the Constitution. That's it.

If you want to continue to pit the State Orgs against the NFAA and vice versa, then go start your own thread about it and quit diverting attention away from the matter at hand.


----------



## TNMAN

*Back to the point---*

Have to admit it. Spoon & Co. are right.

Page 12, para 2.7 ---membership requirements may be waived at State level only in: 2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.

The RIC ruling appears to be based on the faint implication that the required state indoor and outdoor championships are somehow not "State level". However, if you electronically search throughout the C&BL for the term "state level", it is clear that "state level" in multiple clauses specifically includes state championships. Imho, the RIC ruling may have been pre-decided only because "that's the way its always been", and without any logic or stated reason, completely dismissed 2.7.4. The dates on the ruling support this contention as the request was received and a ruling issued on the same day. At first glance, 2.7.4 appears to be an ambiguity which conflicts with 2.5. Careful reading of the entire document leads to the conclusion that 2.7.4 is not a conflict and is not ambiguous. It is clearly one of only four exceptions to 2.5. That may or may not have been the original intent, but without any doubt, that is exactly what it says. 

One thing that does seem odd or inappropriate is the threat of expulsion at the end of the ruling. Might be a case of "When you are not sure, just argue louder." See that a lot in here too.


----------



## SuperX

psargeant said:


> Its good to know that the NFAA does so much of this stuff for the clubs... Once again, you fail to read and just start spouting off...
> 
> I guess all of our jobs just got easier guys...Nfaa is taking care of all of it for the clubs...
> 
> They're writing the check for the targets...
> 
> They're going to set the schedule...
> 
> They're paying for awards...etc...
> 
> Can you tell me where I can send the bill...???
> 
> I know I promised to stay out of it, but I just can't after that rant...
> 
> In answer to your questions:
> We collect a total of $10 a year from the clubs for charters...the rest of the $40 or so in charter fees goes to the NFAA...
> 
> For that the clubs get from the NCFAA:
> Promotion on our website and in any other way we can support them... I've never seen anything about a local shoot on the NFAA website, have you?
> Insurance coverage when hosting NCFAA shoots that the NCFAA pays for (I'll give you that we get this through the NFAA's policy, but we could get it elsewhere).
> Officers at nearly every shoot running the show and if they're not officers, they've been shown how to do it by one.
> A portion of the entry fee at every shoot held at their facility.
> 
> So what do they really get from the NFAA?
> A range affiliation certificate (after a *state officer *does a range inspection. This costs $15 and goes to the NFAA not to the state).
> Right to buy insurance they can get cheaper from the ASA.
> 
> I sure understand all of the arguments you're making. I've been using those exact things to keep the dedicated group of field archers in this state that do all the work placated and willing to re-new their NFAA charters for 3 years now. Every year I have a harder and harder time convincing them that it's worth it...
> 
> The 3 folks you're attacking in this thread do more work to support field archery and the NCFAA (and by extension the NFAA) than anybody else in NC.
> 
> BTW our NFAA Director gave up Spoon's position because it was too much work......he wanted to stay involved, but needed something that required less of a time committment....
> 
> Our membership is fine...we have 3 more 14 target field ranges now than we did 5 years ago...
> 
> Now, I'm not arguing the merits of the system anymore (unless there are more attacks forthcoming), back to the topic who thinks this ruling is good for Field archery?


As the state does for the club, so the NFAA does for the states.

The NFAA director or their designate does the inspections and not the state - the NFAA is on the hook for that, not the state. That is why the inspection fee goes to the NFAA.

I am not attacking I am defending unfounded and uninformed blaming of the NFAA RIC (Rules Interpetation Committee) for doing their job and interpreting the rules, correctly. If you want to make all of the state championships able to have non-NFAA member guests, then submit an agenda item to change the rules of the state charter system in the NFAA. If enough STATES agree, it will be done. It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.

I'll leave you with one parting thought: The clubs and shops are the backbone of archery. The NFAA works through the states to support them and create a level playing field in the sport of archery across the nation and the world. I commend you 3 for being the people who take that lofty goal (no pun intended) and turn it into reality. That is from the heart!

I'm out of here too - if you need me I will be at 46.822617,-125.518799 fishing.

Tight Lines,

Crystal


----------



## TNMAN

*looking even closer*

Almost ambiguities in contracts and other legal documents are caused by trying to say the same thing in two different places. I contend that the ambiguity in this case is between 2.4 and 2.5. Para 2.4 reads in part "Require membership in the NFAA *as essential for competition in all official NFAA rounds*---." Then 2.5 reads in part "These tournaments must require NFAA membership", leaving out the earlier words "as essential for competition" from the arguably superceding requirement of para 2.4. Para 2.7 and subparas 2.7.1-2.7.4 are clearly exceptions to both mentions of membership requirement in pargraphs 2.4 and 2.5. There are a few other mentions of "membership requirement" in the rules that are directly linked to "competing". 

No one is saying the RIC is not doing their job. No one bats .1000. And just because something has been wrong for a long time does not make it right. Sure hope the directors spend some time looking at this.


----------



## Rolo

SuperX said:


> I am not attacking I am defending unfounded and uninformed blaming of the NFAA RIC (Rules Interpetation Committee) for doing their job and interpreting the rules, *correctly*.


I think that may be part of the problem...we have an interpretation...but it ain't a final interpretation...the Directors still get their say...and the "correct" interpretation may not be so *correct* in the end...





SuperX said:


> If you want to make all of the state championships able to have non-NFAA member guests, then submit an agenda item to change the rules of the state charter system in the NFAA. If enough STATES agree, it will be done. It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.


I think the goal is to make sure that guests can shoot the shoot, and to promote archery, even though they would just be shooting for the enjoyment (novel idea) and perhaps becoming familiar with the state association and NFAA, to determine if perhaps they want to get involved, without buying the car before a test drive.

The clubs and states are of course wanting to do everyhting they can to allow people to shoot and get involved, even though these guests will not be shooting for a championship, without the fear of getting their charter...well...YANKED.


----------



## kidnutso

Spoon13 said:


> Back on Topic folks. This thread is about the fact that there are several of us that feel as though the Rules Interpretation Committee got it WRONG when they handed down their ruling and that the ruling is contrary to what is WRITTEN in the Constitution. That's it.
> 
> If you want to continue to pit the State Orgs against the NFAA and vice versa, then go start your own thread about it and quit diverting attention away from the matter at hand.


:thumbs_up

I think the key here is whether or not the two required State Shoots, as required in Paragraph 2.5, are State Level Shoots. I believe that the rules back up that they are State Level. And that Paragraph 2.7.4 would apply to those two shoots as well. 

It's obvious to me. There are Sectional Level shoots where each Section encompasses multiple states. There are National Level Shoots where all Sections are part of. Now you tell me where the rules and logic says that the State Shoots that are mandated by the NFAA are not State Level; thus, allowing Non Member Shooters in a guest division not shooting for awards as per described in Paragraph 2.7.4. It's the same with Sectionals. The NFAA mandates the Sectional Shoots. But they are still Sectional Level, not National. Thus the State Shoots mandated by NFAA should be State Level, following all NFAA rules including the right of the States to waive the member requirement for the State Level (in a non-competitive division).

And I don't care who disputes this...it is a fact. I've signed up at least a dozen or more members over the past 4 years that my club has hosted State and Sectional Shoots by letting them shoot as a "guest" one year to get a taste of the NFAA style shooting. Then the next year, they joined. Of course this was when we thought the rule allowed guest before the RIC ruling came down. I guess adding members to the NFAA through our shoots is a thing of the past unless we can get this ruling reversed in 2012.

But what do I know?


----------



## GOT LUCKY

SuperX said:


> Simmer down missy nobody asked you
> 
> How are state memberships proceeding? Are they going down too? Are clubs and shops not folding left & right around the country? How are the states preserving the field ranges in their borders?
> 
> Physician heal thyself before you profess you can heal anyone else



*You know I'm always gonna tip-toe in for a good debate...especially when it comes to the NFAA Membership:tongue: 

Besides....It has definitely livened up this cemetery.....I hear "BONES A RATTLIN'" and smell "FISH A GRILLIN'".... 

"State Memberships"????....hummmm.....my guess would be doing very well in N.C.....and if this demand for "gotta join the secret handshake club/exclusionary business" keeps up to shoot at the two most important and highly attended tournaments...I think even better....

Especially once we establish the "Cow Chip Toss Class" for us "Civil Disobedients" to come and enjoy the State Indoor (boy it's gonna get messy) and Outdoor Championships....wanna see the trophy????

....and North Carolina is one state for sure that has increased the number of Field Courses over the past 6 years that I have been shooting :clap2: :clap2: :clap2:*

.


----------



## Cecil

In the 2 NFAA State Championships per year, only NFAA members who are residents of the state may compete for awards. Guests (which are defined as NFAA members from other states) may participate, but not for awards. Based on the by-laws a walk-in archer who is not an NFAA member cannot participate. Unless (according to 2.7.3) the state org issues a non-competitive state association membership (again, not for awards). 

What is to stop a state from issuing a non-competitive state association membership to allow the non-NFAA member to participate in the shoot? (non-competitive=no awards) In fact, the state could issue a _temporary_ non-competitive membership (say for about 2 days).

Problem solved. Everyone gets to play. :darkbeer:

NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.
2.7.2 Special events conducted in conjunction with Bowhunter Jamborees and
Bowhunter Education programs.
*2.7.3 The issuance of non-competitive state association memberships.*
2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.


----------



## kidnutso

Cecil said:


> In the 2 NFAA State Championships per year, only NFAA members who are residents of the state may compete for awards. Guests (which are defined as NFAA members from other states) may participate, but not for awards. Based on the by-laws a walk-in archer who is not an NFAA member cannot participate. Unless (according to 2.7.3) the state org issues a non-competitive state association membership (again, not for awards).
> 
> What is to stop a state from issuing a non-competitive state association membership to allow the non-NFAA member to participate in the shoot? (non-competitive=no awards) In fact, the state could issue a _temporary_ non-competitive membership (say for about 2 days).
> 
> Problem solved. Everyone gets to play. :darkbeer:
> 
> NFAA membership requirements may be waived at State level only in:
> 2.7.1 Special events conducted for the sole purpose of membership promotion.
> 2.7.2 Special events conducted in conjunction with Bowhunter Jamborees and
> Bowhunter Education programs.
> *2.7.3 The issuance of non-competitive state association memberships.*
> 2.7.4 In guest divisions not shooting for awards.


Cecil, If what you're saying about 2.7.3 is true, then why is 2.7.4 not true. I wish it was as simple as you say because I would love to be able to let Non-members shoot in a division not competing for awards. But I think you missed the point in that the RIC has ruled and agrees with the decision the WI State Director made about not allowing non NFAA Member Shooters. Until that can be hashed out at a State Directors meeting, as far as the NFAA is concerned, non-NFAA member can shoot these two annual required shoots.

And it doesn't matter how many of us think the RIC made a mistake on the interpretation of these rules. I don't believe for a minute that the intent of that rule was to keep Non-Members from shooting these shoots...just to let the NFAA members compete for the awards among themselves. That's the ruling they made, and they have say so until and amendment proposal is made or the rules can be more clearly written. If we allow non members to shoot these shoots until that is done, as far as the NFAA is concerned, we will be in violation of the rules. :sad:


----------



## Cecil

kidnutso said:


> Cecil, If what you're saying about 2.7.3 is true, then why is 2.7.4 not true. I wish it was as simple as you say because I would love to be able to let Non-members shoot in a division not competing for awards. But I think you missed the point in that the RIC has ruled and agrees with the decision the WI State Director made about not allowing non NFAA Member Shooters. Until that can be hashed out at a State Directors meeting, as far as the NFAA is concerned, non-NFAA member can shoot these two annual required shoots.
> 
> And it doesn't matter how many of us think the RIC made a mistake on the interpretation of these rules. I don't believe for a minute that the intent of that rule was to keep Non-Members from shooting these shoots...just to let the NFAA members compete for the awards among themselves. That's the ruling they made, and they have say so until and amendment proposal is made or the rules can be more clearly written. If we allow non members to shoot these shoots until that is done, as far as the NFAA is concerned, we will be in violation of the rules. :sad:


The difference (in my view) is that the NFAA has defined what a guest is (NFAA member from another state). This is why a non-NFAA member does not qualify as a 'guest'. 

Correct me if I am wrong (I haven't seen the ruling), but the RIC ruled on a non-NFAA member participating in the shoot. As Mike said earlier, the RIC makes the ruling on the written by-laws, not an interpretation. This probably also applies to the ruling sent by the director to the RIC for review. Did the ruling include a non-competitive state membership or only a non-NFAA archer participating as a 'guest'?

2.7.3 specifically states in writing that NFAA membership can be waived in the case of a non-competitive state membership.


----------



## kidnutso

Cecil said:


> The difference (in my view) is that the NFAA has defined what a guest is (NFAA member from another state). This is why a non-NFAA member does not qualify as a 'guest'.
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong (I haven't seen the ruling), but the RIC ruled on a non-NFAA member participating in the shoot. As Mike said earlier, the RIC makes the ruling on the written by-laws, not an interpretation. This probably also applies to the ruling sent by the director to the RIC for review. Did the ruling include a non-competitive state membership or only a non-NFAA archer participating as a 'guest'?
> If
> 2.7.3 specifically states in writing that NFAA membership can be waived in the case of a non-competitive state membership.



RIC ruled on Non-NFAA member participation. And I didn't see where Mike said that, but I don't necessarily agree. Paragraph 2.11 says, "Refer all instances of questionable interpretation to their NFAA Director. (That's what the club in WI did.) The Director thereupon makes a ruling then forwards his/her interpretation to the Rules Interpretation Committee. The RIC makes a ruling based on his/her interpretation. If we have hundreds and maybe thousands of NFAA members that are interpreting these paragraphs different from RIC...what makes RIC understand the C/BL any better than they do. RIC is making a ruling based on his/her interpretation. These rules are written too vaguely for anyone to know in black and white what they mean. They need to be clarified and re-written so it's plain what they are trying to say.

And are you saying Paragraph 2.7.3 allows a State Association to allow a non-NFAA shooter to be granted a non-competitive membership in the state (for whatever fee it determines) and they can shoot in these two NFAA mandated shoots, but not for awards?


----------



## Cecil

kidnutso said:


> And are you saying Paragraph 2.7.3 allows a State Association to allow a non-NFAA shooter to be granted a non-competitive membership in the state (for whatever fee it determines) and they can shoot in these two NFAA mandated shoots, but not for awards?


Yeah, that's what I am reading. 2.5 says 'membership is required'. 2.7 says 'membership can be waived in these instances...' 

I did find the PDF of the RIC ruling in an earlier post. It seems the RIC is saying that 2.7 only applies to State level shoots. But, this is what were are referring to, State Championships. Not Sectional or National.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

*SOOOooooooooooo... a non-state--non-member can do what now??????

Welllllllllllllllllllll.....with all of this "HOOPLA"....Guest -- Non-Guest -- Can Shoot---Can't Shoot......who knows any more...and I don't want to jeopardize N.C.'s association with the NFAA.

Mr. Lucky and I will just drive up and we will offer Tim our expertise at counting cow chips and pickin' -n- shuckin' corn and fling some practice arrows...Heck....we will bring our own trophies for that..:angry:*

.


----------



## kidnutso

Cecil said:


> Yeah, that's what I am reading. 2.5 says 'membership is required'. 2.7 says 'membership can be waived in these instances...'
> 
> I did find the PDF of the RIC ruling in an earlier post. It seems the RIC is saying that 2.7 only applies to State level shoots. But, this is what were are referring to, State Championships. Not Sectional or National.



That what I'm arguing too. But the WI director ruled that non-members could not shoot in those State Level Shoots. And the RIC ruling stated that he agreed with the WI director. I don't think RIC is considering these two shoots State Level because they are required by the NFAA. It's like I said...the rules are open to too much interpretation. They need to be changed to state what the original intent of the rules was. And if there's no still around who knows what that intent was, the rules need to be looked at and defined.


----------



## kidnutso

GOT LUCKY said:


> *SOOOooooooooooo... a non-state--non-member can do what now??????
> 
> Welllllllllllllllllllll.....with all of this "HOOPLA"....Guest -- Non-Guest -- Can Shoot---Can't Shoot......who knows any more...and I don't want to jeopardize N.C.'s association with the NFAA.
> 
> Mr. Lucky and I will just drive up and we will offer Tim our expertise at counting cow chips and pickin' -n- shuckin' corn and fling some practice arrows...Heck....we will bring our own trophies for that..:angry:*
> 
> .


Hi Lucky,

I am assuming you are a member of the NFAA. I am pretty sure that you would be allowed to shoot in the NC shoot. As a NFAA defined guest (member of the NFAA from another state). You could shoot but just not for the NC State awards. At least that's my understanding.


----------



## Cecil

kidnutso said:


> That what I'm arguing too. But the WI director ruled that non-members could not shoot in those State Level Shoots. And the RIC ruling stated that he agreed with the WI director. I don't think RIC is considering these two shoots State Level because they are required by the NFAA. It's like I said...the rules are open to too much interpretation. They need to be changed to state what the original intent of the rules was. And if there's no still around who knows what that intent was, the rules need to be looked at and defined.


I think you're right. 'I don't think RIC is considering these two shoots State Level because they are required by the NFAA.'

The RIC makes a leap that State Championships defined in 2.5 are above 'State Level'. Everywhere else 'State Level' is implied as below Sectional (and National).


----------



## kidnutso

Cecil said:


> I think you're right. 'I don't think RIC is considering these two shoots State Level because they are required by the NFAA.'
> 
> The RIC makes a leap that State Championships defined in 2.5 are above 'State Level'. Everywhere else 'State Level' is implied as below Sectional (and National).


I just wish there was some way we could get this resolved before Feb. 2010. That's the next time the State Directors meet to consider amendments to the C/BL. :sad:


----------



## GOT LUCKY

kidnutso said:


> Hi Lucky,
> 
> I am assuming you are a member of the NFAA. I am pretty sure that you would be allowed to shoot in the NC shoot. As a NFAA defined guest (member of the NFAA from another state). You could shoot but just not for the NC State awards. At least that's my understanding.


*Sorry Sweets.......not anymore :sad: 
Note my signature line.............
Can't justify my money going to an Organization who refused to consider a Membership Committee, even discuss it or offer any change in what they are currently doing to try and turn around the decline in membership......

So now I am just one of those "Civil Disobedient Non-Members from South Carolina" driving up to enjoy a weekend of FUN with my N.C. Friends.....*

.


----------



## SCarson

GOT LUCKY said:


> *Sorry Sweets.......not anymore :sad:
> Note my signature line.............
> Can't justify my money going to an Organization who refused to consider a Membership Committee, even discuss it or offer any change in what they are currently doing to try and turn around the decline in membership......
> 
> So now I am just one of those "Civil Disobedient Non-Members from South Carolina" driving up to enjoy a weekend of FUN with my N.C. Friends.....*
> 
> .


We gotcha covered, Lucky!! Just bring y'alls bows and be prepared to shoot like the rest of us. No way we'd have YOU drive up here and just stare at cow chips. If you can't beat'em, use their rules agin'em.


----------



## Guest

Well from an outside perspective most of you do not want an organisation you want a company, there is a very big difference between them.

What is the most mind boggling thing to me is that you are complaining about rules and regs that your own state presented and approved yet you complain that the NFAA is wrong..absolutley mind boggling......gonna check the sky outside to see if mine is still blue cuz yours has gotta be different.


----------



## Jbird

*How Sad it This?*

That this is the most active and most interesting thread in the Field Forum.
I think the recent decisions on who comes and who goes might need to be
revisited. This place ain't fun anymore.


----------



## kidnutso

Sean McKenty said:


> Well from an outside perspective most of you do not want an organisation you want a company, there is a very big difference between them.
> 
> What is the most mind boggling thing to me is that you are complaining about rules and regs that your own state presented and approved yet you complain that the NFAA is wrong..absolutley mind boggling......gonna check the sky outside to see if mine is still blue cuz yours has gotta be different.


OK Sean. First...being from Canada, are you a member of the NFAA? And I would like to challenge you obtain a copy of the NFAA Constitution & By-laws, read the sections we've been discussing, then tell me that you don't believe that it allows states to have a non-competitive guest division at the two state championships.

I don't believe for a moment, that the rules were written to exclude non-members from shooting. Just from competing against the NFAA members. That's what the State Directors voted for when this rule was voted in. Not excluding non-members. The rules are not plain. They are subject too much to interpretation.


----------



## Spotshooter2

Strange a couple of the members from the club I belong to specifically asked Bruce Cull in front of our state director if a club was allowed to have guest division for non NFAA members at our state tourneys. His answer was yes , just that they could not shoot for state awards but if the host club wished to supply awards for the guest division it was fine. So that is what our clubs have been doing in our state.


----------



## kidnutso

Spotshooter2 said:


> Strange a couple of the members from the club I belong to specifically asked Bruce Cull in front of our state director if a club was allowed to have guest division for non NFAA members at our state tourneys. His answer was yes , just that they could not shoot for state awards but if the host club wished to supply awards for the guest division it was fine. So that is what our clubs have been doing in our state.


And to me...that's exactly what the rule states. I think RIC ruled in favor of the WI Director...and I think he's wrong.


----------



## rock monkey

it doesnt matter where sean is from or if he is or isnt a member of the nfaa. if he is a member of the naa, he can shoot for awards. it's the reciprocal agreement.

now, get someone that isnt familiar with the way the naa and nfaa accomodate each other's members and he went to a 'state level shoot' and the registration table turned him and his group away because they werent "nfaa" specific members, then i would also be angry. time and money were spent only to be made unwelcomed.

the rules as cited are vague and confusing. each one by itself is contradicting to the next. the RIC only considered one specific rule and made it's decision on a specific rule.

imo, the 'guest/visitor' definition needs to be specifically defined to remove the grey areas in the definition and to define what is and is not allowed. i agree that the 'guest/visitor' should not be allowed to shoot for the top level awards that are reserved for the members but they also should not be discouraged from just participating for the experience and 'sales pitch' for the game itself.

the nfaa needs to learn how to market itself and have a more user-friendly website that encourages visitors and interest in their form of archery.

if they can do it in europe, why cant they get on the shoot video program here? it would go far when trying to explain the game to those with an unfamiliarity of the format. having youtube links and other video hosting sites on your site can go a long way.



one of the biggest issues the nfaa has when they review and consider changes, is that they only look small picture. in one section, a certain issue will be brought to attention, but in another section, the same rule, written the same way, in the same language is not considered/changed. when you make changes like that year after year, the rules get vague and confusing.


----------



## kidnutso

rock monkey said:


> it doesnt matter where sean is from or if he is or isnt a member of the nfaa. if he is a member of the naa, he can shoot for awards. it's the reciprocal agreement.


I am very familiar with the reciprocal agreement that the NFAA and NAA have. I’ve had several members of the NAA shoot the Sectional Shoots and State Shoots (once they’ve paid the applicable State Fee to join the State Association) that my club has hosted. But it does matter where Sean if from if it means he’s not an NFAA Member (that’s why I asked), and he comes on here criticizing NFAA members for taking exception to a ruling that the NFAA RIC made. PAA members, although they can shoot in NFAA shoots, have no say say so on the voting or ruling of the NFAA. And vice versa. If Sean was posting how he had a beef with some of the rulings of the NAA, I wouldn’t come on her and criticize him and his fellow PAA members for questioning rules that the NAA had put into place. I’m not part of the NAA, so I don’t have the call to do so. And if Sean is not an NFAA member, I doubt that he’s purchased an NFAA Constitution & By-Laws and has knowledge (other than what he’s gleaned from these posts) of what all these rules say and how vague and unclear they are. If he is knowledgeable of these rules, then I apologize



rock monkey said:


> the rules as cited are vague and confusing. each one by itself is contradicting to the next. the RIC only considered one specific rule and made it's decision on a specific rule.


I agree with you on the vagueness and confusion. But I’m not sure which *ONE* rule the RIC made its decision on. RIC seemed to mention several of them in the ruling I read.



rock monkey said:


> imo, the 'guest/visitor' definition needs to be specifically defined to remove the grey areas in the definition and to define what is and is not allowed. i agree that the 'guest/visitor' should not be allowed to shoot for the top level awards that are reserved for the members but they also should not be discouraged from just participating for the experience and 'sales pitch' for the game itself. the nfaa needs to learn how to market itself and have a more user-friendly website that encourages visitors and interest in their form of archery. one of the biggest issues the nfaa has when they review and consider changes, is that they only look small picture. in one section, a certain issue will be brought to attention, but in another section, the same rule, written the same way, in the same language is not considered/changed. when you make changes like that year after year, the rules get vague and confusing.


Agree with 100% on this one RM. I think the NFAA is not only hurting the local clubs who hosts these shoots (some of which are just barely surviving in these hard financial times) but also the State Associations and the NFAA as well. I believe taking a hard line stance on no Non-NFAA members in these shoots is going to result in a further drop of membership in the NFAA and State Associations resulting in a loss of annual revenue as well.


----------



## Guest

Boy you gotta read your own rules alot closer than you have been thats for sure, 

I am an NFAA member through a club in Michigan,although the NFAA has a reciprocate rule with the NAA I am excluded from that because NAA requiers citizenship the NFAA requiers membership. So I can shoot for awards in the NFAA sanctioned tournaments but have to shoot in the guest division in the NAA. except for the US open.

I do and have read the NFAA rules and regs simply because you do not follow the international rules so we encounter rule differences we have to be aware of before competing. The section you sight is pretty clear to me that the guest class is for out of state NFAA members.

What is even more confusing to me is that there is a clear way to make change that is spelled out in your regs, you can have any rule change you want to, make the case and put it forward

The NFAA was formed from the States, the States where formed from the clubs, the Clubs where formed from the individuals......not the other way around. What ever rules and regs that are there good or bad came from you


----------



## CHPro

> I don't believe for a moment, that the rules were written to exclude non-members from shooting. Just from competing against the NFAA members. That's what the State Directors voted for when this rule was voted in. Not excluding non-members.


Just a quick history lesson which may.....or may not...clarify why I believe the rule was interpretted as it was. It used to be that ALL State level championship tournaments using NFAA sanctioned rounds were closed to ONLY NFAA members. The State orgs were allowed to host something like up to 3 or 5 non-sanctioned special tournaments for the purpose of promoting membership into the State Org and the NFAA. At those special promo tournaments NFAA membership was not required. The States, via a submitted agenda item and subsequent vote, revised the rule(s) to how they are written today with the intent to open up state level tournaments outside of the required State Indoor and State Outdoor because all states voting for the change felt this would increase attendance at their tournaments and promote membership for their state org and the NFAA.

Sound familiar . Same argument going on now to open up the last two membership required NFAA state championships . Apparently opening up all but the two required state tournaments to non-NFAA members didn't do the trick though, so not sure I see how opening up all state tournaments is going to make a change for some or your membership or host club financial situations?

Not saying the rules written as is are misleading. Anyone who was not involved in their state's politics and did not see how the rule was expanded to allow states to host state level tournaments with the exception of the 2 required would not know that previous rules were even more restrictive. Regardless, now the RIC has come out with a pretty clear-cut ruling of their interpretation of the rule...possibly due in some part based on the "why" of the historical rule changes noted above. This means that ruling is essentially law unless it gets overturned at the next BOD meeting and not entered into the C/BL. Or have your state submit an agenda item that eliminates the membership requirements for the 2 required state tournaments and let a body of your state peers come to a consensus.

>>-------->


----------



## brtesite

be careful of what you wish for 
I did explain what I believe would happen if guests were allowed to shoot. eventually that is all that would be at the state shoot. We are having a planing meeting in Sept. I will try to get an agenda going to allow non NFAA shooters at the state shoots to be voted on at the next meeting . Don't know how it will turn out.


----------



## kidnutso

brtesite said:


> be careful of what you wish for
> I did explain what I believe would happen if guests were allowed to shoot. eventually that is all that would be at the state shoot. We are having a planing meeting in Sept. I will try to get an agenda going to allow non NFAA shooters at the state shoots to be voted on at the next meeting . Don't know how it will turn out.


But Mike. Isn't the next meeting that this could be voted on not until Feb. 2012?


----------



## TNMAN

*historical intent*

Thanks CHPro and BrteSite for your insite. Those rules have definitely changed since the mid '80's. Thought I knew what they said until re-reading them this week after noting the insistence of good members. The RIC must have deemed the history and original intent more important than the meaning of the currently written words. The reference in the ruling to para 2.8 now makes a little more sense when viewed in a historical context. However the membership decides thru a directors vote, a rewrite of these particular rules is badly needed. On that, I think most will agree.


----------



## Spoon13

For the sake of clarity, I would like to say that I am pretty sure that even those of us advocating for non-NFAA members to be allowed to shoot at the State Championship aren't wanting them to be eligible for State Championship awards. That doesn't make sense. But to completely eliminate someone that wants to come and learn off our great are sport and potentially become a member of our organization is even more senseless.

Historical context is important to know but even those before us knew that the WRITTEN WORD was more important than the interpretation or intent of the rules. Hence BDC-8-1980.

I and many others believe the rules are clear and that membership can be waived at a State Level event, regardless of whether it is the State Championship or not, and those shooters will participate in a Guest class not eligible for awards.


----------



## kidnutso

Spoon13 said:


> For the sake of clarity, I would like to say that I am pretty sure that even those of us advocating for non-NFAA members to be allowed to shoot at the State Championship aren't wanting them to be eligible for State Championship awards. That doesn't make sense. But to completely eliminate someone that wants to come and learn off our great are sport and potentially become a member of our organization is even more senseless.
> 
> Historical context is important to know but even those before us knew that the WRITTEN WORD was more important than the interpretation or intent of the rules. Hence BDC-8-1980.
> 
> I and many others believe the rules are clear and that membership can be waived at a State Level event, regardless of whether it is the State Championship or not, and those shooters will participate in a Guest class not eligible for awards.


Spoon, I couldn't agree with you more. And in all the past shoots that I've allowed non members to shoot (before RIC made a ruling based on history and intent...not what is written) they were always informed that they were not competing for awards. And they were fine with that. They just wanted a shoot to try out the 5 spot or field shoots as they had never shot them before. And I did gain several members for the NFAA the following year by allowing this.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

Jbird said:


> That this is the most active and most interesting thread in the Field Forum.
> I think the recent decisions on who comes and who goes might need to be
> revisited. This place ain't fun anymore.


*Heyyyy Bird.....

Go knock on management's door with that suggestion.......and let me know how that turns out for you.....*

.


----------



## brtesite

TNMAN said:


> Thanks CHPro and BrteSite for your insite. Those rules have definitely changed since the mid '80's. Thought I knew what they said until re-reading them this week after noting the insistence of good members. The RIC must have deemed the history and original intent more important than the meaning of the currently written words. The reference in the ruling to para 2.8 now makes a little more sense when viewed in a historical context. However the membership decides thru a directors vote, a rewrite of these particular rules is badly needed. On that, I think most will agree.


Tn, there are rules that we shoot by that are as old as dirt. The RIC has only what is written & not what should be more modern or keeping up with the times, to make their decisions. Until the states decide to make changes, things will always be the way they are. 
That was the same for the Membership committee. Voted down by the directors.


----------



## psargeant

brtesite said:


> be careful of what you wish for
> I did explain what I believe would happen if guests were allowed to shoot. eventually that is all that would be at the state shoot. We are having a planing meeting in Sept. I will try to get an agenda going to allow non NFAA shooters at the state shoots to be voted on at the next meeting . Don't know how it will turn out.


No one is advocating allowing non-members to compete for awards. If we were, I could see your prediction being true and I would fight against it.

In fact, we have experienced the opposite here. By allowing folks the opportunity to shoot (as a guest) in all of our shoots, we have signed up many of them as members. We haven't lost anyone as a result of this practice...

Sorry Mike, but the data just don't support it...

Show me anywhere in the constitution that designates a state championship shoot as anything but a state level event...

It still baffles me how anyone can think turning people away is a good idea when membership is declining, courses are empty, and we're struggling to get/keep people interested in the game...


----------



## brtesite

psargeant said:


> No one is advocating allowing non-members to compete for awards. If we were, I could see your prediction being true and I would fight against it.
> 
> In fact, we have experienced the opposite here. By allowing folks the opportunity to shoot (as a guest) in all of our shoots, we have signed up many of them as members. We haven't lost anyone as a result of this practice...
> 
> Sorry Mike, but the data just don't support it...
> 
> Show me anywhere in the constitution that designates a state championship shoot as anything but a state level event...
> 
> It still baffles me how anyone can think turning people away is a good idea when membership is declining, courses are empty, and we're struggling to get/keep people interested in the game...



No one is saying turning them away is a good idea
The requirements for NFAA members only is the requirement for being a NFAA charter member. 
It is the same requirement that you must pay club dues in the amount that you say & not what you are willing to pay. 

Again lets get it changed.
Until that happens, this is the rule.


----------



## psargeant

brtesite said:


> *1)*No one is saying turning them away is a good idea
> *2)*The requirements for NFAA members only is the requirement for being a NFAA charter member.
> It is the same requirement that you must pay club dues in the amount that you say & not what you are willing to pay.
> 
> Again lets get it changed.
> Until that happens, this is the rule.


1) That is in effect what you are doing though...

2) I personally think the RIC got it wrong. That is not what is written in the C+BL, but we'll live with the ruling...Our state officers are already working on an agenda item...

With all the thinking I'm seeing, I doubt it will pass, after all it would be the right thing to do for our sport...


----------



## CarlV

As an orgaization we tend to get all "wrapped around the axel" with our rules.

Many of these rules are so antiquated that they have long ago lost their purpose.

Throw the rule book away and let's start fresh.


----------



## pragmatic_lee




----------



## kidnutso

brtesite said:


> No one is saying turning them away is a good idea
> The requirements for NFAA members only is the requirement for being a NFAA charter member.
> It is the same requirement that you must pay club dues in the amount that you say & not what you are willing to pay.
> 
> Again lets get it changed.
> Until that happens, this is the rule.


But Mike,

How can you read Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.8 and tell me that Paragraph 2.7.4 does not allow the states to waive the member requirements (for a non-competing division) for the State Indoor and Outdoor. The only way that you could would be by telling me that these two shoots are not State Level. And I stand with PASargeant on that one. Show me in the Constitution where is says these two shoots are anything but State Level Shoots.


----------



## kidnutso

:thumbs_up:thumbs_up


pragmatic_lee said:


>


----------



## brtesite

pragmatic_lee said:


>


Lee 
this has nothing to do with tradition. 
Why doesn't any one here actually write to all the states & complain about every one doing things wrong instead of trying to load up on some imaginary group that you think can change things?

the Ric was put in place by ,Guess who, The states. Every thing in that book was put in by the states .
I think we have beat this horse to death by now

We have a planing meeting in Sept. All the councilman will be there, get on them with your thoughts to be discussed.

No input , no results.


----------



## brtesite

kidnutso said:


> But Mike,
> 
> How can you read Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.8 and tell me that Paragraph 2.7.4 does not allow the states to waive the member requirements (for a non-competing division) for the State Indoor and Outdoor. The only way that you could would be by telling me that these two shoots are not State Level. And I stand with PASargeant on that one. Show me in the Constitution where is says these two shoots are anything but State Level Shoots.


please write to the RIC. Just because they are held in your state, the championship is not considered to be the sun. shoots. Those two shoots must be held under all of the NFAA rules. in order to be in compliance. I don't know how else to explain it .It seems that unless you don't hear what you want to hear , the explanation is not valid.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

brtesite said:


> Lee
> this has nothing to do with tradition.
> Why doesn't any one here actually write to all the states & complain about every one doing things wrong instead of trying to load up on some imaginary group that you think can change things?
> 
> the Ric was put in place by ,Guess who, The states. Every thing in that book was put in by the states .
> I think we have beat this horse to death by now
> 
> We have a planing meeting in Sept. All the councilman will be there, get on them with your thoughts to be discussed.
> 
> No input , no results.


Mike,
The RIC was NOT put in place by the States. According the C / BL the RIC is appointed "by the President" which I do not think is imaginary! 

I firmly believe these 2 things to be FACT

1) The RIC misinterpreted the current Constitution and By Laws and made an invalid interpretation.

2) The RIC did not use due diligence in making their interpretation, most likely as a result of not wanting to rule against the WI Director. 

Mike, I also firmly believe that there will be far more ramifications from this RIC's ruling than the arrow size / no size ruling from a couple of years ago. ESPECIALLY if that totally UNCALLED for last statement in RIC2010-6 is attempted to be enforced.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

brtesite said:


> *please write to the RIC*. Just because they are held in your state, the championship is not considered to be the sun. shoots. Those two shoots must be held under all of the NFAA rules. in order to be in compliance. I don't know how else to explain it .It seems that unless you don't hear what you want to hear , the explanation is not valid.


WHO is the RIC and who is the Chariman?

There are several Committees called for in the Constitution (RIC being one of them); however, the NFAA web page only list 3 in the Chairman section.
Pro Chairman
Certified Instructor Program
National Bowhunting and Conservation Chairman (Supposed to be 3 Chairmen, but only 1 is listed)


----------



## kidnutso

brtesite said:


> I don't know how else to explain it .It seems that unless you don't hear what you want to hear , the explanation is not valid.


I am not basing my comments on what I want to hear. I'm basing it on black and white. Show me in black and white where it tells me those two shoots are not State Level, and maybe I might agree with you. As far as I'm concerned, your explanation is based on possibly the original intent before these rules were re-written and what you want it to be. Not what is written in the rule book. And I think that is what the RIC ruling was based on. And I believe that RIC ruling was wrong, but I'm powerless to do anything about it until the next State Directors meeting where I can encourage my State Director to vote in favor of ammending it to where it is very clear that States can let Non Members shoot at these shoots as long as they are in a non-competing division.



brtesite said:


> please write to the RIC. Just because they are held in your state, the championship is not considered to be the sun. shoots. Those two shoots must be held under all of the NFAA rules. in order to be in compliance.


I'm not from Missouri (no offense meant Missouri ATers), but *SHOW ME*. Where does the rule book back you up that these two shoots are not State Level, and that Paragraph 2.7.4 does not apply to Paragraph 2.5. If you read again, you will note that Section 2.8 refers to the "Special Events" listed in Paragraph 2.7.1 and 2.7.2. It doesn't say that Paragraphs 2.7.3 or 2.7.4 fall under those "Special Event". The way the rules are written, Paragraphs 2.7.3 and 2.7.4 apply to Section 2.5. That may not be the way they were intended, but that's the way they are written. You can't base a ruling, and be correct, on what was intended. You have to base it on how the rules read. 

Now, I ask you again, show me in black and white where in the rules it says these two NFAA mandated State Championships are not State Level. Mike there are three levels of Championship shoots: National Level, Sectional Level and State Level.


----------



## pragmatic_lee

brtesite said:


> Lee
> this has nothing to do with tradition.
> Why doesn't any one here actually write to all the states & complain about every one doing things wrong instead of trying to load up on some imaginary group that you think can change things?
> 
> the Ric was put in place by ,Guess who, The states. Every thing in that book was put in by the states .
> I think we have beat this horse to death by now
> 
> *We have a planing meeting in Sept. All the councilman will be there, get on them with your thoughts to be discussed.
> *
> No input , no results.


Mike,
One more question - this in regards to your high lighted statement above. When you say: "We have a planning meeting in Sept....", I'm assuming that you mean the Councilmen? According to the way I read the Constitution, rulings by the RIC are to be discussed and voted on by the Directors, not the Council so if this is a Council meeting in Sept., why will this subject even be brought up?


----------



## brtesite

pragmatic_lee said:


> Mike,
> The RIC was NOT put in place by the States. According the C / BL the RIC is appointed "by the President" which I do not think is imaginary!
> 
> I firmly believe these 2 things to be FACT
> 
> 1) The RIC misinterpreted the current Constitution and By Laws and made an invalid interpretation.
> 
> 2) The RIC did not use due diligence in making their interpretation, most likely as a result of not wanting to rule against the WI Director.
> 
> Mike, I also firmly believe that there will be far more ramifications from this RIC's ruling than the arrow size / no size ruling from a couple of years ago. ESPECIALLY if that totally UNCALLED for last statement in RIC2010-6 is attempted to be enforced.


no, Pres appoints who is on it. 
The formation of the office was ratified by the states.
Incorrect on #2. Ric has ruled many times against a director.

why is it uncalled for. He just stated a fact that can be invoked. .
If you are not in compliance, then what do you you think should happen. 
It has happened in the past.


----------



## brtesite

pragmatic_lee said:


> WHO is the RIC and who is the Chariman?
> 
> There are several Committees called for in the Constitution (RIC being one of them); however, the NFAA web page only list 3 in the Chairman section.
> Pro Chairman
> Certified Instructor Program
> National Bowhunting and Conservation Chairman (Supposed to be 3 Chairmen, but only 1 is listed)


Your councilman is one of them , & the chair is Great lakes councilman.


----------



## brtesite

pragmatic_lee said:


> Mike,
> One more question - this in regards to your high lighted statement above. When you say: "We have a planning meeting in Sept....", I'm assuming that you mean the Councilmen? According to the way I read the Constitution, rulings by the RIC are to be discussed and voted on by the Directors, not the Council so if this is a Council meeting in Sept., why will this subject even be brought up?


Where did I say we would vote on any thing . 


Ok you all win. 
I will not bring any thing up , any one with a complaint , go to your directors. Have them get things ready for the next meeting 
By the way this is my last pot on this subject. 
Y'all have killed the messenger. 

THink I'll have a :beer:


----------



## reylamb

Since I do not have my C/BL in front of me at this time, simple question. 

In the C/BL is the word Guest defined anywhere?


----------



## rock monkey

article I, paragraph B, sub-paragraph 7

the word 'guest' is mentioned on the following pages(source-nfaa 09-10 c/bl appendix):
27, 44, 59, 60



reylamb said:


> Since I do not have my C/BL in front of me at this time, simple question.
> 
> In the C/BL is the word Guest defined anywhere?


----------



## TNMAN

brtesite said:


> Y'all have killed the messenger. THink I'll have a :beer:


Sorry Mike. It's not right that you get grilled over this just because you're willing to try to answer questions. I do understand your point that in the end the rules are whatever the membership wants. Sincere thanks for making yourself available. 

That said, it's hard for anyone to explain away or ignore para 2.7.4. The "not state level" argument is not supported anywhere in the rules, though it seems to carry water in some minds at high levels. Whole lot more willing to believe that the RIC was going by intent or past enforcement rather than the language of the rules. I think the Directors will look at this ruling closely if members go to the trouble of calling.


----------



## SuperX

you guys could break a ball bearing!


----------



## Crazy4Centaurs

What's his name ??!? I'll write to him ................ LOL !


brtesite said:


> Your councilman is one of them , & the chair is Great lakes councilman.


----------



## GOT LUCKY

TNMAN said:


> Sorry Mike. It's not right that you get grilled over this just because you're willing to try to answer questions. I do understand your point that in the end the rules are whatever the membership wants. Sincere thanks for making yourself available.
> 
> That said, it's hard for anyone to explain away or ignore para 2.7.4. The "not state level" argument is not supported anywhere in the rules, though it seems to carry water in some minds at high levels. Whole lot more willing to believe that the RIC was going by intent or past enforcement rather than the language of the rules. I think the Directors will look at this ruling closely if members go to the trouble of calling.


*Awhhhhhh Brtesite is tough.....he's been in bigger/hotter discussions then this one....besides he's the only one with a set willing to join in the discussions......and.... they are discussions folks.

Let's just see how it shakes out in September....of course a lot of State Field Championships will have been held by then...

Let's see the back-tracking for this one....It should be almost as big as the arrow size folly...*

.


----------



## AT_X_HUNTER

I'm curious as to where letting people shoot in a guest class has been a problem. If a state has seen a decline in membership only to see a rise in visitor class participation I can see a reason for the argument. I can really see a problem if the same names that drop off the NFAA/state org. roster ends up shooting visitor class. Personally, I haven't seen that, at least not in my state. Over the last 4 years we have had 8 visitors, 3 in 2006, 2 in 2007, 1 in 2008, and 2 in 2010. Usually visitors are people who show up to shoot but don't know about the NFAA. They just wanted to shoot the state event. Since they were there they weren't members they shot for no awards, just the atmosphere of a larger scale event.

I still fail to see where and when this has really been an issue worthy of even looking at the rule, let alone proposing the RIC on the matter. Maybe other states have seen a decline in attendance. But I really doubt that is because of a visitor class. It's more likely a financial issue. Is the NFAA membership worth paying just to be able to shoot One State event? In many people's minds the answer is no. That may be what we need to be spending our time debating and attempting to change.


----------



## red1691

I am not saying that the non-NFAA guest class is for NFAA drop outs or repeat offenders, I am Looking for a way that we can have the First time Field shooter or Indoor shooter, to have a way to shoot at the State Level, Not competing for the State Championship, just to shoot and to see what it is all about! 
And the next time they need to Join the NFAA!
That's the way I feel about this..


----------



## kidnutso

red1691 said:


> I am not saying that the non-NFAA guest class is for NFAA drop outs or repeat offenders, I am Looking for a way that we can have the First time Field shooter or Indoor shooter, to have a way to shoot at the State Level, Not competing for the State Championship, just to shoot and to see what it is all about!
> And the next time they need to Join the NFAA!
> That's the way I feel about this..


Now that I can agree with. I don't see letting someone shoot year after year if they don't join the NFAA and State Association. The shoots my club host are not so big that I cannot keep records of who shoots one year from the next. It wouldn't be a problem at all. If you shoot this year as a non-member to see what it's all about, then next year you join or don't shoot. Not a problem with me. And I'll tell you, there's not been a non-member shoot any of my sanctioned shoots yet that didn't have to listen to an NFAA/State Association membership sales pitch. And in lots of cases it worked. :thumbs_up


----------



## GOT LUCKY

AT_X_HUNTER said:


> I'm curious as to where letting people shoot in a guest class has been a problem. If a state has seen a decline in membership only to see a rise in visitor class participation I can see a reason for the argument. I can really see a problem if the same names that drop off the NFAA/state org. roster ends up shooting visitor class. Personally, I haven't seen that, at least not in my state. Over the last 4 years we have had 8 visitors, 3 in 2006, 2 in 2007, 1 in 2008, and 2 in 2010. Usually visitors are people who show up to shoot but don't know about the NFAA. They just wanted to shoot the state event. Since they were there they weren't members they shot for no awards, just the atmosphere of a larger scale event.
> 
> I still fail to see where and when this has really been an issue worthy of even looking at the rule, let alone proposing the RIC on the matter. Maybe other states have seen a decline in attendance. But I really doubt that is because of a visitor class. It's more likely a financial issue. Is the NFAA membership worth paying just to be able to shoot One State event? In many people's minds the answer is no. That may be what we need to be spending our time debating and attempting to change.


*HUmmmmmmmmmm.....I think I resemble that statement.....

So is it all about us "Civil Disobedients" who are no longer "in" being excluded from shooting....even for FUN???*

.


----------



## AT_X_HUNTER

GOT LUCKY said:


> *HUmmmmmmmmmm.....I think I resemble that statement.....
> 
> So is it all about us "Civil Disobedients" who are no longer "in" being excluded from shooting....even for FUN???*
> 
> .


I have no idea what it is about. If it wasn't an issue why was it addressed? If it really was a problem site an example (not theory) and move forward. That can be respected and understood more than just changing or "clarifying" for no expressed reason at all. Oh well. On a more positive note I really like what has happened to the Mag. Nice work George. Definitely a change for the better.


----------

