# Need advice regarding unsafe coach



## JLorenti (Mar 17, 2004)

*Important...*

If this is truly the situation...You need to....
talk freely and straight foward to this individual. You need to get the support of any other coaches that deal with these kids and have a consensus of the coaches to speak about the safety issues with this coach in a zero tolerance way.
You are saying safety is an issue. It MUST be addressed immediately.

we as coaches must not compromise our students, or anyone else for that matter when it comes to a safety issue. please man address this issue immediately. Don't let another day go by on the safety issues.

On the other issues invoving misinformed coaching practices you may take a more tactful approach. 

But not on safety. Remember once an unsafe arrow is loosed there is no getting it back. No excuse for this. You are responsible as the range master, archery coach to stop this immediately.

But first things first. Form your group immediately and speak to this individual who says they are a level three coach and addres the safety issues. You should have more luck changing the behavior of this coach by havig the consensus of several coaches at once.You MUST bring each and every issue of safety concern out in the open and give this coach the proper handling technique of the safety issues that are being violated. 
Please we don't need an archery accident here.
Remember the only way to handle safety isues is zero tolerance and a complete stoppage of the practices that are causing this situation immediately and completely.

As a coach yourself ,I feel you have an serious obligation to stop this behavior that is putting others in potetially harms way.

i cant be blunt enough here. Stop it now!!


We as coaches, and any coaches who read this post, are going to be expectig you to post another post tommorrow stating that these issues have been addressed to this coach and that he understands what he is doing wrong here and that he is committed to stop these unsafe practices.

Please let us know.
Thank you
yours in archery(safe Archery)

Joe Lorenti
__________________
Take a kid Huntin'....for the best hunt of your life.
Pick a spot... success will follow.


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

*Food for thought*

Picking up where Joe left off I would like to relate a true story (without details) about how I found myself named as a defendant in a law suit while in college.

At the time I was a freshman, a member of the school Emergency Medical Services Team and a volunteer for the local town ambulance service. One night we responded to a mutual aid call with a neighboring town. I was a newly minted American Red Cross Advanced First Aid and Emergency care instructor and the LEAST experienced member of the team. (At the time Emergency Medical Technicians had only been certified for a few years.) Anyway, while on scene I witnessed an incident involving personnel from the city we were assisting. Making a very long and involved story I cannot discuss short, About a month or so later, the town I volunteered for, my crew chief and I received notice that we were named in a law suit involving care rendered by another service at that mutual aid call.

The town petitioned to be removed from the suit for a lot of reasons. According to the town’s council that represented us the judge was reluctant to remove my name and therefore the town because I was a”… certified instructor and should have recognized what was happening and taken appropriate measures to prevent the dangerous situation that occurred.” Ultimately after being deposed we were dropped as named defendants from the suit. It was definitely not fun.

That was 29 years ago and it has definitely affected how I do things. First, if I see something that is wrong or unsafe it is my responsibility to address the situation with those responsible. Second, If I hold a valid certification it is my responsibility to make sure things are safe or at least within minimum safety requirements. Three, regardless of who else is present if I hold a higher level of certification when something happens and I made no effort to prevent an incident or accident. I can expect to named as a defendant along with every other certified individual present. Unfortunately our litigious society has gotten worse not better in the last three decades. 

Gary


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

Just to add a little to Joe and Gary's excellent advice, I have attached a link to an article my daughter, a dream team coach, and I wrote several years back. The important thing to remember is who is the customer? If a coach doesn't fit with the customers' expectations, then both should move on. While some coaches when approached with the unhappiness of the customer may alter their methods, my experience is that most will not change. It is better to find out early that it is not a good fit and find another coach.

http://www.texasarchery.org/Documents/Writeups/TB/CUYAC.htm
tom


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

I thought I'd chime in here also. There are many styles and nuances to coaching, especially when it involves young people. Many things we would look at and shake our heads in disbelief are things that may be effective in some circumstances.

But a non-negotiable is safety. Accidents are always lurking about looking for a victim. A coaches duty is to protect, prepare and then train.

My advice is, if there is a range involved have the range owner get involved, it's his liability also. Get support from his credentialing body and fellow piers and gracefully confront this issue. 

No need to get tough, unless he blows you off.


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

I am sorry to hear that Tori. I assume it is at Woodley park. If that is the case, couldn't the Woodley park Archers 'banned' him from using the faculities? Or atleast write him a formal letter asking him to stop? (not sure if legally they can ban him since they don't own the faculities). If you need more force behind the letter then get El Dorado,Simi Park, local college etc clubs to also sign the letter (I am sure this sort of problem is well known to all of us). 

If not then perhaps the club can write a letter to NAA/ Coach Lee and present the problem and ask that his Coaching Creditials be removed or atleast demoted. 

Truthfully none of that might Prevent him from coaching but he may become so uncomfortable that he may leave on his own.

I think this highlights a loophole in the coaching creditial system if he got to level 3 and shows such lack of knowledge regarding level 1 information. 

If there is anything I can do to help, let me know.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Just out of pure curiosity. Is there not a retest method within the NAA? I find it hard to believe that there is no machine in place to deal with this particular issue, it would seem fundamental to system to have a method of arbitrating complaints about coaches. This this type of thing must have arisen before.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

*Safety First...for most people?*

This is as good a time as any to mention a very disturbing observation I saw at the practice range at the National Target Championships in Colorado Springs.

It is often said that archery is one of the safest sports. This is because archery range rules do not allow any room for accidents. One common sense safety rule for all levels of archers is that no one is down range when shooters are on the line, releasing arrows.

Yet, the "dream team" doesn't seem to have that same common sense. One "dream team" archer was actually shooting arrows into a their target when the archer on the next target over was pulling his arrows! Coach Lee was standing right behind the line watching the practice.

I suppose one could say that because of their ability we needent worry, and the targets were only at 10 meters, but accidents do (and will) happen. It would be interesting to see what the response of the NAA insurance carrier would have regarding this practice?


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

*What???*

I can only speak for myself and those that I know personally. We work extremely hard to maintain a balance between safety and getting things done. In ALL cases we err on the side of safety. If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.

At the risk of being redundant [See my previous post.] IF YOU WITNESSED SOMETHING YOU FEEL IS UNSAFE. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SPEAK UP AND BRING IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THOSE IN AUTHORITY IMMEDIATELY, IF NOT SOONER, RIGHT NOW! That would include in this case Coach Lee, Myself, any coach on the field, a judge, tournament official, NAA Staff Member, Boad Member the list goes on. 

At the time you state the Dream Team was involved I was the FIRST Person that would be spoken to (before Coach Lee, and definitely by Coach Lee afterward) and since I received NO FORMAL or INFORMAL communication from anyone during or after Nationals regarding any incident on the field. I have to intrepret that as YOU were also comfortable with the situation and not concerned with safety at that time. 

Gary

Gary Holstein
USA Archery Junior Dream Team , HPP Regional & Level IV National Coach


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> This is as good a time as any to mention a very disturbing observation I saw at the practice range at the National Target Championships in Colorado Springs.
> 
> It is often said that archery is one of the safest sports. This is because archery range rules do not allow any room for accidents. One common sense safety rule for all levels of archers is that no one is down range when shooters are on the line, releasing arrows.
> 
> ...


This seems to be common practice on SoCal ranges. I was shooting 90 Meters at Woodley Park when an archer walked up to the butt next to mine and started shooting at maybe 20 yards.. I was freaked but was assured that is the way they shoot at Woodley.

As for the coach, determine who the certifying body is supposed to be, verify that he is actually certified, and then file a formal complaint. Any corroborating letters from other students should be included. It is the certifing body's responsibility to make sure their coaches are competent or why bother with a certification?

Cya!


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

coach1 said:


> I can only speak for myself and those that I know personally. We work extremely hard to maintain a balance between safety and getting things done. In ALL cases we err on the side of safety. If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.
> 
> At the risk of being redundant [See my previous post.] IF YOU WITNESSED SOMETHING YOU FEEL IS UNSAFE. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SPEAK UP AND BRING IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THOSE IN AUTHORITY IMMEDIATELY, IF NOT SOONER, RIGHT NOW! That would include in this case Coach Lee, Myself, any coach on the field, a judge, tournament official, NAA Staff Member, Boad Member the list goes on.
> 
> ...


Confident and Comfortable? That is why they call them "accidents". Most people are very confident they can drive a car immediately before an accident. Most hunters are very confident that they won't shoot someone before the gun "accidentily" goes off. The best way to reduce accidents is to minimize the consequence if an accident were to happen. Shooting while someone is pulling on the next bale is NOT minimizing the consequence.

If that is what you choose to do at the training center is one thing. Doing it in front of all the other archers at the nationals is another. What kind of example are you giving? What would be wrong with following the safety rules of the tournament that "everyone" else is expected to follow?

As for me not caring...that is not true. I wasn't comfortable with it then and I am still not comfortable with it now. I WAS concerned with the safety at that time and I am still concerned now. You said it is "my responsibility" to say something. That is why I chose to bring it up now.

A few of us watching commented on it and simply shook our heads. Until I saw this thread, I really didn't know what good it would do to mention it. Unfortuantely, it would be nobody me versus the Dream Team and their National Coaches. So what happens? I mention it and you, as I expected, choose to "shoot the messenger". This is probably why none of us were too excited about mentioning in the first place. I am simply a Level 1 Coach. So much for trying to help the "Big Boys"


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> Not true. I wasn't comfortable with it then and I am still not comfortable with it now. I WAS concerned with the safety at that time and I am still concerned now. That is why I chose to bring it up now.
> 
> A few of us watching commented on it and simply shook our heads. Until I saw this thread, I really didn't know what good it would do to mention it. Unfortuantely, it would be nobody me versus the Dream Team and their National Coaches. So what happens? I mention it and you, as I expected, choose to "shoot the messenger". This is probably why none of us were too excited about mentioning in the first place.
> 
> Besides, what do I know? I am only a Level 1 Coach. So much for trying to help the "Big Boys"


I'm with you on this. Those coaches and archers should be ashamed of their behaviour. They may "feel" comfortable with being unsafe, but they are also modeling behaviour for upcoming generations. 

This is nothing more than moral relativism. right *IS* right and wrong IS wrong. period!!! No matter *WHO* it is.


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

bdca said:


> This seems to be common practice on SoCal ranges. I was shooting 90 Meters at Woodley Park when an archer walked up to the butt next to mine and started shooting at maybe 20 yards.. I was freaked but was assured that is the way they shoot at Woodley.


Wow. That just doesn't sound safe. I've seen to many misfires and fingers slipping to do something that silly. 

I just don't see how they can balance the risk/consequences equation with that kind of setup.

-Andrew


----------



## Valkyrie (Dec 3, 2002)

*Coach1 worte: "If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.*

I strongly disagree with this statement - I am not comfortable shooting while others are retrieving arrows on the next bale. I have been at some tournaments that - if I want to practice, I'm forced to do so with the knowledge that some people will walk down lane while I'm at full draw - in other words - *THEY* are comfortable, I am not. 

If it is not possible to avoid the situation by shooting at a different bale, or different part of the field, I do my best to fall into sync with those on either side of me. If the group on my right moves while the group on my left is shooting, then what am I supposed to do? Frankly - I walk down to retrieve arrows with the less "accurate" shooters, hoping to minimize my own peril.

And before I'm flamed, yes, I do comment to my right and left that it is unsafe, I try to get the group to wait, but some archers don't believe the rules are for them and risk injury anyway.

What's the solution? Rules, enforcement and accommodation. 90 meters shouldn't be next to 30 meters - put some distance between sets of bales so that the group shooting at 90 and the group at 30 can walk as a group at different times and still remain safe.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

Valkyrie said:


> *Coach1 worte: "If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.*
> 
> And before I'm flamed, yes, I do comment to my right and left that it is unsafe, I try to get the group to wait, but some archers don't believe the rules are for them and risk injury anyway.
> 
> What's the solution? Rules, enforcement and accommodation. 90 meters shouldn't be next to 30 meters - put some distance between sets of bales so that the group shooting at 90 and the group at 30 can walk as a group at different times and still remain safe.


The solution is we need more range masters, tournament directors and coaches that will stand up for what is right. The problem is everyone lets it slide because they don't want to offend anyone. I'd rather have offended live people then spoiled dead ones.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

coach1 said:


> If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.


That should NEVER ever happen period. It won't on my watch.

Keyword to above quote is "probabilty". I prefer the words "near impossibility"


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Freak wind gusts, string breakage, limb failure, arrow breakage, inadvertant jostling by another shooter, even witnessed a seizure in a 21year old once.

Confidant my foot, thats pure arrogance at its worst. ANY RSO in ANY shooting sport better know when the range is hot and not let one toe of any archer period over the shooting line.

Shame on you for allowing that. Bloody shame.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

I simply amazed we are even having this discussion. It is too much to believe that the USAT, it's coaches and anyone else remotely related would endorse this, much less participate. 

WHAT are they teaching JOAD?

I challenge any HPP coach or Coach Lee himself to justify this behaviour.


----------



## Paradoxical Cat (Apr 25, 2006)

CM JOAD said:


> Yet, the "dream team" doesn't seem to have that same common sense. One "dream team" archer was actually shooting arrows into a their target when the archer on the next target over was pulling his arrows! Coach Lee was standing right behind the line watching the practice.


Wrong or right, safe or not, there is a post in this thread that seems to indicate that that is pattern and practice at Chula Vista. My guess it is because coaching time is precious. And also at that level....(Reminds me of a master climber I met who climbed 5.11+ routes free solo. He had actually set the first 5.14, and everyone argued that at his level the risk of the rope breaking exceeded the risk of him falling...whatever.)

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=531192


----------



## Valkyrie (Dec 3, 2002)

Paradoxical Cat said:


> Wrong or right, safe or not, there is a post in this thread that seems to indicate that that is pattern and practice at Chula Vista. My guess it is because coaching time is precious. And also at that level....



"At that level" - I used to be "at that level" and I was never comfortable with shooting while others were at the next target pulling arrows. As said before, anything can happen - broken knocks, releases that fire at will, damaged arrows, fletchings falling off in mid flight - all have unpredictable effects - and these are just a FEW of the things that happened to me personally. Unfortunately, it's going to take one mistake and then common sense will rule.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

Paradoxical Cat said:


> Wrong or right, safe or not, there is a post in this thread that seems to indicate that that is pattern and practice at Chula Vista. My guess it is because coaching time is precious. And also at that level....(Reminds me of a master climber I met who climbed 5.11+ routes free solo. He had actually set the first 5.14, and everyone argued that at his level the risk of the rope breaking exceeded the risk of him falling...whatever.)
> 
> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=531192


Yes, I made the post about this practice at the OTC. In fact at the time I challenged Coach Lee that this was not acceptable, especially in front of all the JOADs. I made my point.

A few years back the junior world trials were held in Chula Vista. One of the kids I coach was practicing on official practice day before the trials. The shooting and pulling simultaneously was occurring. On one end one of the kids on the official practice field saw a friend on the unofficial practice field and decided to cut across the field to see their friend. All of a sudden my archer sees a head in their compound scope as this archer was about to shoot. The archery couldn't let down fast enough and it still causes nightmares to this day. Anyone with risk management experience will tell you this practice is unacceptable. We are humans and shooting mechanical devices. Humans make mistakes and mechanical devices break. Mitigating the risk is so easy, everyone pulls at the same time. The arguements for shooting and pulling at the same time are so weak that any lawyer would have a field day in court were the worst to happen.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Valkyrie said:


> "At that level" - I used to be "at that level" and I was never comfortable with shooting while others were at the next target pulling arrows. As said before, anything can happen - broken knocks, releases that fire at will, damaged arrows, fletchings falling off in mid flight - all have unpredictable effects - and these are just a FEW of the things that happened to me personally. Unfortunately, it's going to take one mistake and then common sense will rule.


 The insidious danger here is long term. When an obviously unsafe practice is adopted by the pinnacle of the sport, it is in danger of becoming adopted by the lower tiers as being acceptable. 1 and only 1 accident resulting in injury when adherence to the rules could prevent it is totally unacceptable. What on earth happened to being the role model for other archers?


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

*Right or Wrong?*

I think it would be very easy get a determination whether the practice of pulling arrows while someone on the adjacent bale is shooting arrows is considered safe or not. The NAA can simply notify their insurance carrier. Problem solved! I am thinking that the insurance company has a very good feeling for the real value of "low probability".


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Unsafe Coach*

Thank you for the responses regarding the Unsafe Coach.

I need to set some things straight, first he is not a Woodley Park Archers Club Members or Woodley coach, but because we are a public range he can coach as he likes. We have asked him not to coach any Woodley Park Archers classes, but that is all I can do.

Second we have tried to speak to him regarding he dangerous coaching, but he said quote” That’s the way I was taught and I am a Level 3.
This guy doesn’t even know the whistle system. 

He seems to think that this is a personal vendetta, which it is not. I will be honest I can’t stand the guy and for good reason. I am one of the coaches he has bad mouthed; he has also told people who are very new to the sport that Woodley Park classes and range is unsafe and none of the coaches there know what they are doing. We get 50+ on our Wednesday beginner class and over 80 on our Saturday classes. Woodley is trying to promote the sport and teach in a safe and positive way. Not all of our coaches and instructors have a ton of experience, but they are safe.

Trust me when I say we have tried to talk to him, we also tried to have a supposed high level coach talk to him and it did not any good.

I did receive advice from Gary telling me that we should contact Brad Camp at USA Archery which we will do. Thank you Gary.


As for the person who posted that they demand that I post that I have spoken to this person and fixed the problem……

I am not shrinking violet if I have an issue with someone I don’t hesitate to get in their face and those who know me know this to be very true.

I would love to just post this guys name and trash him in a public forum, but I want to be professional and try and keep my involvement in the sport positive.
I will not just make a post trashing someone without signing my name and hope that it gets solved.

I will keep you posted on the out come of this. 

Thank you to those who gave me positive advice.

Tori 





QUOTE=JLorenti;5180889]If this is truly the situation...You need to....
talk freely and straight foward to this individual. You need to get the support of any other coaches that deal with these kids and have a consensus of the coaches to speak about the safety issues with this coach in a zero tolerance way.
You are saying safety is an issue. It MUST be addressed immediately.

we as coaches must not compromise our students, or anyone else for that matter when it comes to a safety issue. please man address this issue immediately. Don't let another day go by on the safety issues.

On the other issues invoving misinformed coaching practices you may take a more tactful approach. 

But not on safety. Remember once an unsafe arrow is loosed there is no getting it back. No excuse for this. You are responsible as the range master, archery coach to stop this immediately.

But first things first. Form your group immediately and speak to this individual who says they are a level three coach and addres the safety issues. You should have more luck changing the behavior of this coach by havig the consensus of several coaches at once.You MUST bring each and every issue of safety concern out in the open and give this coach the proper handling technique of the safety issues that are being violated. 
Please we don't need an archery accident here.
Remember the only way to handle safety isues is zero tolerance and a complete stoppage of the practices that are causing this situation immediately and completely.

As a coach yourself ,I feel you have an serious obligation to stop this behavior that is putting others in potetially harms way.

i cant be blunt enough here. Stop it now!!


We as coaches, and any coaches who read this post, are going to be expectig you to post another post tommorrow stating that these issues have been addressed to this coach and that he understands what he is doing wrong here and that he is committed to stop these unsafe practices.

Please let us know.
Thank you
yours in archery(safe Archery)

Joe Lorenti
__________________
Take a kid Huntin'....for the best hunt of your life.
Pick a spot... success will follow.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Unsafe coach*

Thank you for the responses regarding the Unsafe Coach.

I need to set some things straight, first he is not a Woodley Park Archers Club Members or Woodley coach, but because we are a public range he can coach as he likes. We have asked him not to coach any Woodley Park Archers classes, but that is all I can do.

Second we have tried to speak to him regarding he dangerous coaching, but he said quote” That’s the way I was taught and I am a Level 3.
This guy doesn’t even know the whistle system. 

He seems to think that this is a personal vendetta, which it is not. I will be honest I can’t stand the guy and for good reason. I am one of the coaches he has bad mouthed; he has also told people who are very new to the sport that Woodley Park classes and range is unsafe and none of the coaches there know what they are doing. We get 50+ on our Wednesday beginner class and over 80 on our Saturday classes. Woodley is trying to promote the sport and teach in a safe and positive way. Not all of our coaches and instructors have a ton of experience, but they are safe.

Trust me when I say we have tried to talk to him, we also tried to have a supposed high level coach talk to him and it did not any good.

I did receive advice from Gary telling me that we should contact Brad Camp at USA Archery which we will do. Thank you Gary.


As for the person who posted that they demand that I post that I have spoken to this person and fixed the problem……

I am not shrinking violet if I have an issue with someone I don’t hesitate to get in their face and those who know me know this to be very true.

I would love to just post this guys name and trash him in a public forum, but I want to be professional and try and keep my involvement in the sport positive.
I will not just make a post trashing someone without signing my name and hope that it gets solved.

I will keep you posted on the out come of this. 

Thank you to those who gave me positive advice.

Tori


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

Archerycat said:


> Thank you to those who gave me positive advice.
> 
> Tori


This the key here. Positive advice. This thread was not a post to trash the US teams. I find it amazing that someone has the nerve to sit and watch what THEY believe to be an unsafe situation and then come back and post on AT and think that is ACCEPTABLE! 

There were several Dream Team coaches at Nationals and any one of which could have been approached or even Coach Lee himself. If you don't have the NERVE to say something to their face, then don't bother posting it here.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

I may be wrong here, but I suspect what the originator of this thread really wanted was not necessarily POSITIVE advice, but rather CONSTRUCTIVE advice, which are not necessarily one and the same thing. Good constructive advice could, potentially be very negative, and yet still be good, useful advice toward resolving the problem. Positive advice can sometime devolve into just telling someone what they want to hear, which may not be good or useful.

This thread certainly was not meant to bash anyone, and bashing anyone is certainly never good, useful or constructive. However, some of the advice offered to our friend was that he/she should consider talking to members of the archery community acting in an official capacity. Therefore, it is worth noting whether or not those people can be trusted to be any better than the unsafe coach he/she is having a problem with.

If, for example, it has been shown that NAA and its affiliated coaches cannot be trusted to have any better idea of safe practices than the offending individual, there is really no point approaching them about correcting the situation.

My second point is this: safe is safe, unsafe is unsafe. It doesn't matter how the issue is raised, wther it's to someone's face or not. Safety is not a question of how it's presented.

In the aviation community, civilian and military, there is a program by which any person - pilots, crewmembers, maintenance personnel, mechanics, whatever - can submit complaints of unsafe practices that must be addressed. They're anonymous.

That's not cowardly. In actuality, the program is designed to allow anyone to feel free to report unsafe practices without fear of being called cowardly. And it works.

Because safe practices have nothing to do with how violations are reported.

Unsafe is unsafe, no matter who is doing it or how good they THINK they are. Accidents happen, that's why they're called accidents. No one plans for it to happen, and if anyone foresaw it, they would be less likely to happen. In fact, they happen precisely because the people involved DID NOT foresee the likelihood of them happening.

Bashing = bad.
Bringing to light unsafe practices = good.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

FLarcherymom said:


> This the key here. Positive advice. This thread was not a post to trash the US teams. I find it amazing that someone has the nerve to sit and watch what THEY believe to be an unsafe situation and then come back and post on AT and think that is ACCEPTABLE!
> 
> There were several Dream Team coaches at Nationals and any one of which could have been approached or even Coach Lee himself. If you don't have the NERVE to say something to their face, then don't bother posting it here.


Barb, have another glass of kool-aid. Very common among folks who can't defend their argument. All they can do is start getting personal. Are you more concerned about my character than that of the safety of our "dream team"? I have been called many things, but lacking nerve is a first. Thank you for your advice, but I will say what I want to say, when I want to say it. Here is my phone number if you would like to make some more assumptions about my character or you would like to defend this defenseless act. 320-260-1987. As a matter of fact, instead of fighting the battle for them, why don't you have one of the dream team coaches call me.

Barb, I see that your profession is "insurance". Are you kidding me?


----------



## JLorenti (Mar 17, 2004)

*Archerycat....*

On post #24 you have taken offense to the way someone made you confront the situation. I took that to mean me.(You had my post quoted directly below your response). You seemed to me in the first post to be asking what you should do. 
I have been a firearms instructor, a range master, Law enforcement rifle, shotgun, and pistol instructor, certified Level II archery instructor, Joad coach.
You take offense to the way I may have presented my solution and keeping you accountable, well i'm sorry but that is the basics of coaching.When it comes to safety as a coach you must lay out the ground rules and keep the kids, adults or whoever you have as students kept accountalbe to those saferty standards. You have no less of an obligation to your situation you are laying out to all of us in this post.
First and foremost safety at all costs. No exceptions, no excuses, zero tolerance for any violartions of safe shooting prctices.Then you can get to everything else.
Many posters on this thread have tried to give you the RIGHT answer, to show you that by just letting this happen and not doing anything is as bad as doing it yourself and if someone gets hurt you will be as responsible as the original violator. If You are a certified coach or instructor ,then a court of law will hold you that much more liable because you suppossedly know better.

Bottom line is I don't care if you are annoyed because i made you become accountable to the situation, as a coach that is what you are responsible to do in the first place.
Now I'm as nice a person as the next guy, but i have too much experience in the shooting sports and know better than to sugar coat a reccomendation when it comes to a question about range safety or unsafe range practices.
There are very few absolutes in the shooting sports, but safety is certainly one of them.
I have 700 plus posts here on AT and i do not take this tone very often, i beleive in the positive approach on all aspects of giving advice, helping archers, coaches or their families, but I don't remember a post where safety was brought up as an issue, which obviously needs to be dealt with on a much different level.

I am glad you are taking care of it. Enough said.

I think Geek and several others have given you good advice as to what to do with this coach and his possible removal of his coaching credentials by the USAA.


Good luck
You obviously have good feel for the right standards. keep it up.

Joe Lorenti


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

CM_JOAD,

I'm sure that if you had actually approached the aforementioned coaches at nationals, instead of saying you have no nerve, someone would instead be accusing you of disrespect and undermining the coach's authority to teach his students as he saw fit.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

tedzpony said:


> CM_JOAD,
> 
> I'm sure that if you had actually approached the aforementioned coaches at nationals, instead of saying you have no nerve, someone would instead be accusing you of disrespect and undermining the coach's authority to teach his students as he saw fit.


You know that and I know that. At some point, Barb will also be "in the know".


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

Ok now, take a deep breath.

We can't change things that have happened in the past, they are done. Lets just focus on what we can do in the future to always put safety first. 

I have never seen (and actually cannot fathom) people pulling while others are shooting one or even two bails over. If I do see that I will take charge of the line and do everything I can to stop behavior such as that. I would feel it is my responsibility. I would hope each of you would do the same. There is no excuse or justification to have people pulling and shooting at the same time.

That is all we can do, try to do things right in the future. It isn't going to fix anything harping about the past.

As for practice time being tight and that being a reason for pulling/shooting at the same time. That is hogwash. Nobody's time is worth an arrow (which would probably make a passthrough) in the back or in the face. Good chance of death there. If that practice is followed and we take gold, silver, and bronze in both the mens and womens divisions due to the extra coaching time gained from pulling/shooting at the same time I would still consider it a failure as we put lives at risk for some silly pieces of metal.

-Andrew


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> Barb, have another glass of kool-aid. Very common among folks who can't defend their argument. All they can do is start getting personal. Are you more concerned about my character than that of the safety of our "dream team"? I have been called many things, but lacking nerve is a first. Thank you for your advice, but I will say what I want to say, when I want to say it. Here is my phone number if you would like to make some more assumptions about my character or you would like to defend this defenseless act. 320-260-1987. As a matter of fact, instead of fighting the battle for them, why don't you have one of the dream team coaches call me.
> 
> Barb, I see that your profession is "insurance". Are you kidding me?


Not I am not kidding. I deal with accidents on a daily basis and that is why I posted what I posted. I do NOT disagree with safety as an issue. What I disagree with is you posting about a situation that you saw as unsafe and did nothing about it. You are always on the attack with every post on AT. I have done my best to hold my tongue with most of the stuff that you post. But this is the second time that I have responded. Yeah I should have kept my mouth shut here too but sometimes I can't take it anymore and spout off at the mouth, I guess it has to do with my time in the Marine Corps.


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> You know that and I know that. At some point, Barb will also be "in the know".


Oh good excuse for doing nothing. I will be sure to use that one myself. Now that I am "in the know", I will just turn a blind eye when I see archers doing this. Not my responsibility now is it, since it is not my kid/s.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

Whoaaa...slow down kids. This was about safety and policies. Advice was asked for in dealing with a problem we all could relate to. The real issues here are not so much how we respond, but how we prevent. It needs to take a concerted effort all the way to the top, to make safety more of a priority than winning.

What would a gold be if worth if it ultimately cost a life?


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

Interesting responses my first post on on this thread #3 way at the top. was intended to illustrate what will probably happen if an accident happened and no one took any action to prevent it. 

My second post was in response to the Dream Team response because I am one of the dream team coaches, I was in Colorado Springs, I am VERY High Profile at National Events. Generally the Big camera is a dead give away. I am frequently in the way of someone trying to see waht "Their" athlete is doing. To all those that get inconveninced I do apologize unfortunately it goes with the photo gig. NO ONE, NOT ONE SINGLE SOLITARY SOLE, MENTIONED ANYTHING to me that one of the athletes that I have authority with was doing anything, had done anything, or in anyway had behaved in any manner other than properly. 

let me spell it out here plainly and succinctly. It is the responsibility of every member of the archery community ensure that the sport grows and is percieved to be as safe as our injury statistics state. To that end it is the responsibility of everyone to monitor and police the sport. That includes Level1 coaches, Parents spectators or anyone else to speakup AT THE TIME OF INFRACTION. As I learned in College if you don't speakup and attempt to prevent a potential problem BEFORE it gets serious YOU ARE EVERY BIT AS GUILTY OF CAUSING THE PROBELM AS THOSE DIRECTLY INVOLVED. I t-Shirt Bought and Paid for this T-Shirt at the ripe old age of eighteen. (aside:On more than a few ocassions over the years I have been very unpopular with certain civil authorities I worked with)

I can assure you that if ANYONE including you had mentioned something to me about one of the Dream Team athletes, Resident Athletes, Champs Athletes or one of the athletes I coach. The appropriate conversations would have been held. This is NOT the kind of press discussion observation of the national programs we are for. 

Gary


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

FLarcherymom said:


> Oh good excuse for doing nothing. I will be sure to use that one myself. Now that I am "in the know", I will just turn a blind eye when I see archers doing this. Not my responsibility now is it, since it is not my kid/s.


Not one of us, should ever turn a blind eye. If we do we should pack up and leave the sport.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

FLarcherymom said:


> I can't take it anymore and spout off at the mouth, I guess it has to do with my time in the Marine Corps.



On which side?


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

target1 said:


> Not one of us, should ever turn a blind eye. If we do we should pack up and leave the sport.


Kind of my point. Thank you.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

CMJOAD & FLarcherymom...you guys need to take a time out.

relax...breathe deep


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Tori -

Sorry, but I'm having a little bit of a problem with this. You're stating that this coach is "allowing" shooters to pull or shoot infront of other active shooter's shooting line?

Well, that would certainly be an unsafe practice, but the part I'm having trouble believing is that the *archers themselves *(even new shooters) would let that happen. (If you're talking about five year old kids, then a simple call to the local police should end that practice and again where are the kids' parents - they should be freaking out.) Most adults would have to know better.

Look, I shoot at a few unsupervised ranges, and if ANYONE steps infront of the line before an archer declares a clear or cease fire - all hell breaks loose, and most of these guys ain't exactly what you'd call Olympic hopefuls. So what you're actually saying is that not only is the "coach" unsafe, but the archers are idiots???

Apologies if that's too blunt, but depending on the range (indoor vs outdoor, public vs private) then maybe a call the the local police might be inorder. A bow is still considered a firearm in most jurisdictions - just a thought. And yes, it might get the range closed down, but if what you are saying is true, perhaps it should be.

Viper1 out.


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> On which side?


See you proved my point again. Thank you for doing that. We can always count on you.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

FLarcherymom said:


> See you proved my point again. Thank you for doing that. We can always count on you.


do I have to get between you two?


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

target1 said:


> do I have to get between you two?


No, I am done. Thanks for your help here.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

coach1 said:


> As I learned in College if you don't speakup and attempt to prevent a potential problem BEFORE it gets serious YOU ARE EVERY BIT AS GUILTY OF CAUSING THE PROBELM AS THOSE DIRECTLY INVOLVED.
> 
> Gary


Gary, I did "speak up" BEFORE it "got serious". I mentioned it now. The accident hasn't happened yet. There is still time to correct it! Yet, I am portrayed as having poor character?

As for the Nationals, I saw you with your camera. Actually I did thank you for your camera effort and you basically blew me off. I did not know that you were a coach at that time. Imagine what could have happened if were reprimanding you instead of complimenting you? 

I find it very hard to believe that this unsafe practice was unknown to the coaches and that my talking to them at the Nationals would have been a revelation to them. Could it be that we have some egg on some faces? 

As for Barb, get a life. You "feel" I didn't bring it to peoples attention the right way? Fact is, it has been brought to light and hopefully the result will be positive. Your character assasination has no value other than exposing your true character and lack of concern for the safety of archery in general.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Viper1 said:


> Tori -
> 
> Sorry, but I'm having a little bit of a problem with this. You're stating that this coach is "allowing" shooters to pull or shoot infront of other active shooter's shooting line?
> 
> ...


Bingo, "reckless endangerment" springs to mind.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

FLarcherymom said:


> Oh good excuse for doing nothing. I will be sure to use that one myself. Now that I am "in the know", I will just turn a blind eye when I see archers doing this. Not my responsibility now is it, since it is not my kid/s.


Barb, make up your mind. You are upset with me for doing nothing or for doing something? And based on an accident that could have happened, your choice of the term "blind eye" is quite appropriate. HU RAH!


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

all of this talk on unsafe practices...especially when there are kids involved..is making me shudderrrrrrr!!!!..........


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

jmvargas said:


> all of this talk on unsafe practices...especially when there are kids involved..is making me shudderrrrrrr!!!!..........


You know that and I know that. Maybe.....no, not going to go there.

Barb, thanks for calling. It was a pleasure speaking with you. Look forward to someday meeting you at an event. :wink:


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

jmvargas said:


> all of this talk on unsafe practices...especially when there are kids involved..is making me shudderrrrrrr!!!!..........


And so it should. 

The FIRST thing in any weapons training is safety, before you pick up the weapon and before you approach the range. That said foolish to point a finger at any ONE individual there. Every single person there should in fact know better and can and should have raised the alarm or refused to participate and walked away. I wouldn't let my nieces or nephews within a country mile of that nonesense.


----------



## gonehuntin (Dec 2, 2004)

*A thought*

Maybe the secondary issue (the first one being... safety practices on shooting ranges isn't a personal decision, of course!) is,.... really..... how do we manage our certified coaches system and that whole education program... how do we "police" our Coaches Standards and Ethics? Who is in charge of this? What knowledge and experience would that person or group of people have to make rules and decisions that affect us all? Shouldn't we be capable of "policing" ourselves as a group? Who's job is it to decide when someone should go, or make some other major decisions about us? What do we base that decision on? What recourse would a coach have to defend such accusations and consequent decisions? 


Kinda like..... "Who's really in charge here"


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

First off. Affiliation for coaches is strickly voluntary, unless your with a governing body and even then technically the certification is only good within sanctioned or affiliated events. There is no LAW that states coaches are to be certified or even trained. Anyone can claim to be a coach. Since there is no LAW there really is no jurisdiction. The NFAA, NADA or NAA can only exercise control over their own.

It is really up to the archery community-at-large to govern itself. There are ALOT of coaches and archers that are outside governing bodies and there are no controls over that.


----------



## Huntmaster (Jan 30, 2003)

target1 said:


> First off. Affiliation for coaches is strickly voluntary, unless your with a governing body and even then technically the certification is only good within sanctioned or affiliated events. There is no LAW that states coaches are to be certified or even trained. Anyone can claim to be a coach. Since there is no LAW there really is no jurisdiction. The NFAA, NADA or NAA can only exercise control over their own.


One of the nations top private coaches that I know if isn't even a level one coach as far as I know, and he has several top shooters. Trying to deal with this through the NAA (or certificate holders org)would proably not get him removed from coaching, but it might get the point across.


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

target1 said:


> First off. Affiliation for coaches is strickly voluntary, unless your with a governing body and even then technically the certification is only good within sanctioned or affiliated events. There is no LAW that states coaches are to be certified or even trained. Anyone can claim to be a coach. Since there is no LAW there really is no jurisdiction. The NFAA, NADA or NAA can only exercise control over their own.
> 
> It is really up to the archery community-at-large to govern itself. There are ALOT of coaches and archers that are outside governing bodies and there are no controls over that.


This is very true. But there is no insurance coverage unless acting under the certification of a governing body, ie...sanctioned event or official practice. Thus couldn't some control be levied by at least removing the certification and thus the availability of insurance? Not that this would necessarily stop someone who has already displayed total disregard for human life.


----------



## Paradoxical Cat (Apr 25, 2006)

target1 said:


> First off. Affiliation for coaches is strickly voluntary, unless your with a governing body and even then technically the certification is only good within sanctioned or affiliated events. There is no LAW that states coaches are to be certified or even trained. Anyone can claim to be a coach. Since there is no LAW there really is no jurisdiction. The NFAA, NADA or NAA can only exercise control over their own.


True. But any person coaching without certification could be enjoined from holding themselves out as a certified coach. Of course, that is if, and only if, there is an interest and money for enforcement.

This is the reason for having standards bodies, like SAE or ASME, they certify that you are adhering to their standards. In return, you get to use their name as a basis for your credentials. And you may get some professional benefits, such as insurance.

However, outside of coaches associated with specific ranges or of a particularly high caliber, I don't see how this will help much.

PC-


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

FLarcherymom said:


> This is very true. But there is no insurance coverage unless acting under the certification of a governing body, ie...sanctioned event or official practice. Thus couldn't some control be levied by at least removing the certification and thus the availability of insurance? Not that this would necessarily stop someone who has already displayed total disregard for human life.


Interesting points for sure. I am curious, could any individual not secure private insurance directly to cover themselves? Are the governing bodies the only method of acquiring insurance?


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

Hutnicks said:


> Interesting points for sure. I am curious, could any individual not secure private insurance directly to cover themselves? Are the governing bodies the only method of acquiring insurance?


Most clubs buy additional insurance on top of what the governing body provides. This covers them for Directors and Officers coverage and many other things that are not covered under the governing body insurance. As for an individual, absolutely. You can get insurance for just about anything these days. I am looking at adding a floater to our homeowner's policy to cover my daughter's archery equipment. (Too much investment flying around the country in a bow case). RK found out the hard way that airlines don't much care about your stuff.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Hutnicks said:


> Interesting points for sure. I am curious, could any individual not secure private insurance directly to cover themselves? Are the governing bodies the only method of acquiring insurance?


Virtually any range or even pro shop with an indoor range can procure very inexpensive liability insurance via an affiliation with either the ASA or the IBO. I have studied all of their policies, and they are all very similar.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Barb

Chris

thanks for those replies. I was interested in that in some canoeing venues the set up seems to be the same. There is discounted "group" policy insurance available through a sanctioning body, but we found as well that there are underwriters who would do a personal liability policy (pricey to say the least).

So in effect joe nobody can call themselves a coach or better yet an "Olympic archery coach" and set up shop just about anywhere. Now if that anywhere is on a public range does that not limit any ability to enforce practices on that individual? Who in fact would one appeal to?


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

Hutnicks,

Interesting point, I would think on a public range if there was a recurring safety issue you would go the owner/operator of the range. In the case of the range being operated on public property such as a park, The Ranger or other management type would be the first place to go.

Looking at what they call themselves that can get sticky. If he/she called themselves an archery coach and does in fact have a clientele probably not much you can do there. When you add the term Olympic without a qualifier such as style there may be some place to go if the powers that be decide to care. Unless I am mistaken the Term Olympic actually has some protection afforded it. I know there is a gymnastics center locally that receives a cease and desist letter on a semi regular basis. Because of their unauthorized use of Olympic and in their case they make sure there is no confusion because they use the rings also.

Gary


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

I must say I'm struck by a few things.

One, pulling while others are shooting is uncommon on most of the public ranges in my area with the exception of the Golden Gate Park range, which has no shooting line. All the targets are at the back end of the range and people have to stand closer or farther from the target to be at the desired distance.

I've been shooting at the range at 20 and had a shooter show up and walk back to 70 and shoot past me--a shooter who couldn't even keep his arrows on the bale. I moved. The GG Park set up is usually ok when there are only a few shooters and extra lanes available but it is a bad set up when it is crowded and the expertise level is mixed.

Second, I'm struck that Coach1/Gary admits to and defends the practice of pulling arrows next to an active lane. Actually, what surprises me more is that he defends it *and* suggests that a poster is somehow at fault for not brining it up at the shoot. I really don't see any indication that would have resulted in a change in behavior given Gary's stated opinion and defense of the practice nor has he indicated that he would have put a stop to it, although he did write that such a practice would only occur if "EVERYONE involved is confident." However, it isn't up to "everyone" to speak up, especially the youths involved, even though such should be encouraged.

This is not the case of some safety violation that has escaped notice helpfully being brought to the attention of officials, this is a safety violation being *conducted* by top people. There is no reason for an underling to assume that criticism whould be welcomed. And, indeed, Gary has proven that point whith his heavily CAPTALIZED response to the isssue. No, it is up to the top officials who are approving of the questionble practice not to do it in the first place and to provide and example--this is *J*OAD we are talking about.

Safety is taught by example from the top down. Even practices that might arguably be safe should not be condoned if they are a bad example and would not generally be safe when practiced by others--especially at a youth competition.

It seems clear that it is *not* the case that "In ALL cases we err on the side of safety" since the Gary admits the practice and defends it. That is not erring on the side of safety but defending a convenient practice of questionable safety. You can't claim to err on the side of safety in all cases and at the same time blame a level one coach for not telling you to err on the side of safety about a rather obvious and *fundamental* safety violation.

Coach1/Gary wrote:
I can only speak for myself and those that I know personally. We work extremely hard to maintain a balance between safety and getting things done. In ALL cases we err on the side of safety. If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.

At the risk of being redundant [See my previous post.] IF YOU WITNESSED SOMETHING YOU FEEL IS UNSAFE. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SPEAK UP AND BRING IT TO THE ATTENTION OF THOSE IN AUTHORITY IMMEDIATELY, IF NOT SOONER, RIGHT NOW! That would include in this case Coach Lee, Myself, any coach on the field, a judge, tournament official, NAA Staff Member, Boad Member the list goes on.​


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

coach1 said:


> Hutnicks,
> 
> Interesting point, I would think on a public range if there was a recurring safety issue you would go the owner/operator of the range. In the case of the range being operated on public property such as a park, The Ranger or other management type would be the first place to go.
> 
> ...


I was just thinking back to the original dilemma posed in this thread, and there in fact seems to be a loophole or soft ground in this area. I am leaning to the view that if dialogue with an individual proves fruitless then an appeal to someone with range experience is in order. And on a public venue that may in fact be the local police as I believe Viper1 pointed out. 

As another aside (please don't kill me for this) it is of some interest if in fact public ranges require some sort of certification for use of their venue and if not perhaps the governing body for archery in the area should make an appeal or a least have a minimum knowledge test before letting "anyone" loose on the public. I am never a proponent of more regulation, but the issue of safety really boils my blood.


----------



## Bill Reeb (Aug 6, 2007)

i have been reading this post regarding pulling arrows when someone is still shooting on the next butt. i personally have done this as far back as the last nationals at Oxford Ohio. it was definatly a little odd and not something i would do regularly. one butt separation would be plenty.

However there are way to many worry warts out there. you need to worry about yourself and refrain from trying to slow others down to your speed. the fact is what you want is not to be safer but rather to force others to conform to your beliefs. in the process you are just being unpleasant. something i doubt you intended to be.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Bill Reeb said:


> However there are way to many worry warts out there. you need to worry about yourself and refrain from trying to slow others down to your speed. the fact is what you want is not to be safer but rather to force others to conform to your beliefs. in the process you are just being unpleasant. something i doubt you intended to be.


When my mother took archery in the 50's she had a very strict coach. They weren't _allowed_ to wear arm guards and the _had_ to pull arrows while others were shooting. I don't know if that was some sort of Teutonic pedagogical discipline or what not but it seems like a bad idea.

Now, as to me trying to "force others to conform to [my] beliefs," well that is an unrestricted argument you could apply to any safety standard. It isn't in and of itself an argument in favor of pulling arrows next to an active lane--especially when you are acting as and example to the juniors at the shoot. Would I also be trying to "force others to conform" to my beliefs if I argued that drawing on people is a bad idea? Why would that be different?

Archers can be sort of cavalier about walking down range while people are shooting. We would _never_ allow such a practice at a firearms range nor would any coach argue that such a practice was consistent with the statement that "In ALL cases we err on the side of safety." Why is this? Why would people walk down range at an archery range but not a gun range? The reason isn't that archers are generally more accurate than rifle and pistol shooters, it has to do with the perception of risk--that bullets are more dangerous than target arrows. I'd have to agree that this is generally true, but that both bullets and target arrows are potentially survivable and both are potentially lethal. The difference is one of degrees. Pulling arrows next to an active range is not inherently safe and is especially not an advisable exemplar at a youth competition.

What are you, as a coach, going to tell the parents of a kid shot while pulling arrows next to an active range? Will you tell them its not your fault "because EVERYONE involved was confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident was minimal?"

Coaches are often acting _In Loco Parentis_ and putting youths next to a target that is being shot at is, IMO, a clear case of negligence. You will have a hard time arguing in court that pulling arrows next to an active lane passes the "reasonable man" standard, i.e. that the actions were consistent with what a reasonable person would do under the circumstances. Because of that, insurance carriers cannot condone such a practice.

I'm not sure which person you think is "in the process you are just being unpleasant. something i doubt you intended to be." but you could be referring to me or more than one person. Either way, I would say that arguing for safety fundamentals should be a no brainer. What more fundamental safety point is there than "don't cross the shooting line while people are shooting?" It's a corollary to "Don't shoot when somebody is down range." Other than "only point the bow down range," "don't point the bow at anything you aren't going to shoot," what other tenet of safety is more important? Or does asking that question make me seem unpleasant? Hopefully not.


----------



## G33k (Jul 16, 2003)

Warbow said:


> When my mother took archery in the 50's she had a very strict coach. They weren't _allowed_ to wear arm guards and the _had_ to pull arrows while others were shooting. I don't know if that was some sort of Teutonic pedagogical discipline or what not but it seems like a bad idea.


There is a set distance that is considered safe, It constitutes a safety lane. So maybe the phrase 'pulling while people are shooting on the NEXT target" Needs to be defined, how far is the next target? IF one person is thinking 5 ft and another is thinking 5 meters, then people are arguing Apples and Oranges.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

to me this practice of pulling arrows on one butt while others are still shooting in the next butt is an accident waiting to happen....i must admit that i have done it once as the ones shooting in the next butt were our national team members and it was only at 30m but i was still looking behind all the time while i was pulling my arrows....i have not done it since.....IT'S NOT WORTH IT!!!...PS..no way i would have done it if it was a longer distance....


----------



## mwarddoc (Aug 12, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> This is as good a time as any to mention a very disturbing observation I saw at the practice range at the National Target Championships in Colorado Springs.
> 
> It is often said that archery is one of the safest sports. This is because archery range rules do not allow any room for accidents. One common sense safety rule for all levels of archers is that no one is down range when shooters are on the line, releasing arrows.
> 
> ...


This is a practice that also disallows for the risk posed by the unpredictable individual, and having dealt with psychopaths who have murdered their entire families as well as people who are being spoken to and directed by "The Devil", after being "apparently normal", I wouldn't walk downrange.

Accidents do happen after all. It only takes one. So, if anyone reading these posts thinks this is "OK", and "Safe" when they do it, next time you walk downrange think about someone's unknown mental issues and the possibility that they might just be walking in front of someone who had decided or has "been told" that "today is the day" and you just might be the best pair of shoulders in the way. Think about that as you walk to pick up your arrows.

Now, you might think I'm nuts, but I've walked into the room with the killer, and talked to him, and been as close to him as I am to this keyboard...and he's a lot more normal sounding than many of the posts on this forum.

It isn't always a "random" act, as it is portrayed in the papers, but someone who just happened to put themselves in the position of being the victim of the random act.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

G33k said:


> There is a set distance that is considered safe, It constitutes a safety lane. So maybe the phrase 'pulling while people are shooting on the NEXT target" Needs to be defined, how far is the next target? IF one person is thinking 5 ft and another is thinking 5 meters, then people are arguing Apples and Oranges.


It isn't just a matter of feet between lanes but a mater of degrees of arc--how far away you need to be from the target horizontally in terms of linear feet depends on how far away from the shooting line. Additionally, there is also the need to be able to walk safely to and from the target from the shooting line, and as shooting lanes are not painted all the way to the target, it is easy to wander into the next lane while traveling between the shooting line and the target.

Additionally, as someone noted in an anecdote earlier, people who are used to pulling arrows after a cease fire can easily forget that the lanes next to him or her are active and wander into them.

So, can people pull arrows while the range is hot and not get shot? Of course, they do it all the time. It is it a good idea? Of course not. Everything is "safe" right up until the point someone gets hurt. If you know you'll think something was stupid to do in retrospect after you get hurt then you know its not a good idea to do it! Pulling arrows next to an active lane is just such a circumstance. And it's not fair to the shooter, either.


----------



## mwarddoc (Aug 12, 2007)

*Random Acts of "Mercy"*

I forgot to add in my paranoid post, as I am sure some will suggest, that it is often the most disturbed person who will find ways to suggest that something can be done make it seem that something is "safe" or "we can do this this way".

This is because their judgment is so screwed up that they themselves don't recognize the risk they put others at, or don't care, or actually like to see the other person at risk. There are lots of professional and highly respected people just like this.

So you end up dead in a fall from a leader climb, with an arrow in your back, being shot in the house with the loaded gun...I've seen that also and watched the person shot in the back on the respirator...drowned while kayaking (while the nutcase watches you), falling 1000 feet down an glacier, and the other person gets to talk about their "buddy" who got killed with them.

Makes a good story he/she can tell remorsefully at the bar someday.

Personally, I'd rather get killed by a bear or a cougar than to get killed by being stupid.


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

Bill Reeb said:


> However there are way to many worry warts out there. you need to worry about yourself and refrain from trying to slow others down to your speed. the fact is what you want is not to be safer but rather to force others to conform to your beliefs. in the process you are just being unpleasant. something i doubt you intended to be.


If it becomes a more widespread practice, someone will get shot. There is no getting around that. The only reason someone hasn't yet, is most people have more common sense. This type of behavior is flat out stupid to do, especially in front of the kids at JOAD nationals. 

If someone gets shot, especially one of the JOAD kids emulating that behavior it will be bad for the sport. It isn't that hard to connect the dots.

-Andrew


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

Bill Reeb said:


> However there are way to many worry warts out there. you need to worry about yourself and refrain from trying to slow others down to your speed. the fact is what you want is not to be safer but rather to force others to conform to your beliefs. in the process you are just being unpleasant. something i doubt you intended to be.


I'm sorry, but it's attitudes like this that have no business in this sport.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Folks -

Just wondering if anyone thought this thread was still going anywhere?

BTW - the discussion on insurance, is nice, but you need insureance AFTER the fact, I thought the idea was to prevent "the fact" from happening in the first place. 

Even my local indoor range has a number of arrow holes in the ceiling and arrow scraps along the side walls to confirm that there is no "safely lane". Try getting away with that kind of reasoning at a rifle or pistol range.

I can't speak for anyone else here (obviously), but I'm one of those people who still considers a bow (yeah, even a FITA bow) a weapon, and if I saw a range where people were pulling and shooting at the same time (with parallel shooting lanes), I'd leave pretty quickly. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## JohnR (Apr 5, 2007)

*Not on my watch!*

I use the appropriate whistle commands and enforce them!
I teach safe arrow pulling and safe arrow pointing.
*Safety is no accident!*

Once in a tournament my shot made a 90 degree turn to the right, we found a vane half way to the target...never did find the arrow.

I've seen broken nocks and strings launch arrows 6 targets away.

It ain't worth the risk! Wait your turn to pull or talk to the slow-poke...however maybe you're the problem child.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

I think it would be a great idea, if every sanctioning body adopted a common safety statement. Then every club and range across the country could sign off on it. We could even get parks and public ranges to post them, then at the very least their would be some sort of enforceibilty. 

It could even be required that certified coaches had to agree in writing to maintain their credentials.

just thinking out loud


----------



## bsu_beginner (Feb 14, 2005)

Hmmm... what state? We have the good samaritan law here.



coach1 said:


> Picking up where Joe left off I would like to relate a true story (without details) about how I found myself named as a defendant in a law suit while in college.
> 
> At the time I was a freshman, a member of the school Emergency Medical Services Team and a volunteer for the local town ambulance service. One night we responded to a mutual aid call with a neighboring town. I was a newly minted American Red Cross Advanced First Aid and Emergency care instructor and the LEAST experienced member of the team. (At the time Emergency Medical Technicians had only been certified for a few years.) Anyway, while on scene I witnessed an incident involving personnel from the city we were assisting. Making a very long and involved story I cannot discuss short, About a month or so later, the town I volunteered for, my crew chief and I received notice that we were named in a law suit involving care rendered by another service at that mutual aid call.
> 
> ...


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

BSU,

The Good Samaritan laws apply to non trained individuals that are making a good faith effort to save someone’s life with means readily available. Physicians, Paramedics, Nurses, Police, Fire Fighters, Emergency Medical Technicians step into a grey area when the stop to help off duty. Depending on the state, they are protected to varying degrees. When you arrive when called you are expected to be trained, knowledgeable and professional. The Good Samaritan laws do not apply.

Gary


----------



## FLarcherymom (Jun 10, 2007)

bsu_beginner said:


> Hmmm... what state? We have the good samaritan law here.


BSU: We have that law here in FL too. However, I don't think a parent/coach standing watching kids pulling while other kids are shooting would qualify as a good samaritan. If they were capable and able to stop the unsafe condition and failed to do so they are liable.


----------



## dgardner (Aug 24, 2007)

bdca said:


> This seems to be common practice on SoCal ranges. I was shooting 90 Meters at Woodley Park when an archer walked up to the butt next to mine and started shooting at maybe 20 yards.. I was freaked but was assured that is the way they shoot at Woodley.
> 
> Cya!


I am the President of Woodley Park Archers. We have range rules posted, and pride ourselves on teaching and promoting safe archery. It is NOT common practice on our range to practice unsafe shooting, with that said it is a public range therefore we can not control who uses the range.

If one of our coaches had seen this happen for that matter any of our members with experience they would have approached the person to make sure they understood the rules for shooting next to each other on the long range. 

I believe this post was started by Tori Kaspert, seeking advice on how to handle a level 3 coach who is unsafe and claims he was taught to call clear while shooters are still on the line shooting. Some how this post has gotten completely off subject. 

I take offense to the fact you are implying WPA is not a safe place to shoot. If you would like to discuss this with me, I would be more then happy to. You may also email at [email protected]


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

Warbow,

I normally do not respond to posts that do not include name and location. However in this case I am making an exception.

I don't believe I was actually defending the practice. I was simply acknowledging that it occurs. In most of the Southern California Ranges the posted rules state that a MINIMUM of one bale separation between shooters at different distances. I'll Use El Dorado Park for example there is 10 meters separation between bales. At one bale separation then creates a twenty meter "safety" zone between shooters. Which if I remember my Level 1 book correctly to the recommended minimum safety distance at the end of the range.

From a practical standpoint There is little or no difference between walking down the edge of a roped off area. Accidents can and if allowed will happen. Safety is EVERYONES responsibility. My personal comfort level is completely different depending on who is shooting twenty meters away. In practice I have never seen anyone move closer to another shooter than they absolutely had to. It all seems to work out. And to date in California the only incident that I am aware of is an Orange County Deputy Sheriff that accidentally got shot in the leg during a traffic stop. A compound shooter shooting in his walled in back yard had an accidental release that went over a fifteen foot wall traveled about 200 yards and landed in the deputies Calf The dash camera caught the whole thing. (And yes he let the traffic stop go)

On an uncontrolled range, including every practice range I have seen at every tournament for thirty plus years, every Athlete and coach must use their experience and judgment to make sure everyone stays safe or possibly better stated unhurt. I have said it before and I'll say it again If you witness something that you feel in your experience is unsafe It is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO OR SAY SOMETHING. Even the best of us make the occasional mistake. I know myself and every coach I work with including Coach Lee will listen to your concerns. 

I used the term unhurt because life is inherently dangerous. Should I never cross a street because there is risk that someone might run a light or make a turn without looking? Should I never go skiing because I might fall off a chair lift or fall and break a leg? Should I never fly in a plane because it might crash or worse be used in a terrorist attack? Should I never go skydiving because my parachute might not open? Should I never go scuba diving because I might get the bends, or attacked by the boogie man of the deep? Should I never play tag because I might tear my ACL or MCL? Should I never use a ladder because I might fall off? Should I never ever ride a motorcycle because everyone eventually falls off? 

We do not go out of our way to do things that are obviously dangerous. Of the list above skydiving and riding motorcycles are outside my personal comfort and risk zone. I have participated in all the other mentioned activities. On the range as in life we make the best decisions we can based on our knowledge and experience. 

Now that I think about it how is walking down range and pulling arrows a20 meters or so away any different that the judges, agents and runners standing behind the targets at 70 meters about 20 meters to the side? We have pass through arrows all the time at 70 meters both recurve and compound. I don't believe there is any difference. That being said it happens because the risk involved is small enough to be considered safe. 

Gary


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

dgardner said:


> I take offense to the fact you are implying WPA is not a safe place to shoot. If you would like to discuss this with me, I would be more then happy to. You may also email at [email protected]


If the "you" is referrng to me, I would have to say my one experience at Woodly Park was disconcerting. I live in the Santa Cruz area and specifically spent an extra day in Van Nuys on a business trip so I could shoot 90m at Woodley. We don't have 90M anywher ein the area. 

The range was uncontrolled and people were shooting various distances at various butts, totally uncoordinated. People were pulling, walking, shooting, all at the same time. I shot next to someone at 70M and waitied untill they left to shoot 90. As I stated, an archer (bow hunter) marched up to the next butt and started shooting at 20M or so while I was shooting 90. As a visitor, I did not feel it was my place to chastize the fellow with his back to my arrows.

So before shooting any more arrows, I queried this practice with some of the locals they assured me that this is the way it was done on this range, but they like to keep the longer distances at one side of the field. The range felt to me, like a free for all and I was frankly uncomfortable, left and shot the 20 meter phone book section instead. 

There were some kids shooting at 10 yards and others at 20 and I waitied untill all the 10 yard kids had finished before I shot 20m. This also did not seem safe.

My impression was that the Woodley range was a bit bizarre with little or no management and there definately was no range captain on the outdoor field on the Friday I was there.

We have a club in a public park but we manage the field and only open the range (for non members) when there is a club member-range captain present.

I don't have a lot of experience shooting CA FITA fields, but Woodley is not high on my list of safe places to shoot.

You may have the range rules posted, but if there is no one to educate the general public or enforce the rules...what good is it?

It may be a different ball game on the weekends..I hope so.

You folks are incredibly lucky to have a field like Woodley, but from my albeit single experience, it is an accident waiting to happen.

Cya!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

coach1 said:


> Warbow,
> 
> I normally do not respond to posts that do not include name and location. However in this case I am making an exception.


Frankly, given all the indignant SHOUTING you used in your response to CM JOAD, I think arguing with you under a nom de Forum seems like a good idea. 

I'd hope that you'd respond to posts based on the merit of their content rather than whether they are accompanied by a name and location. I do realize, though, that we often use shortcuts to estimate the worth of something and that the amount of information in a person's Member Profile is one way to do that, I'd posit that another is to review some of their previous posts to see if they write honestly and logically--or just read the post and respond based on the merits.



coach1 said:


> I don't believe I was actually defending the practice.


You may not have been. However, the impression I received was that you were:


coach1 said:


> I can only speak for myself and those that I know personally. We work extremely hard to maintain a balance between safety and getting things done. In ALL cases we err on the side of safety. If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field.


To me, that says that you don't just condone the practice, you actively approve of it. The phrasing implies that _you_ are one of the "confident AND comfortable" coaches. If that isn't defending the practice then I'm at a loss for words.

I really don't think that was "simply acknowledging that it occurs."

Additionally, re: the pulling at the JOAD event you didn't actually come out and say that you would have put a stop to it. Instead, you said, "The appropriate conversations would have been held." Which doesn't necessarily mean anything but talking would happen. If you meant it would stop if someone said something you could just say so, but you didn't.



coach1 said:


> In most of the Southern California Ranges the posted rules state that a MINIMUM of one bale separation between shooters at different distances. I'll Use El Dorado Park for example there is 10 meters separation between bales. At one bale separation then creates a twenty meter "safety" zone between shooters. Which if I remember my Level 1 book correctly to the recommended minimum safety distance at the end of the range.I was


I would acknowledge that the distance from the shooting line and the separation between bales are key factors related to the safety of pulling arrows on a live range. 10 meters is a lot at 10 meters, not as much at 90 meters. The facts can mitigate such a practice.


coach1 said:


> From a practical standpoint There is little or no difference between walking down the edge of a roped off area.


Well, except for the _ropes_. Granted, the rope doesn't magically stop arrows, but it does stop people from accidentally wandering in to the lane. Since lanes are often unmarked, it is easy for archers to walk into a lane by accident, though hopefully that will never happen.

I think that because this is a *Junior* Olympic Archery Development that we need to lead by example, especially when youths are involved in multiple shooting sports.

I have clearly acknowledged in prior posts that one can pull arrows on a hot range without getting shot, however that doesn't make it a good general practice, especially on ranges with tightly spaced lanes nor at JOAD events.


----------



## monty53 (Jun 19, 2002)

Bill Reeb said:


> i have been reading this post regarding pulling arrows when someone is still shooting on the next butt. i personally have done this as far back as the last nationals at Oxford Ohio. it was definatly a little odd and not something i would do regularly. one butt separation would be plenty.
> 
> However there are way to many worry warts out there. you need to worry about yourself and refrain from trying to slow others down to your speed. the fact is what you want is not to be safer but rather to force others to conform to your beliefs. in the process you are just being unpleasant. something i doubt you intended to be.


You are welcome to pull your arrows while I'm shooting on your next butt anytime!..............:wink:


----------



## mwarddoc (Aug 12, 2007)

*Crazy Shooting*

When I read these posts, I also got the impressing that members were defending this practice. I drill into my kids safety, safety, safety, with guns, bows, etc. Yet, accidents happen, birds fly into arrows, etc, etc.

But, if anyone thinks that this is OK, then why not shoot both ways?

You could have targets at both ends of the field, alternating lanes, the shooters on each end could pull each others arrows as a courtesy, and a string/pulley system with small carriers, like the old laundry line could be set up so that you could pull your arrows back down.

This might speed up training and shorten course times for the less paranoid of us.

Now those of you who find it unsafe, and think it is deplorable, I'm in full agreement, so don't blame me if you run into this system at one of the ranges.

I'm just too paranoid...


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

If the athletes involved are juniors, though, then their comfort level is going to be dictated by what their coaches are telling them. As a coach you need to understand that they are excited to learn, and they are excited to emulate what the people are doing that they look up to.

So, if the coach tells them something is safe, but they disagree, the chances are that they are going to think of themselves as wimps, keep their mouths shut, and deide to just get more brave, or whatever. Especially if that coach is highly respected.

I am not coach, but I know quite a bit about this. I'm a military helicopter flight instructor, and I deal with students every day who have never been in the cockpit of a helicopter before. Safety needs to be determined by the comfort level of the least comfortable person, not just the most experienced.

If I do something that is perfectly safe, but that my student is incapable of performing safely, how well is that going to go when he is on a solo flight and tries to emulate me? Let me tell ya, it's not pretty. I can fly the maneuver because I have thousands of flight hours, but my student, who has 20, cannot.

It's my job as a teacher, instructor, coach, leader, or whatever title you like, to teach him to do it safely within his comfort level.

I really don't see how any responsible person can argue for any sacrifice of safety for the sake of expediency, especially not one who is in a position of authority, and is an active role model to aspiring young people. There is a lot more to being a teacher or a coach than just technical expertise. It requires maturity, experience and good judgment.

There is no excuse for any preventable accident. Ever.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

coach1 said:


> I used the term unhurt because life is inherently dangerous. Should I never cross a street because there is risk that someone might run a light or make a turn without looking? Should I never go skiing because I might fall off a chair lift or fall and break a leg? Should I never fly in a plane because it might crash or worse be used in a terrorist attack? Should I never go skydiving because my parachute might not open? Should I never go scuba diving because I might get the bends, or attacked by the boogie man of the deep? Should I never play tag because I might tear my ACL or MCL? Should I never use a ladder because I might fall off? Should I never ever ride a motorcycle because everyone eventually falls off?


Gary,

Is this your preface when telling a parent why their child, that was intrusted to your care, just lost an eye? "I am sorry folks, but it was not our fault. Life is inherently dangerous".


----------



## coach1 (Apr 14, 2003)

Jim,

Not at All, when a minor is entrusted to my care their safety is priority one at all times. That being said the original issue that started all of this was the practice range at Colorado Springs. Where I was not present or supervising any athletes. I admit I have one single serious archery related injury to my credit. One torn anterior cruciate ligament, that injury did not occur on the shooting range.

I am neither condoning nor condemning the practice of walking the range or pulling arrows while shooting is occurring. I am simply acknowledging that the practice goes on and in those cases it is the responsibility of everyone involved to undertake the practice with due caution. Safety goes both ways. We are quick to admonish the person “crazy’ enough to walk down range. However, I haven’t heard one word admonishing the shooter who could still pause or go retrieve their arrows that are in the target.

Like I have said before we must rely on our experience to judge what risks we are willing to take. If you see something that your experience tells you is wrong you have a duty to speak up and correct it at the time. Not weeks later.

Responding to another poster that commented that I said the appropriate “conversations would have been held” In Colorado Springs on the practice field that is the limit of my authority. As a coach we have a lot or responsibility but no authority to actually make an athlete behave a certain way. If I had been informed of a potentially dangerous situation I would have spoken to the individuals and the Tournament director, judges etc. 

Gary


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

coach1 said:


> Jim,
> I am neither condoning nor condemning the practice of walking the range or pulling arrows while shooting is occurring...Gary


I think you can argue that the practice is reasonable under certain circumstances, but the things you are posting are inconsistent.

You can't say in one breath "In ALL cases we err on the side of safety" and have it be consistent with your subsequent statement "If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal." Your choice to use hyperbole has made your argument self contradictory.

You can argue that the risk is acceptable, that it is reasonable and even that it is miniscule. But you can't do that and simultaneously claim to always err on the side of safety. Erring on the side of safety means being as safe as possible, it does not mean choosing to accept unnecessary risk on the basis that it is reasonable. You have to pick one position or another not both.

By not accepting practice you are unquestionably condoning the practice. That is the definition of condoning, to "accept and allow a behavior to continue." Condoning does not mean that you endorse a practice, though it seems clear that you do since you have argued for its reasonableness, it only means that it has your tacit approval. Once again, your semantics are off.

You can argue that the practice is reasonable. You can argue that you don't actively champion it but you can't argue that you don't condone it so long as you stand by the statements you've made in the forum.

I think this side thread serves to illustrate the quandary that Archerycat is in. Some experienced coaches can be very difficult to have a discussion with since they are so used to being right by dint of the fact that they so often are right that they forget that they can be wrong. Some of them can be very sure of themselves and be condescending while trying to advance contradictory positions as being simultaneously true. I respect experience right up until the point that it conflicts with logic and reason.

There is no reason to assume that a simple discussion with Archerycat's unnamed coach would be fruitful, though one can hope.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

coach1 said:


> I am neither condoning nor condemning the practice of walking the range or pulling arrows while shooting is occurring.


But the whole point here is that everyone, as responsible adults, coaches, participants, etc., needs to comdemn this practice. Take a stand! Is it right or wrong? Your posts contain more double talk than I've seen from most politicians.

Again I reiterate. If a young, aspiring athlete is standing there with a respected coach, who is a person of authority in that person's life, and that coach tells them to go ahead and draw and shoot with a person down range, how is that young athlete ever going to learn the proper respect for safety that would prevent them taking that shot?

If that coach has never told them it's wrong, how will they know? Are you suggesting that they should develop a sense of this for themselves without proper instruction? In fact, not just lack of instruction, but active instruction TO THE CONTRARY?

Is this "do as I say, not as I do?" Or, more correctly based on the posts I've read here, this is more like, "do as I have never told you, but not as I'm telling you right now." WOW! That sounds like the attitude of a good role model!

A coach must be a person who stands completely above reproach, comes nowhere near the line, and sets a flawless example for apiring young athletes. Those kids look up to the coach, they want to be the best, and they desperately expect the coach to tell them how to do that. The same goes for teachers, scout leaders, and everyone else who works with the kids who will become the next generation of our society.

Just because an accident has not happened does not mean it won't. That's why it's called an accident, because no one expected it. However, from the overwhelming response on this thread, I think it's obvious that just about everyone expects this one.

You keep stating over and over that safety is everyone's responsibility. That means it's yours, too, and so far your attitude has shown, at best, a complete indifference to safety, and at worst a cavalier arrogance that's going to get someone killed.

If safety is everyone's responsibility, as you so often have stated, then take a stand for one side or the other. Take a stand for the safe course rather than the expedient one.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

coach1 said:


> If you see something that your experience tells you is wrong you have a duty to speak up and correct it at the time. Not weeks later.
> 
> 
> Gary


Gary, 

Since an accident hasn't happened YET, I am having a hard time realizing how the timing of my "duty to speak up" reduces the validity of my claim. What's done is done. No harm no foul. Now, from this point forward, am I to understand that YOU will exercise your "duty to speak up" with whoever neccessary to "correct it" and insure that this unsafe form of practice will never happen again as long as you are a coach...at least in public?


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

I have flown combat missions in war time, but I'll say this: if my attitude were this cavalier toward safety, I would be grounded, no question, no doubt, as would any other pilot wearing the military uniform of these United States.

Now I ask you, how does the expediency and necessity of target shooting compare in importance?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

*errata:*

Correction:


Warbow said:


> By not accepting practice you are unquestionably condoning the practice.


should read "By accepting the practice you are unquestionably condoning the practice."


----------



## djhohmann (Nov 4, 2005)

*Down Range*

You should not shoot when someone is downrange of you. Period.

If someone started shooting from behind me on a range I'd call the cops.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

djhohmann said:


> You should not shoot when someone is downrange of you. Period.
> 
> If someone started shooting from behind me on a range I'd call the cops.


You don't want shoot in Southern California...

Cya!


----------



## Soul Stripper (Aug 24, 2006)

If you walk on to a range while someone is still shooting at our club, we consider it a suicide attempt. You will be banned from the property forever.
Sounds like Ca. has some future Darwin award candidates wondering around.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Many of you folks would not do well at training centers around the world. All that I've been to or seen video from have archers shooting on bails near folks pulling down range.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

bdca said:


> You don't want shoot in Southern California...
> 
> Cya!


Another way to say that is "he doesn't want to be shot in Southern California"


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

c3hammer said:


> Many of you folks would not do well at training centers around the world. All that I've been to or seen video from have archers shooting on bails near folks pulling down range.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pete


Pete, Just because it's done does not make it right. Genocide and ethnic cleansing is done all over the world also. Still isn't right. There is a time, a man(or woman) has to stand up for what is right. This is nothing more than moral relativism. 

Those that choose to behave this way, have no business in this or any other shhoting sport that involves weapons. But the reality is, they are there. So all I can implore anyone to do is...have some integrity and stand up for what is Right.

Right is Right all the time.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

Yes, there are some safe people in So Cal.


----------



## djhohmann (Nov 4, 2005)

*Southern California*

Being from Northern California it certainly doesn't surprise me that Southern California archers are idiots if they allow this. Next thing will be for the SoCal archers to argue that they should be able to shoot on the beach. 

(And "training camps" around the world aren't much of a defense for this bad and dangerous practice.) 

At our local park in New Jersey, if you walk of the field with your arrows in your quiver you're liable to get a fine from the local police for carrying a weapon. Your arrows need to be in a case whenever you’re not on the range.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

djhohmann said:


> At our local park in New Jersey, if you walk of the field with your arrows in your quiver you're liable to get a fine from the local police for carrying a weapon. Your arrows need to be in a case whenever you’re not on the range.


At which point I assume they become illegal _concealed_ weapons?

I can't say I'd hold up New Jersey as an example of reasonable weapons laws


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

target1 said:


> .....There is a time, a man(or woman) has to stand up for what is right. This is nothing more than moral relativism....


And what is right is that there be a few bails up close that anyone can shoot on at any time regardless of who's down range on the other bails. The idea that someone can miss a bail by a 30 degrees or more is not in the relm of possibilty that most of us are even willing to consider.

I think the vast majority of target recurve archers will disagree with you on what is right or wrong here. It's not an issue of relativity, but factually what is safe practice on the range.

Can you name a single accident where an archer on an adjacent bail has been shot? How about even a close call?

I think the odds of grandpa having a heart attack in his car driving by the practice range in Colorado Springs, jumping the curb and running someone over, was much more of a safety risk than archers blind bailng while others were walking down range to retrieve arrows at the longer distances.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

The NFAA has a pretty good rule of thumb on setting up a field course. The safety zone to each side of target should be about half the distance to the target. So, at 50 meters you would need 25 meters to each side that people should not come into. I think the actual formula is distance X tangent of 15-30 degrees. 0.5 is the tangent of 26.5 degrees. Even the most liberal angle of 15 degrees would still need almost 25 meters to each side of a 90 meter target for a shoot and pull at the same time situation.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

c3hammer said:


> Can you name a single accident where an archer on an adjacent bail has been shot? How about even a close call?


But the point is that the majority of people out there shooting are smart enough not to tolerate this practice, so the fact that it hasn't happened is due most likely to the fact that so few people do it.

However, if the top people, those most respected in the fiels, are out there doing it and setting the example for others, the practice will soon become widespread, then the chance of occurrence will go up, especially when the people trying to do it become less and less skilled.

Archery is a shooting sport. Would you walk downrange of someone firing a rifle? No. I don't think anyone here would tolerate that. Is a bow any less deadly? No.

So how can it be considred acceptable?

An accident is an accident because no one predicted it, no one saw it coming, and everyone involved was sure there were adequate safeguards in place. The minute someone sees a potential problem with a situation, that means there are NOT adequate safeguards.

Yes, life is inherently dangerous. That's exactly why we MUST take every precaution that we have control over, not just blow them off because "accidents happens."


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> Can you name a single accident where an archer on an adjacent bail has been shot? How about even a close call?


No, I can't. The question is what are we to conclude from that? Without a proper survey, it is hard to draw a conclusion that is based on empirical evidence. We neither know the actual number of accidents nor how many people pull arrows down range on a live range nor under what circumstances.

There are a number of possible conclusions to draw from my ignorance regarding whether anybody has ever been shot while pulling arrows on a live range, including extremes. It could be that wandering the range like a drunk in a western movie bar fight is completely safe or it could be that people haven't been hurt because they generally don't go down range while others are shooting. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence of injuries.

Without cold hard data, I'm going to err on the side of safety and stay on the side of the shooting line that doesn't have drawn bows pointing in my general direction. And I think it is generally a good idea to have kids do the same.

BTW, the practice of pulling arrows on a live practice range that Coach1/Gary doesn't deny seeing at the JOAD tournament, and which he pointedly defends seems to be in strict violation of the published USA Archery Tournament Guidelines, which state rather plainly:


> _A Director of Shooting must be in charge_ of the official practice field at all times. _He will give acoustic signals to indicate when *all shooting must stop*_ in order to allow archers to collect their arrows, and again when shooting can be resumed.
> Upon the Director of Shooting sounding the acoustic control, all archers will move forward to collect their arrows. *No archer may shoot during this time. Archers contravening this rule may barred from that practice session.*


I would think that a level 4 coach would be more familiar with the USA Archery Tournament Guide than a level 1 coach like CM JOAD, yet Coach1/Gary is either ignorant of the guidelines or deliberately chooses to ignore them when discussing this practice and its occurrence at the National Target Championships.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

coach1 said:


> Responding to another poster that commented that I said the appropriate “conversations would have been held” In Colorado Springs on the practice field that is the limit of my authority. As a coach we have a lot or responsibility but no authority to actually make an athlete behave a certain way. If I had been informed of a potentially dangerous situation I would have spoken to the individuals and the Tournament director, judges etc.
> 
> Gary


Gary,

I have no doubt that you would have "spoken to the individuals". More importantly, what exactly would you have said?


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Warbow said:


> ...The question is what are we to conclude from that? ..... There are a number of possible conclusions to draw from my ignorance....


You haven't been on a range where archers shoot on adjacent bails all day long, 250 - 500 arrows a day for years and years without accident. You must not have seen or noticed what happens when a nock breaks or a riser snaps or any of the other interesting things that can cause an arrow to go off course and how far it actually goes off course.



> Without cold hard data.....


You don't appear to want to look at the actual data.



> BTW, the practice of pulling arrows on a live practice range that Coach1/Gary doesn't deny seeing at the JOAD tournament, and which he pointedly defends seems to be in strict violation of the published USA Archery Tournament Guidelines.....


I was unaware of this rule and have never seen it actually practiced at a national or international tournament on the practice range. I'll suggest that it is inconvenient, outdated and will be changed shortly.

The bottom line is that a bow is not a firearm. It is a tool and although it can be used as a weapon, much like a hammer, it can't go off by accident. I'll contest that injurious or deadly accidents with a bow are simply outside of the relm of statistics that we live with on a daily basis. You have to pull it back and aim it at something to hit it. It's a virtual impossibility to shoot someone unless you are trying to.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> You haven't been on a range where archers shoot on adjacent bails all day long, 250 - 500 arrows a day for years and years without accident. You must not have seen or noticed what happens when a nock breaks or a riser snaps or any of the other interesting things that can cause an arrow to go off course and how far it actually goes off course.
> 
> 
> The bottom line is that a bow is not a firearm. It is a tool and although it can be used as a weapon, much like a hammer, it can't go off by accident. I'll contest that injurious or deadly accidents with a bow are simply outside of the relm of statistics that we live with on a daily basis. You have to pull it back and aim it at something to hit it. It's a virtual impossibility to shoot someone unless you are trying to.
> ...


 Those two statements would appear to be the very epitome of contradiciton.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> You don't appear to want to look at the actual data.


If you have some "actual _data_", as opposed to _anecdote_, I'd be interested in seeing it. You have never, to my knowledge, referenced any data purporting to be an accurate sampling of practice field-related archery injuries or the overall prevalence of the practice of pulling arrows next to an active lane and under what circumstances. You have no reasonable or factual basis for your statement to claiming that I don't want "to look at the actual data."

I think I've been pretty careful not to make many absolutes in my posts. If you or Coach1 would like to point to what you think are any _factual errors_ in my posts, as opposed to differences of opinion, please point them out so that I can review your allegations.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

CM JOAD said:


> Gary,
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted by coach1
> ...


It is interesting, isn't it, that after I pointed out that Coach1 was demonstrably vague on what he would have done if you had pointed out your concerns, only saying that the "appropriate conversations would have been had," that he continues to dodge the issue even as he claims to be responding to it.

As CM JOAD implicitly asks, would Coach1 have even _tried_ to stop the practice right there and then? If safety is everyone's responsibility why is he passing the buck now and claiming that as an NAA level 4 coach and as a member of the Dream Team he doesn't have the ability to stop a dangerous practice which he has definitively said only occurs "because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field." Which is false, that Coach1 couldn't stop the arrow pulling or that it only occurs when "EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable ?" You can only pick one. The more Coach1 writes, the more he contradicts himself.

I don't think anyone is questioning Coach1's experience or knowledge of archery but I certainly do question his ability to speak plainly. As tedzpony has noted, Coach1 speaks like a politician, trying to make it seem like he has said something definitive when, in fact, he hasn't. Perhaps that kind of speech comes with the politics of being high up in the Archery world.

A few things seem clear, and correct me if I've made any error:

Coach1 hasn't denied that arrows were pulled while the range was hot nor whether he knew about it at the time.

Coach1 blamed CM JOAD for the incident's continuation. It was CM JOAD's fault that the incident continued, not the fault of the top coaches in the nation who were actively violating the NAA Tournament Guidelines, because _they_, if such a thing were to have occurred (hypothetically, of course, since Coach1 has been very cagey about what he witnessed and/or knew to be happening at the time), _they_ would only have allowed such a thing "because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field."

Coach1 tried to imply that the practice would have stopped if CM JOAD had said something, but in two different posts he evaded the question of if he would have actually tired to stop the practice had CM JOAD said something and if he would try to do so in future tournaments knowing that CM JOAD is not comfortable with the practice.

Coach1 _defended_ the practice:



> "If athletes are shooting and pulling at the same time it is because EVERYONE involved is confident AND comfortable that the probability of an accident in minimal. That includes the Athletes involved and EVERY Coach on the field."





> "In most of the Southern California Ranges the posted rules state that a MINIMUM of one bale separation between shooters at different distances. I'll Use El Dorado Park for example there is 10 meters separation between bales. At one bale separation then creates a twenty meter "safety" zone between shooters. Which if I remember my Level 1 book correctly to the recommended minimum safety distance at the end of the range."





> "From a practical standpoint There is little or no difference between walking down the edge of a roped off area"





> "We have pass through arrows all the time at 70 meters both recurve and compound. I don't believe there is any difference. That being said it happens because the risk involved is small enough to be considered safe."


_and Coach1 said he wasn't_ "actually _defending_ the practice. I was simply acknowledging that it occurs." In fact, he clarified and said he wasn't even _condoning_ the practice--in contradiction to the plain meaning of "condoning."

It isn't I don't think Coach1 can argue that pulling arrows on a hot range is an acceptable risk (I tend to disagree, but it is an _arguable_ point), no, it is really the condescension, the obfuscating verbosity and the evasive yet indignant equivocations I find more troubling.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> Those two statements would appear to be the very epitome of contradiciton.


How so?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> How so?


In statement 1 you are giving examples where a bow can in fact "misfire" In statement 2 you claim specifically that this cannot happen.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

Warbow said:


> It isn't I don't think Coach1 can argue that pulling arrows on a hot range is an acceptable risk (I tend to disagree, but it is an _arguable_ point), no, it is really the condescension, the obfuscating verbosity and the evasive yet indignant equivocations I find more troubling.


Yah. Yah. I think that is exactly my point! (Does anyone know what he just said?)


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*California Range bashing....Oh come on guys!!!!*

:angry:I just wanted to say that Ranch Park, Woodley and El Dorado are all public ranges. Woodley and Rancho are part of the Los Angeles Park District, and the Park states that both parks are “SHOOT AT YOUR OWN RISK” The clubs connected to both ranges cannot police it all day, just during their classes.
The clubs cannot shut the ranges down when no one is there, the Park District sets the hours. 

Woodley and Rancho are from sun up to sun down. Woodley Park Archers has permits to shoot after hours if you are participating in one of their classes or leagues.
Those classes and leagues practice strict safety guidelines. I know for a fact that anyone who is unsafe or breaks any of the club, or range safety rules is not permitted to shoot.
If fact the person who I originally wrote about who was unsafe during a class that he was not supposed to be coaching. Was asked to leave.

It is the responsibility of the archer to practice safe archery, if you feel that someone is shooting too close to you, you have a few choices.

1.	If you were there first, you can ask the archer who decided to shoot too close to you to move.
2.	If you don’t have the guts to ask the other archer to move, then you can move yourself.
3.	If you don’t like the first two choices then go home. 

I know I am going to get hate mail, but I don’t care I am sick of the bashing that has taken place. This all started when I asked for advice about an unsafe coach.

I thank those who gave me constructive positive advice.


Tori Schroeder-Kaspert


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Warbow said:


> If you have some "actual _data_", as opposed to _anecdote_, I'd be interested in seeing it.


I don't understand what you disagree with here. The idea that training centers all over the world operate in this fashion or the fact that no one gets injured or killed doing it this way? Do I have to do a study to show how many archer hours are spent each year around the world shooting like this without incident or can we simply assume that our own OTC and every other training center like it do it this way because they don't have any safety issues with the practice?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CM JOAD said:


> Yah. Yah. I think that is exactly my point! (Does anyone know what he just said?)


Charles Leonard Harness does


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Archerycat said:


> :angry:I just wanted to say that Ranch Park, Woodley and El Dorado are all public ranges. Woodley and Rancho are part of the Los Angeles Park District, and the Park states that both parks are “SHOOT AT YOUR OWN RISK” The clubs connected to both ranges cannot police it all day, just during their classes.
> The clubs cannot shut the ranges down when no one is there, the Park District sets the hours.


"“SHOOT AT YOUR OWN RISK” shouldn't mean "SHOOT IN A RISKY MANNER."

The Redwood Bowmen's range in Oakland has no range-master and is a public range in a public park, but it has a distinct shooting line with permanent ground quivers and targets at staggered distances. People wait to pull arrows. The Golden Gate Park archery range does not have staggered targets, nor does it have a shooting line. People shoot past each-other. 

It seems pretty clear that this is a range construction issue more than a range captain issue.



Archerycat said:


> It is the responsibility of the archer to practice safe archery, if you feel that someone is shooting too close to you, you have a few choices.
> 
> 1.	If you were there first, you can ask the archer who decided to shoot too close to you to move.
> 2.	If you don’t have the guts to ask the other archer to move, then you can move yourself.
> 3.	If you don’t like the first two choices then go home.


4. Lobby to have the range re-arranged with staggered targets and a distinct shooting line with marked yardages and ground quivers* to make shooting inherently safer. It is easier to control behavior with the aid of good design than to try and fight bad design with signs and and eduction that has failed to work in the past.

(*The ground quivers just make the line more distinct and make it seem more official and "required.")



Archerycat said:


> I know I am going to get hate mail, but I don’t care I am sick of the bashing that has taken place. This all started when I asked for advice about an unsafe coach.


Hate mail? I should hope not. And I certainly would hope that a vigorous discussion of safety wouldn't be characterized as such--especially since _safety_ was the key matter in you query.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

CM JOAD said:


> Yah. Yah. I think that is exactly my point! (Does anyone know what he just said?)


Well, I am trying to be ironic. The phrase "obfuscating verbosity" is one of those self-referential phrases that is the very thing it mocks (confusing language designed to muddle the facts)--just to try and emphasize the point...


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Hutnicks said:


> In statement 1 you are giving examples where a bow can in fact "misfire" In statement 2 you claim specifically that this cannot happen.


You missed my point of the fact that misfires aren't a safety issue. Arrows coming off the rest send the arrow down and a few feet to one side. Shots through a clicker end up on the bail or a few feet to one side low in the dirt. Broken handles generally give you a big lump on your forehead. Broken nocks spin the arrow around with little or no energy a few feet to one side or the other. Touching off a release while sky drawing is one of the most prevalent issues and again has no effect on folks to either side of that lane.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> I don't understand what you disagree with here. The idea that training centers all over the world operate in this fashion or the fact that no one gets injured or killed doing it this way? Do I have to do a study to show how many archer hours are spent each year around the world shooting like this without incident or can we simply assume that our own OTC and every other training center like it do it this way because they don't have any safety issues with the practice?


I believe what you say, however, your personal experience, while suggestive, is not a substitute for representative data.

I've never claimed that people are getting shot right and left, but you've claimed that nobody has ever been shot. Your experience is as one person at one location at a time. While it suggests that archery accidents may be rare, it isn't proof that they don't happen, only that you haven't seen one.

"Data," well, _good_ data, is information that has been systematically collected in a reliable way. Representative data is data that is good data that is an accurate analog for all of the data for a given subject. What you have is personal experience, which is extensive but it is not necessarily reliable or representative data for archery as a whole.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

OT:


Hutnicks said:


> Charles Leonard Harness does


A _ lawyer_ and sci-fi writer? I suppose it is still a step up from _cult leader_ and sci-fi writer... Well, his story _Flight into Yesterday_ has been compared to Alfred Bester's The Demolished Man and The Stars My Destination--and those were both pretty good.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> OT:
> 
> 
> A _ lawyer_ and sci-fi writer? I suppose it is still a step up from _cult leader_ and sci-fi writer... Well, his story _Flight into Yesterday_ has been compared to Alfred Bester's The Demolished Man and The Stars My Destination--and those were both pretty good.


He also wrote numerous short stories, one of which was about an inventor who created a machine which took incoherent rhetoric and distilled it into succinct readable wording, the result of which was the invention being bought out and shelved as it was too dangerous for the public to actually know what was being said. A hilarious read if ever you can find it (originally in Omni and Penthouse early 80's I think).


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> You missed my point of the fact that misfires aren't a safety issue. Arrows coming off the rest send the arrow down and a few feet to one side. Shots through a clicker end up on the bail or a few feet to one side low in the dirt. Broken handles generally give you a big lump on your forehead. Broken nocks spin the arrow around with little or no energy a few feet to one side or the other. Touching off a release while sky drawing is one of the most prevalent issues and again has no effect on folks to either side of that lane.


 I did not miss your point at all. A safety issue is a safety issue period, and they exist in other form's than you describe, some of which and ceretain nock breakages fall into this category as well, pose a danger to lateral objects.

Once again,

You missed my point of the fact that misfires aren't a safety issue.

Touching off a release while sky drawing is one of the most prevalent issues and again has no effect on folks to either side of that lane.


You see no irony at all here! Safety is safety, period.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

The fact of the matter is, no matter how you try to justify it, and no matter how "safe" you prove it is, this practice has potential risk.

But let's assume for one moment that the risk is minimal. Let's say that when shooting and pulling simultaneously, the benefits outweigh the risk involved, so you continue to do it.

There is still risk, because you cannot possibly account for every method of failure of a nock, arrows, limb, riser, plunger, clicker, rest, etc, not to mention the variable aspects that constitute the physical being of the person using the bow. There are far too many variables to measure to be 100% sure that this sort of accident cannot happen.

So, for that sake of your argument, for Coach1 and c3hammer, let's assume that it is 99.999% safe to do this. That's pretty good odds. Not even the military waits for odds that good before going in to battle.

So, that means that out of every 100,00 arrows loosed, there is the potential for 1 injury.

Now, let's say that one injury is a kid walking down there to retreive his arrows as his parents sit in the bleachers watching this practice session at this high level training center where they feel sure he'll get the best training possible.

Given the proportions of the human body, there is a good likelihood that arrows is going to go through a vital organ or into his head. He may not be dead, he may just be paralyzed for the rest of his life, or spend it hooked up to a ventilator, be missing an eye, or something equally as debilitating.

So, I would like to know, from those who defend this practice, and also from those who refuse to condemn it as well:

How will you explains to that little boy's parents the justification for putting their son at risk for the sake of saving 2 minutes of your precious coaching time?

And I would like to see these responses in plain English language. No double talk. It's simple. What will you say to Johnny's mom?

1 in a 1,000, 1 in 10,000, 1 in a million -- is still one human life.


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

> It's a virtual impossibility to shoot someone unless you are trying to.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pete


I'm sorry, that is one of the silliest things I have ever heard an experienced person say. 

Murphy has a law for a reason. There simply is no excuse for pulling/shooting at the same time. 

Shoot a dozen arrows, everyone retrieves. Shoot a dozen arrows, everyone retrieves. It isn't hard. It doesn't take that long to walk 180M, and if waiting for someone walking there increases your time spent at the range by 30 minutes then so be it. If you need to blank bale and just can't wait for someone to walk back and forth, go inside. Inconvience is no excuse to shirk safety rules. Shooting someone because they are slowing you down doesn't make any sense.

I honestly can't believe this conversation is even taking place. 

-Andrew


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

c3 makes a really good point, this isn't just a problem in the US for archery, it's a worldwide phenomenon for all the world's elite archers who shoot for their country and train all day and night. 

A story I recall is when the World Championships were in NYC, several countries came early to practice in Long Island at a public range, and they each divided the field into three, and walked up and back down the field as a team, as other countries continued to shoot in their respective space. The space in-between the countries were "safe" but to me I would need to be on opposites sides of a football field (160 feet) shooting downfield to feel semi safe and even then I would still follow the rules of the line that I've been taught since day one. 

There's only so many hours in a day I get that, time is limited. Still though it does send a pretty nasty message to young hopefuls that it's okay if they think they're at that level (and what youngster who is having a good day and can't miss hasn't felt that?). At the same time many of us who haven't been at that level find it scary / completely against everything we're taught at the very beginning about shooting and coaching in terms of safety. 

Maybe it's not the NAA we should be directing this conversation at, but FITA itself for allowing the practice, not that they could do anything to stop it of course.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

tedzpony said:


> The fact of the matter is, no matter how you try to justify it, and no matter how "safe" you prove it is, this practice has potential risk.


Everything has risk. Getting in your car to drive to the range, walking to school, drinking the water out of your tap, etc.......

We take risks every day. It's part of life. Most things we do every day are much more dangerous than someone blind bailing a few yards away from other pulling at 30m.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

c3hammer said:


> Everything has risk. Getting in your car to drive to the range, walking to school, drinking the water out of your tap, etc.......
> 
> We take risks every day. It's part of life. Most things we do every day are much more dangerous than someone blind bailing a few yards away from other pulling at 30m.
> 
> ...


Getting in your car, walking to school and drinking water don't usually involve sharp pointed objects traveling at high speeds. Risks may be part of life, but greater risks are part of a shorter life. If you choose to take greater risks, that is certainly up to you. The problem is when your choices negatively effect others that aren't given a choice. 

It is a game of numbers. The more risky things we do, the greater the probability that one of those things is going to harm us or someone else. Just because you can do it, doesn't mean you have to do it. Just because an accident hasn't happened doesn't mean that it won't ever happen.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

c3hammer said:


> I think the vast majority of target recurve archers will disagree with you on what is right or wrong here. It's not an issue of relativity, but factually what is safe practice on the range.


It looks to me that the vast majority of archers on this board agrees with me that this is a wrong and unsafe practice. And factually it is unsafe. You may be feeling safe in your little archery bubble, but the reality there are far more less skilled archers than you, shooting on the ranges.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

c3hammer said:


> Everything has risk. Getting in your car to drive to the range, walking to school, drinking the water out of your tap, etc.......
> 
> We take risks every day. It's part of life. Most things we do every day are much more dangerous than someone blind bailing a few yards away from other pulling at 30m.
> 
> ...


Pete, let me say first I respect what you have done as a shooter, thanks for your representation of this country.

But your statements are ludicrous. Your rational will eventually cost someone their life and most probably a child. You are a role model and children look up to you, yet as an example you model and dictate BAD advice. As adults are real job is to raise up the next generation and if everyone before it fudges on rules, valus and procedures than in no time it is a free for all.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

In order to call this more risky you have to show that there is actually a risk involved. You guys are either saying that the practice isn't done often or that there have been injuries from doing it. Neither of which is the case.

I can pretty easily substantiate that the practice has been done daily around the world for dozens of years. I can't substantiate a single injury from doing it. These numbers would suggest that there is little or no risk in this activity. Certainly much less risk than getting in your car, playing other sports or simply walking down the street.

I can show you some of the facts, you guys can only show me unfounded fear.

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

c3hammer said:


> In order to call this more risky you have to show that there is actually a risk involved. You guys are either saying that the practice isn't done often or that there have been injuries from doing it. Neither of which is the case.
> 
> I can pretty easily substantiate that the practice has been done daily around the world for dozens of years. I can't substantiate a single injury from doing it. These numbers would suggest that there is little or no risk in this activity. Certainly much less risk than getting in your car, playing other sports or simply walking down the street.
> 
> ...


The accident is probably not going to happen at an official "training center". The accident is going to happen at an amatuer range where someone less capable has seen "the elite" do it at a national event and therefore.... Probability dictates that it WILL happen. The more people that do it, the higher the probability. It is not a matter of IF, it is a matter of WHEN.


----------



## ewan (Aug 28, 2007)

I'm moving to Santa Monica next month... glad I encountered this topic before I got there, or I would have got quite a shock... If someone tried shooting whilst people were downrange here in the Republic of Ireland, they would face rather serious consequences. 

If everyone is behind the line, they can't get shot.

It's a simple rule, that works.

A 1350 archer can still encounter wind gusts, equipment failure. Hell, a failed fletch can make you miss the entire butt. 

Consider Balzhinima Tsyrempilov at a very windy European champs a while back - he missed the target at 70m in the final against Frangilli - it happens.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

c3hammer said:


> Everything has risk. Getting in your car to drive to the range, walking to school, drinking the water out of your tap, etc.......
> 
> We take risks every day. It's part of life. Most things we do every day are much more dangerous than someone blind bailing a few yards away from other pulling at 30m.
> 
> ...


Absolutely true, and I suspected you woould bring that back up again. The point is that, precisely because life is inherently dangerous, we need to take every precaution THAT WE CAN CONTROL, so that when one comes up which we CANNOT control, they do not compound on each other.

You CANNOT control when a nock might break, or a vane might rip off unexpectedly. Therefore, in order to mitigate the occurrence, you DO exercise control over where people are standing when it could potentially happen.

That's the point. Managing risk. You don't just fatalistically assume that everything is unsafe, so we might as well all do it. You try to control the ones you can control. For that matter, why don't you go play Russian Roulette? I'm not suggesting you should, but the point is that the game is dangerous. But so what? Life is inherently dangerous, so why not put a loaded gun to your head and pull the trigger?

And another point. We are talking about children here. This occured at a JOAD tournament. When a coach is entrusted with the lives of underage children, he DOES NOT have the option. He MUST make EVERY possible effort to protect them from themselves. I don't know if you're a parent, but from your comments I doubt it.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

c3hammer said:


> In order to call this more risky you have to show that there is actually a risk involved. You guys are either saying that the practice isn't done often or that there have been injuries from doing it. Neither of which is the case.
> {snip}
> I can show you some of the facts, you guys can only show me unfounded fear.
> 
> ...


I wish you wouldn't over-state your case. You don't actually know that there haven't been injuries, only that you haven't seen them and you haven't shown any "facts," only offered your conjecture and anecdotes. The fact may be that the "facts" have never been compiled. If you had them, who knows what would show up, you might even be able to show that you are more likely to be injured behind the shooting line by bow breakage than you are to be hit by an arrow down range. But you you don't have those facts--and neither does the other side of the argument, yet.

However, your default position is if you can't prove injuries then it is safe. However, it is also the case that some safety prinicples are just that, _principles_. Not walking down range while people are shooting is one of those principles and the advantages of instilling it in people in all shooting sports generally out weighs the disadvantages--like death and injury, and having to wait for people. In this case it is a principle which generally promotes safety, even if some can get away with breaking it under specialized circumstances.

To give relative risk arguments their due, it is true, I suspect, that you are far, far more likely to kill someone accidentally with your car than with your bow. One twitch and you've crossed into opposing traffic or mowed over the bike sharing the lane with you. One blink and you've run a red light and T-boned another car. To reduce those risks we have rules, like you can't pass on the other side of the road if their is a double yellow line and you can't go through a red light even after you have stopped and there are no other cars. In the latter example, you could run the light and go through the intersection with no risk, yet we don't because the general principle is sound and our lives depend on instilling the idea that you must stop at red lights and not run them. The principle of not crossing the shooting line while people are shooting has some similar implications.

One thing is clear, pulling while others are shooting is an unnecessary risk, even if you deem it a small one and one that is acceptable. I don't think, however, that kids should be taught to do everything adults do and this is one such case.


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

:zip:

I strongly agree with C3 Pete on this debate as well as some statements made by some others. 

What I strongly disagree with is the arrogant hijacking of this thread by those that can not agree with anyone on any subject. 

Give it a rest... Move on to another subject.


:zip:


Stan


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

ksarcher said:


> :zip:
> 
> I strongly agree with C3 Pete on this debate as well as some statements made by some others.
> 
> ...


KSArcher

I think there is good debate on the subject, your opinion included. If you don't like it, you certainly aren't being forced to read it. But don't try to make other's stop discussing it just because you don't like it. If it bothers you, follow your own recommendation, "Move on to another subject"


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ksarcher said:


> :zip:
> What I strongly disagree with is the arrogant hijacking of this thread by those that can not agree with anyone on any subject.
> 
> Give it a rest... Move on to another subject.


You are obviously entitled to such an opinion, but I'm always amused by people who feel the need to comment in a thread to say that _other people_ shouldn't be commenting in the thread.

BTW, I would disagree that the thread was hijacked, arrogantly or otherwise. Threads _evolve_ as issues come in to focus, just as you have proven by your own post which didn't refer to the OP in any way shape or form. So, as far as "hijacking" is concerned, you are just as much a part of it as anyone, more so, perhaps, because you act like you are above such things.

While I think there is one unnamed person I who think may come off as arrogant, I generally haven't had that opinion of the posters, not even c3hammer, who I disagree with but at least he's willing to take a side and argue without double talk.


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

ksarcher said:


> :zip:
> 
> I strongly agree with C3 Pete on this debate as well as some statements made by some others.
> 
> ...



CM JOAD is right. This is not arrogance, just common sense. To me it is a no-brainer. But is apparent, to others they just don't get it.

It has everything to do with integrity. The definition of integrity is, doing what is right even when others aren't watching.

The archery community and all it's bodies drive into us at an early age, safety, and not crossing that shooting line as long as an arrow is even loaded. Now our "elite" are telling our children that rules don't really matter, because it is not expedient, not convenient.

Like I said before, just because "everyone" is doing it, does not make it right.

And if this bothers you, then I'm talking to you.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

ksarcher said:


> :zip:
> 
> I strongly agree with C3 Pete on this debate as well as some statements made by some others.
> 
> ...


I think the only "arrogance" on this post is by the individuals that believe that this simple rule of safety doesn't pertain to them.

Some may think that arrogance and confidence are the same thing. Here is a simple difference. "Confidence is the belief that you have something to teach. Arrogance is the belief that you have nothing to learn."


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

Boy, i peeed on my shoe!!

Good points made.. I do agree that safety come first regardless of common practice at the training center or in SoCal. 

At least I got you guys off of Pete's back for a few minutes..

Stan


----------



## Jørgen (Oct 15, 2006)

I just want to say this... Once my arrow rest came loose when I let the arrow fly, and the arrow went flying to the left and hit a target to the left of the one I was aiming at. If someone had been there pulling arrows, they would surely have been dead or severely injured. I will not ever shoot my bow if everyone isn't at the line, and I will certainly not even think about going down to pull my arrows when someone else is shooting.


- Jørgen


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

ttt


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

CM JOAD said:


> ttt


_This_ thread needs a "ttt"?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> _This_ thread needs a "ttt"?


Why is that?:wink:


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

Hutnicks said:


> Why is that?:wink:


This is one of the few threads on which I have commented on that a few others have actually defended what I was saying. I kind of hate to see it go away.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Hutnicks said:


> Why is that?:wink:


OT:
You! You with the big innocent looking mouse eyes and the giant mouse Brain. This is all your fault--not the thread, no, the fact that I feel compelled to journey forth to that dark, dingy, messy Place, the overflowing Sci-Fantasy Bookstore. (I think people have died in there and haven't been found for weeks.) And why? To look up some obscure author known, in part, just for his obscurity!

Oh sure, I could blame my penchant for obscurity (does trad archery count?) or a compulsive nature, but no, I choose the much more satisfying and expedient path and blame **YOU** (and maybe CM JOAD, since we know every thing is CM JOAD's fault, especially unsafe archery.)

Curse your obscure and arcane knowledge! And its power of compulsion!

( :wink: - just incase I wasn't hyperbolic enough)


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> OT:
> You! You with the big innocent looking mouse eyes and the giant mouse Brain. This is all your fault--not the thread, no, the fact that I feel compelled to journey forth to that dark, dingy, messy Place, the overflowing Sci-Fantasy Bookstore. (I think people have died in there and haven't been found for weeks.) And why? To look up some obscure author known, in part, just for his obscurity!
> 
> Oh sure, I could blame my penchant for obscurity (does trad archery count?) or a compulsive nature, but no, I choose the much more satisfying and expedient path and blame **YOU** (and maybe CM JOAD, since we know every thing is CM JOAD's fault, especially unsafe archery.)
> ...


I'd suggest a copy of The Rose, its one of his best Oh aand for the topic police, I trust you shoot the Warbow Safely.

CMJoad gald youre finding us agreeable just please do not start a Poll Thread on this one


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Hutnicks said:


> I trust you shoot the Warbow Safely.


Thank you for your kind thoughts. But, please, don't think too highly of me. I think I'll go to Kinko's and have some life-sized targets printed up of people pulling arrows. I haven't figured out the scoring yet...


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> Thank you for your kind thoughts. But, please, don't think too highly of me. I think I'll go to Kinko's and have some life-sized targets printed up of people pulling arrows. I haven't figured out the scoring yet...


Never thought of it but they were tossing out mannekins at a closed shop the other day. This could be the "new 3d" :wink:


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Hutnicks said:


> Never thought of it but they were tossing out mannekins at a closed shop the other day. This could be the "new 3d" :wink:


Well, originally I was going to print up paper targets with armored Normans for Medieval and Robin Hood themed shooting, but I really didn't feel comfortable shooting images of people--but people who deliberately walk down range to pull arrows, well that's a different matter! They are knowingly taking an "acceptable risk!"


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> Well, originally I was going to print up paper targets with armored Normans for Medieval and Robin Hood themed shooting, but I really didn't feel comfortable shooting images of people--but people who deliberately walk down range to pull arrows, well that's a different matter! They are knowingly taking an "acceptable risk!"


Now there's one we didn't consider. They could be displaced reenacters who didn't get the word


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Well, I'm not _condoning_ the idea  , but here is what such a target might look like.

I had to add the warning text, lest someone like, er, **us**, see this out of context and go ballistic :wink: .

What I **wanted** to write on the target was "Go Ahead and Shoot! Pulling Arrows While You Shoot is an Acceptable Risk!" or "Don't Worry! There is Zero Chance You'll Hit Him!" or some such thing.


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Range re-design and So Cal bashing*

REGARDING RE-DESIGNING THE RANGE.

Warbow -You have a good point about range design, BUT....Woodley can't change the design, we can not stagger the butts. If we did that then we would not be able to hold FITA’s.

Tonight, I was shooting at 30 meters at Woodley and a Compound archer decided to shoot 90 in the next target butt. I stopped shooting and asked him to move over a few butts, which he did…. I was nice about it and he apologized and moved. 

TO THE PEOPLE BASHING SO CAL RANGES AND ARCHERS
All ranges have people who do unsafe things; I don’t care where you shoot. 
Woodley posts safety guidelines for shooting, which I have not seen at any of the ranges I have shot. I have shot at Discovery Park in Sacramento, a beautiful range with a similar set up to Woodley’s and I have had someone do exactly what you say happens in So Cal ranges. Yes it unsafe, but if you follow range safety and ask others to do so, usually they do with no problems.

I really think its very unfair to put down So Cal shooters and Woodley or anyone else.

If you think Woodley is unsafe or any range for that matter.
Then don’t shoot there. More room for me.:wink:

If archery is so unsafe, then maybe we should all have to take a safety class before we are allowed to shoot.....Oh wait....Woodley makes all new archers who shoot in our classes take one....


Tori Schroeder-Kaspert


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Archerycat said:


> REGARDING RE-DESIGNING THE RANGE.
> If archery is so unsafe, then maybe we should all have to take a safety class before we are allowed to shoot.....Oh wait....Woodley makes all new archers who shoot in our classes take one....


So, if it is ok to shoot past people and shoot when people are pulling arrows, what _do_ they teach in the safety class?

BTW, I think "bashing" may be a strong term. I don't think that disagreeing with someone is necessarily "bashing" them. I think people are arguing for what they feel is safe. I'm not sure how people can argue for change without somebody taking offense, but hopefully it can be done.

And, now for my more snarky response (which I do mean to be humorous rather than mean):


----------



## krfoss (Aug 25, 2006)

I agree with Archerycat

I have wanted to avoid replying to this thread for a while, however several comments and conversation turns have required a defense. 
I am not the best archer in the world. I have been shooting for just over a year. During that time I have shot almost exclusively at Woodley Park and have abided by its "dangerous" rules. When shooting at 90m, I do attempt to keep at least one bale between myself and the next archer just for safety, and perhaps a slight mistrust in my own shooting. Despite this mistrust, the worst shot has been off the bale one or two feet in either direction from 90m. Not too bad, and not killing someone on the next bale. 
I have shot at 18m while another archer has shot 70 or 90 next to me, however I know their abilities and know their worst shot is still better than my best. So based upon trust, I hazard the risk to save room for other archers. 
Archery is not a sport for children and a bow is not a toy. Any 3rd grader can admit that. That same child can agree that accidents do happen and people can get hurt by misfire and other general accidents. It can happen at Woodley, Discovery Park, or the OTC. Archery is sport of weaponry and dangers are blatant, but it is the risk we all take when shooting.
The origin of this post was regarding an unsafe coach. I do not know the man or woman in question, but as a Level 2 coach I am taking the precautions toward safety. The "unsafe" coach should be reprimanded, and steps are being taken to ensure this. After speaking with the author of this thread in person, she has agreed that the thread's question was answered in full, yet the discussion has taken an accusatory turn and is not answering the thread's question further nor providing any other positive feedback. 
As a Woodley Park Archer, I am proud of my range and will continue to be so until I lose interest in the sport. I will work to ensure safety at my range and only hope others do likewise that their range.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

krfoss said:


> I agree with Archerycat
> 
> Archery is not a sport for children


Well, I'd say it is a sport for children, teenagers and adults, but perhaps you mean un-attended children.



krfoss said:


> The origin of this post was regarding an unsafe coach...After speaking with the author of this thread in person, she has agreed that the thread's question was answered in full, yet the discussion has taken an accusatory turn and is not answering the thread's question further nor providing any other positive feedback.


If her question has been answered in full, then I'd hope that is a good thing and no additional "positive feedback" is necessary.

BTW, one of her complaints was that the Level 3 coach "doesn’t even know the whistle system and he is a level 3." Why would he need to know the whistle system? The whistle system is for starting and stopping shooting so archers can pull arrows safely. If it is safe to pull and shoot at the same time, then there is no reason to use the whistle system, except, perhaps the 5 blasts for extreme circumstances.

Now, as to 'positive feedback,' you may mean positive feedback to the OP or you may mean it in general. If the latter, I think the safety fanatics would argue that the suggestions to pull only when shooting has stopped _are positive feedback_. Just because someone may disagree with a suggestion doesn't mean it isn't positive feed back or constructive criticism. And constructive criticism generally means criticism which includes suggestions for improvement, and the suggestion is to stop shooting before pulling is a suggestion for improvement.

As for "accusatory," well I'd ask how can one argue for change without the status quo being offended? One can say that politeness is key, but ultimately people who are for the status quo want deference rather than a challenge and there may be no way to suggest that change might be a good idea without some offense being taken.

The argument for safety and change can be seen from several perspectives. I can see the arguments for the status quo. At the moment, I tend to disagree with them, but I do understand them.

So, what would you suggest for those of us who disagree with the current standards? Is any vigorous argument for extra safety going to be seen as "accusatory" and "bashing?" Or can it be seen as what it is, a vigorous debate with safety as a laudable goal?

As for accusations, I don't think I've done so except to demonstrate that a certain person's statements were consistently self-contradictory and not plainly spoken. The facts, I think, clearly and soundly back those conclusions. To let such blatant prevaricating stand unchallenged would be to condone a very low standard of discourse from people who should be held to a high standard (as we all should)--and it would have been unfair to CM JOAD, who had, IMO, been unfairly maligned.



krfoss said:


> As a Woodley Park Archer, I am proud of my range and will continue to be so until I lose interest in the sport. I will work to ensure safety at my range and only hope others do likewise that their range.


I don't think anyone has suggested that you should not be proud of Woodley Park. I am curious, though, to know what you will do to ensure safety at the range?


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

krfoss said:


> Archery is not a sport for children...


I guess we should explain that to:

JOAD
The Boy Scouts
The Girl Scouts
All the 4-H Clubs
National Archery in Schools Program
All the bow manufacturers that make equipment for ages 6 and up
All the fathers who take their boys hunting with them

You know, in some places, boys get their first gun before they're 10. Used to be back in the old days every boy living out on a farm would have one younger than that. Was that unsafe? No, because they were taught early and often the importance of safety and proper handling of weapons.

There's no difference here, except that some people seem to have decided they are *so good* and their time *so important* that those rules no longer apply to them.

It was shown in a much earlier post that the NAA already has a rule in place governing this, and that those people who pull while others are shooting are in violation. It was also suggested that the rule was outdated and would probably be changed soon.

So, how about this for an idea? In the meantime, why don't we set the proper example for everyone involved in the sport, and especially the younger ones, by following the established rules. Whether you like them or not, even if you don't agree and you think it's inconvenient. I'm pretty sure on the application for NAA membership you agreed to abide by all the rules of the organization. That's what your signature means. If you fail to do so, you're breaking your word.

Even if you think it's safe to break the rules, it's not good practice to go around breaking every rule that you don't agree with, and it's not something we should be teaching the younger members of the sport. I don't get to drive 100 on the freeway just because I have a fast car and I think it's safe to do so.

If there is a rule in place by the official sanctioning body, doesn't it seem we should all be following it until such time as *they* see fit to change it?


----------



## ewan (Aug 28, 2007)

Warbow said:


> Thank you for your kind thoughts. But, please, don't think too highly of me. I think I'll go to Kinko's and have some life-sized targets printed up of people pulling arrows. I haven't figured out the scoring yet...



I wonder could I get it done up on a t-shirt..


----------



## Paradoxical Cat (Apr 25, 2006)

tedzpony said:


> If there is a rule in place by the official sanctioning body, doesn't it seem we should all be following it until such time as *they* see fit to change it?


To clarify: there is no rule governing ranges. There is a rule governing tournaments. The rule so helpfully misrepresented is from the Guidelines/Rules for tournaments which are run under NAA aegis. They have nothing to do with private or public ranges that are not holding an NAA event.

So there is no reason for a range to follow that particular rule during non-tournament operations, other than they consider it a good safe practice.

Personally, I think you can set up a range that is safe to allow longer distance archers to pull while other are shooting and vice versa. It's a matter of safety lanes and target spacing. Clearly an arrow shot out to 90 meters has a much higher trajectory than one shot to 20. Of course, I would never want to be pulling at 90 when the person next to me is shooting 70 (or vice versa), but a properly set up range would avoid that. This is also, to be sure, an ideal situation and may not be proper for all ranges or spacing.

Now as for bringing up unsafe activities at tournaments, if you see something then you should always say something. There are tournament officials who are responsible for making sure everyone is shooting safely. If you are not willing to speak, then you should not complain about it later on a public forum, but rather bring it up with the NAA itself. To do otherwise is as empty and self-serving as saying "I saw that coming" at the scene of an accident. And if you didn't know what to say, you didn't know what you saw.

Safety on a range is all of our responsibility. This is doubly true when children are shooting.

PC-


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

krfoss said:


> When shooting at 90m, I do attempt to keep at least one bale between myself and the next archer just for safety, and perhaps a slight mistrust in my own shooting. Despite this mistrust, the worst shot has been off the bale one or two feet in either direction from 90m. Not too bad, and not killing someone on the next bale.
> I have shot at 18m while another archer has shot 70 or 90 next to me, however I know their abilities and know their worst shot is still better than my best. So based upon trust, I hazard the risk to save room for other archers.
> 
> Archery is not a sport for children and a bow is not a toy.


Wow. I mean just wow. This is exactly the behavior this whole thread is talking about though. Archery IS a sport to teach children. I've had 6 year olds behave and learn range rules much better than some 13 year olds. A bow is NOT a toy. Yes. But that doesn't mean children shouldn't be able to learn archery. I mean that's the whole point of learning a sport, teaching it to our young to continue the tradition. 

I've accidentally aimed at the wrong target butt, I've had arrow rests fail / arrows come off a rest and take arrows clear 3 lanes over and way over what I was aiming for. I mean if that happens for a lefty and right, the arrow is going to go in completely different directions. Things like this happen all the time. One bale or two or even three is not enough IMO. You need to be clear on the other side of a large field to feel even remotely safe and even then I wouldn't trust it.


----------



## hkim823 (Oct 6, 2004)

Paradoxical Cat said:


> Personally, I think you can set up a range that is safe to allow longer distance archers to pull while other are shooting and vice versa. It's a matter of safety lanes and target spacing. Clearly an arrow shot out to 90 meters has a much higher trajectory than one shot to 20. Of course, I would never want to be pulling at 90 when the person next to me is shooting 70 (or vice versa), but a properly set up range would avoid that. This is also, to be sure, an ideal situation and may not be proper for all ranges or spacing.


I just don't see how this is possible with the chance that arrows fall of rests / rests can fail / strings can break / left and right archers on the same field. 

It's not that I don't trust archers to do the right thing, but equipment does fail and break.


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Whistle system and pulling arrows*



Warbow said:


> Well, I'd say it is a sport for children, teenagers and adults, but perhaps you mean un-attended children.
> 
> I believe that is what he is saying. Un-attended children on a range is problem. But usually the people who don't follow the rules are adults.
> 
> ...


 I have only posted a few times on Archery Talk, and I have only read periodiclly. But the thing I have relized...There are a lot of people who don't read the whole post, they jump on one point and they take it out of Contexts. This comment is for several peopel not just Warbow.[/COLOR]


----------



## Paradoxical Cat (Apr 25, 2006)

hkim823 said:


> I just don't see how this is possible with the chance that arrows fall of rests / rests can fail / strings can break / left and right archers on the same field.
> 
> It's not that I don't trust archers to do the right thing, but equipment does fail and break.


A proper range with safety lanes between the distances will be safe. What it means is that the 90m shooters collect together, as do the 20, etc. In that situation, with a 10 meter separation (30+ feet mind you) between distance groups, it is unlikely that someone shooting (properly) at 20 meters would put an arrow out to 90. (If they are sky-drawing...well, bets are off...but someone should be speaking to them anyway about a truly unsafe practice.) In that situation, I think the risk of being hit by flying bow parts or a sideways flying arrow are probably equal. As I said, however, this is an ideal situation, and not necessarily realistic at all ranges.

I understand that what is being described here is per butt collection, and each archer collecting as they will...but again, if you can put 10 meters around a butt...it shouldn't be an issue. After all, the NAA has mandated a 10 meter safety lane tournaments (20 meters for spectators), and those lanes must have been decided on for a reason.

Of course, at an uncontrolled range it comes down to common sense. I wouldn't walk while other archers are shooting at a very crowded range or at a range where people are clearly fooling around. Nor would I walk while other archers are shooting if the butts are too close together. That's common sense.

Yes, things break, people space-out, and stuff happens, but there is a point where the chances of being hurt in the "safe-zone" and in the "danger-zone" equal out. Again, these are ideal situations and may not be possible to set up in all ranges.

PC-


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

From the wikipedia definition...


> Safety is the state of being "safe" (from French sauf), the condition of being protected against physical, social, spiritual, financial, political, emotional, occupational, psychological, educational or other types or consequences of failure, damage, error, accidents, harm or any other event which could be considered non-desirable.


I'm not a top level shooter, but I can hold my own. Last year while shooting 70M I was in the middle of letting down and bumped my release the wrong way. While my bow was still pointed at the target, it was in a half drawn position when the bow fired it torqued a great amount. This sent an arrow to the right of my intended target, WAY right and it struck a bale that was at 30M. This is the only time in my life I have ever put one that far off left or right. 

Target shooters with blade rests have arrows fall off the rests when drawing pretty regularly. If a release fails at this time, the arrow is NOT going to go anywhere near the intended target.

Last year during leages at my club, a shooters trigger release flat out came apart when he was about 3/4 drawn. He busted his face pretty good and the arrow flew WAY off course. Not 1 or 2 feet off.

These are incidents I have seen just in the last couple of years. If people had been downrange during these incidents, they would have stood a good chance of being shot. Look at the walls of any indoor range. You will find lots of holes in the ceiling, but you will also find SOME in the walls. Please don't pretend that being downrange is "safe", you are not protected. It is risky, it is an unneeded risk. It is irresponsible to teach this behavior to others, especially the more impressionable types. It is irresponsible to have a range that condones this type of behavior. Speeding up your practice time isn't a reason to introduce this risk.

Consider a construction site, there are a lot of shortcuts they could take to reduce costs or speed up jobs. When you find a crew that takes those shortcuts, eventually someone gets seriously injured or dies. It isn't worth it.

I'd hope you seriously consider this because even if I disagree with you, I wouldn't want any of you to get shot.

-Andrew


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Well I just don't bloody get it! Now we are talking about changing ranges to accommodate this behavior. About rules being for tournaments and not ranges per se. What is the crying need for this practice, what is the be all end all benefit you proponents of pulling while shooting seem to be getting that the folks who wait for an all clear do not.


----------



## Paradoxical Cat (Apr 25, 2006)

Hutnicks said:


> Well I just don't bloody get it! Now we are talking about changing ranges to accommodate this behavior. About rules being for tournaments and not ranges per se. What is the crying need for this practice, what is the be all end all benefit you proponents of pulling while shooting seem to be getting that the folks who wait for an all clear do not.


It largely seems to arise when you have short and long range lanes at the same range. I think it is largely an expedience issue, whereby the 20 meter folks don't have to wait for the 90 meter folks to get back to the line. My guess is that Chula Vista, it arose because coaching time is precious, so archers want to shoot as much as possible. And from the 90 meter end of things, I have had to wait for 20 meter people to get back to the line, after shooting their 5 or 6, so I can finish my dozen. If there were sufficient separation (which there isn't at my outdoor range), it would not be a problem.

Again, you could set up a range where the long distances are sufficiently separated from the shorter, so that they wouldn't interfere. You'd just collect with your distance group. It would be far safer.

PC-


----------



## djhohmann (Nov 4, 2005)

*It's Negligent*

It’s time for Woodley archers (and those “supporting” unsafe practices) to have a reality check.

The bow and arrow is classified as a deadly weapon. 

Laws for the proper use of deadly weapons exist in every jurisdiction. 

Organizations such as the NAA, National Shooting Sports, the NRA, the National Association of Shooting Ranges, etc. publish safety rules for target ranges. 

To paraphrase one of these rules is that it’s “unsafe” to shoot when a person is downrange. 

The requirement on every range should be that no one is shooting past or while someone is downrange. This requires that everyone shooting be on the same line. It requires that everyone retrieve their arrows at the same time, etc.

To do otherwise is Negligence and the negligent person would be legally responsible for any harm resulting from their “unsafe” practice. 

Further, because the practice is negligent, the cops, when called will probably issue a summons or a fine – because the practice is against the law.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Archerycat said:


> Just to make something clear, The problem with the guy who did not know the whisle system. He was trying to coach in a class of mostly kids on our short range. There were 40 people who were shooting on our 18 meter range. During a class NO ONE is permitted to pull arrows while someone is shooting. Most of the complaints I believe is on our long range, which is open shooting.
> {SNIP}
> I have only posted a few times on Archery Talk, and I have only read periodiclly. But the thing I have relized...There are a lot of people who don't read the whole post, they jump on one point and they take it out of Contexts. This comment is for several peopel not just Warbow.


I admit that there have been times when I haven't read a post fully or a thread fully and misunderstood the issues and written a post that didn't makes sense. I don't think this is one of those times.

Archerycat, the reason I pulled your concern about Level 3 Coaches lack of knowledge of the whistle system was several fold, including addressing krfoss's point about how this thread has dealt with your OP.

The issue of the whistle system was not taken out of context by me. Your OP _never mentioned the context_ in which the coach didn't use the system. Additionally, people who have been suggesting that pulling arrows on an live range is safe have generally been making that claim broadly and without qualification, except as regards to bale separation. That is, they haven't said it's safe for adult tournaments but not JOAD tournaments, or its safe for tournaments but not practice ranges. So, given that people have just argued that pulling arrows on a hot range is always safe, your concern about a coach not knowing the whistle system showed that at some point you had a concern about people pulling arrows on hot range--which seemed odd in retrospect since you now seem put out by all of those who arguing in favor of extra safety.

So, now it is finally revealed, 4 pages later, that pulling arrows on a hot range is not safe--but only during classes. Pulling during practice at ranges and tournaments is fine but not classes.

Once again, I'm not saying you can't justify the distinction--I think you can--but it is one that would have clarified your position and concerns if you had mentioned it earlier.

That being said, just as you can argue in favor of such a distinction, I can, and do, argue that if "hot pulling" is bad for a class then perhaps it is bad in other circumstances?

(Also, I do see you point about not being able to stagger butts because of FIRA. Clearly that is an issue I don't have an answer for! Er, at the moment.)


----------



## dgardner (Aug 24, 2007)

My 2 cents

I want to start by informing all of you I am a coach at Woodley Park. I am also a level 2 instructor. There was a comment made why should a level 3 need to know the whistle system? The answer is really simple 1) It is a basic safety skill learned during a level 1 class. 2) The whistle system is used while shooting at a tournament and at beginner classes.

The Woodley Park range is set up for 90 meters; we have 11 bales to shoot at. When I go to the range with my 11 year old son, we carefully choose our bale to shoot at. As pointed out by archerycat, we either choose a bale next to someone who is shooting the same distance or if someone comes up to shoot after we have been there we ask them to move over. The rule of thumb is to leave one empty bale between you and the archer next to you if you are going to be shooting different distances. This might not be the case all the time. Sometime you have to really know the person shooting next to you is a good archer as pointed out by krfoss. On a Saturday morning the range can become busy, we do the best to ensure safety, however being a public range we can not tell someone they are NEVER permitted to shoot there. 

Just so all of you know ksfoss is a JOAD coach. I might be speaking out of turn for him here, but I think the “archery is not for kids” has been taken out of context. It is for kids, under adult supervision and not just any adult. If the child’s parents do not understand the safety rules then they child should not be bringing their children to shoot on a range without the child’s coach.

I think parents need to be more involved with their children in regards to archery. Would you let your child go to the gun range if you did not understand the safety rules. If the answer is yes then you have a serious problem. 

If archery is so dangerous then why can any idiot walk into an archery store purchase archery equipment and take it to the range. I am not saying archery is not dangerous, maybe equipment should not be sold to just anyone. At WPA we have all of our beginners take a safety course. 

Della


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

dgardner said:


> My 2 cents
> 
> I want to start by informing all of you I am a coach at Woodley Park. I am also a level 2 instructor. There was a comment made why should a level 3 need to know the whistle system? The answer is really simple 1) It is a basic safety skill learned during a level 1 class. 2) The whistle system is used while shooting at a tournament and at beginner classes.
> 
> ...


Well, it sounds like there are some nice people and good coaches at Woodley.

I should point out that my question "why should a level three coach know the whistle system" was a rhetorical one to point out that even NAA basic instruction includes range control for arrow pulling and that even some advocates of "hot pulling" actually have limits on this practice that they had left completely unmentioned. Your point that it is used in beginner classes and tournaments is a good clarification of how people at Woodley probably consider the proper context for the whistle system. 


dgardner said:


> If archery is so dangerous then why can any idiot walk into an archery store purchase archery equipment and take it to the range.


I'm afraid that is a bit of a non-sequiter. All manner of deadly broadheads that can bring down moose and bear are sold without regulation, but I don't think that speaks to their safety when you are on the pointy side of the arrow.


dgardner said:


> Just so all of you know ksfoss is a JOAD coach. I might be speaking out of turn for him here, but I think the “archery is not for kids” has been taken out of context.


I'm not sure it was taken out of context so much as _written_ out of context. It is an odd remark for a JOAD coach to have written without some sort of explanation. Your explanation makes sense, but it is, perhaps, what ksfoss should have written but didn't.

I must admit, that I'm becoming intrigued by the Woodley safety course. This is the 3d time it has come up. I'd love to see the sylabus.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Paradoxical Cat said:


> It largely seems to arise when you have short and long range lanes at the same range. I think it is largely an expedience issue, whereby the 20 meter folks don't have to wait for the 90 meter folks to get back to the line. My guess is that Chula Vista, it arose because coaching time is precious, so archers want to shoot as much as possible. And from the 90 meter end of things, I have had to wait for 20 meter people to get back to the line, after shooting their 5 or 6, so I can finish my dozen. If there were sufficient separation (which there isn't at my outdoor range), it would not be a problem.
> 
> Again, you could set up a range where the long distances are sufficiently separated from the shorter, so that they wouldn't interfere. You'd just collect with your distance group. It would be far safer.
> 
> PC-


Hmmm Expedience, that age old breeding ground of the accident. Are archers that impatient. Ive RSO'd at ranges where pistol and benchrest shooters shot at the same time and no pistolero ever griped about having to wait for the BR guys to make the walk back.


----------



## ShakesTheClown (Jan 25, 2003)

I've been fortunate enough in my travels to shoot at Woodley Park and several other ranges in California inculding Redwood Bowmen in Oakland.

Woodley Park is similar to ranges at Discovery Park in Sacramento, Eldorado Park in Long Beach and Mile Square Park in Orange County.

They are all open to the public, unsupervised, use at your own risk.

It's my understanding that Woodley Park Archers uses the facility to host qualifiers and run a JOAD program but they are not responsible for the day to day operation or enforcement of the safety rules. There are clubs that do the same thing at Discovery and Eldorado.

These ranges are a combination of practice range and FITA field, thus the staggered target thing wouldn't work. You have to have room to set-up targets out to 90M to run the qualifiers.

Redwood Bowmen is somewhat unique. First, they are an NFAA club and have no interest in hosting a FITA tournament and wouldn't have the room if they did. Their practice range is just that...a practice range, with targets out to 60yards, as I recall. The main difference, however, is that Redwood Bowmen leases the range from the park and they are responsible for the maintenance and operation of the range so they do have quite a bit of control over what goes on at their range. That being said, even they don't have the right to remove someone from their range...that only a park ranger can do.

I don't know how long Woodley has been around but Discovery Park was built during the early '80's and Eldorado was the site for the '84 Olympic archery. They really have a very good safety record. I'm careful, but comfortable shooting all of them. They are also very good for archery, particularly FITA/Olympic archery but also bowhunters and recreational shooters of all types. It's a shame that more communities don't have public ranges like these.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Hutnicks said:


> > Originally Posted by Paradoxical Cat
> > Again, you could set up a range where the long distances are sufficiently separated from the shorter, so that they wouldn't interfere. You'd just collect with your distance group. It would be far safer.
> >
> > PC-
> ...


At least PC has proposed a good idea, segregating the long and short practice ranges to create a design that may naturally encourage safety. I guess, to some extent, that already exists in the form of the 20 yard phonebook backstop, though apparently people shoot from 10 and 20 at the same time.

Your mention of being a Range Safety Officer suggests what may be a common thread. Those of us who also shoot firearms at ranges are, perhaps, more shocked by the practice of "hot pulling" since it stands in contrast to inviolable rules of firearms safety.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ShakesTheClown said:


> Redwood Bowmen is somewhat unique. First, they are an NFAA club and have no interest in hosting a FITA tournament and wouldn't have the room if they did. Their practice range is just that...a practice range, with targets out to 60yards, as I recall. The main difference, however, is that Redwood Bowmen leases the range from the park and they are responsible for the maintenance and operation of the range so they do have quite a bit of control over what goes on at their range. That being said, even they don't have the right to remove someone from their range...that only a park ranger can do.


Actually, the Redwood Bowmen's general set up is common in the Bay area. Staggered butts are the norm for practice ranges at field archery courses and there are a number of archery clubs set up in public park land in the area, including Briones in Orinda, Bowhunters Unlimited in the South Bay, San Francisco Archers in Pacifica and Santa Cruz Archers.

FITA ranges are the exception rather than the norm. Increasingly, this debate seems to be a culture clash as much as anything.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

dgardner said:


> If archery is so dangerous then why can any idiot walk into an archery store purchase archery equipment and take it to the range. I am not saying archery is not dangerous, maybe equipment should not be sold to just anyone.
> Della


Any idiot can walk into a Wallmart and purchase a rifle or shot gun if he has a clean record, a driver's license and a body temperature over ambient.

If I was a Woodley Archer, I think I would have a member present on the range acting as range master and keeping an eye on the bowhunters who march up to the butts next to the guys shooing 90 meters and assigning butts based on expertise and distance. I might even have targets for sale and ask for club donations.

You may argue that it's a public park..yada yada yada... but our club is in a public park but we control it. We have a member on duty over the weekends and all non members learn about when they can pull and where they can stand to be safe. 

Woodley is a scary place. What will be the reprecussions when an archer finally gets shot? At least you guys are not shooting broadheads!

Cya!


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bdca said:


> What will be the reprecussions when an archer finally gets shot?


Well, hopefully we are concerned about protecting people but another reason to be concerned is to preserve our archery ranges and archery club's rights to self-regulate on these public park based ranges.

I'm frankly amazed that in this paranoid day and age that we still have open access archery ranges in public parks! I'd like that to continue. It may only take one tragic injury for the range to be shut down or over-regulated--especially when other interest groups are often salivating for access to prime park land. It is in every archer's interest to prevent such a thing from happening.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> At least PC has proposed a good idea, segregating the long and short practice ranges to create a design that may naturally encourage safety. I guess, to some extent, that already exists in the form of the 20 yard phonebook backstop, though apparently people shoot from 10 and 20 at the same time.
> 
> Your mention of being a Range Safety Officer suggests what may be a common thread. Those of us who also shoot firearms at ranges are, perhaps, more shocked by the practice of "hot pulling" since it stands in contrast to inviolable rules of firearms safety.


Interestingly enough the safety practice is ridigly adhered to even on an airgun range where the risk to life is absolutely minimal.


----------



## dgardner (Aug 24, 2007)

bdca said:


> Any idiot can walk into a Wallmart and purchase a rifle or shot gun if he has a clean record, a driver's license and a body temperature over ambient.
> 
> If I was a Woodley Archer, I think I would have a member present on the range acting as range master and keeping an eye on the bowhunters who march up to the butts next to the guys shooing 90 meters and assigning butts based on expertise and distance. I might even have targets for sale and ask for club donations.
> 
> ...


In the state of California you must pass a fire arms safety course before you purchase a gun. You are incorrect in you statement about being able to buy a gun. 

I am glad you have people who dont have to work and can afford to sit at your range to police it, however this is not the case at Woodley.

I personally think if you dont like our range then dont shoot there.


----------



## dgardner (Aug 24, 2007)

bdca,

Are you a field shooter?

Della


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

dgardner said:


> In the state of California you must pass a fire arms safety course before you purchase a gun. You are incorrect in you statement about being able to buy a gun.


To the best of my knowledge, your correction is false.

California _does not_ require any cert for long gun purchases, which is _precisely_ the example given by bdca:
"Any idiot can walk into a Wallmart and purchase a _rifle_ or _shot gun_ if he has a clean record, a driver's license and a body temperature over ambient." {emphasis mine}

I suspect that bdca knew precisely what they were saying when they chose the specifics in the example.

As for _handgun_ purchases, two simple tests are required in CA: the Handgun Safety Certificate--a multiple choice test*--and the Safe Handling Demonstration. Neither requires a safety course or firing of the weapon and both can be administered by participating gun stores. There are Handgun Safety Certificate courses, but those are just to facilitate learning and passing the test--they are not required. Gun buyers can study the free PDF or buy a subsidized training video for $5 from gun dealers.



dgardner said:


> I personally think if you dont like our range then dont shoot there.


While I think there is merit to the idea that people should remove themselves to from situations they feel are dangerous, I think there is also a danger in the "lump it or leave it" attitude. Someone could say the same thing about any possibly dangerous practice, "if you don't like it, get out," but I think that is a false dichotomy.

Like it or not, Woodley is a public range and members of the public have a right, if not an obligation, to speak out when they think something unsafe may be occurring. I don't think that turning a blind eye is necessarily the best idea.

One of the biggest dangers to safety can be "group think." Humans are social creatures and we tend to want to go along to get along. The culture clash represented in this thread may be related to such a kind of thinking, as may be the insular reactions of people who practice "hot pulling." Once again, I think you can make a case that the risk is acceptable, I'm merely arguing that there are reasons that it may not be.


*You need to get 23 out of 30 right, or about 3 out of 4.


----------



## dgardner (Aug 24, 2007)

I never asked him to turn a blind eye nor would I ever do that. 

bdca only shot at woodley once, who was the person who told this is the way it is always done, was the person a first time shooter at the range and speaking out of turn?

If the range is so unsafe then why do we have people from other places coming to our range to shoot?

Without having a conversation with the person who was shooting next to him at the other distance, how does he know this person was an experienced shooter?

There are a lot question that seem to be unanswered and alot WPA / So Cal bashing going on. 

If you want to talk about safety that is one thing, but to simply BASH and that is what is going on (with a few select people) then I think before all of you should come to range and talk to someone who is a coach there to see how it really is run and stop talking out of turn.

Della


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

dgardner said:


> The Woodley Park range is set up for 90 meters; we have 11 bales to shoot at. When I go to the range with my 11 year old son, we carefully choose our bale to shoot at. As pointed out by archerycat, we either choose a bale next to someone who is shooting the same distance or if someone comes up to shoot after we have been there we ask them to move over. The rule of thumb is to leave one empty bale between you and the archer next to you if you are going to be shooting different distances. This might not be the case all the time. Sometime you have to really know the person shooting next to you is a good archer as pointed out by krfoss. On a Saturday morning the range can become busy, we do the best to ensure safety, however being a public range we can not tell someone they are NEVER permitted to shoot there.


Being a public range is *all the more reason* to enforce strict safety rules. 

You have no idea of the skill level of someone next to you. What happens if you are walking back from 50M and someone stands on the next lane and starts firing them downrange from 90M? It is common practice at this range it sounds like, so what is the problem? 

Sure, you can ask them to move down a lane or two next end, but in the meantime you still have someone of questionable skill shooting downrange next to you.

This isn't safe, and is just a matter of time before someone gets shot. The chances may be slim, but the consequences are VERY high. The equation doesn't balance.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

dgardner said:


> If you want to talk about safety that is one thing, but to simply BASH and that is what is going on (with a few select people) then I think before all of you should come to range and talk to someone who is a coach there to see how it really is run and stop talking out of turn.
> 
> Della


I'd like to think that my posts in this thread have generally been fairly rational, even handed and, at times, conciliatory.

You keep mentioning "BASHING." If I have unfairly done so, please point out where that is so that I may respond. Otherwise, I'd consider un-cited, non-specific allegations of "BASHING" to be, well, nothing but "bashing."

As to talking out of turn, I hope I haven't done so. But even you have found how easy it is to make mistakes in comments, as when you attempted to set bdca straight on California gun laws, so it might behoove one to be prudent when talking down to people about "BASHING" lest one find ones self defending charges of the same, only against a more clear cut and easily cited example.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

What I think most of us would really like to see is this: From one of the people who support the practice of "hot pulling," as we have now designated it, please give us a concise explanation of why you feel this is safe and worth the risk. And please make it something more substantial than "that's how it's done at training centers all over the world."

So far we have seen numerous posts from experienced shooters who can attest first-hand to accidents that have sent arrows into butts at least one over from where it was intended. Also, we have seen defenses of "hot pulling" that claim it is not even risky because such an accident "is an impossibility." This has now been roundly refuted.

Thus far, the only standing argument in favor of this practice seems to be expedience - that coaching time is valuable. Now, considering the aforementioned, personally-cited potential mishaps, can we please see a solid, well-thought-out defense of this practice?


----------



## ShakesTheClown (Jan 25, 2003)

Warbow, you are correct. The configuration at Redwood is not uncommon in the bay area. Are you sure that all of the ranges you mentioned are open to the public? I know that Pacifica is, I've shot there. I'm not sure about the others.

Regardless, all of the clubs you mentioned are NFAA clubs with practice ranges and field archery ranges. A different animal. The longest target on any of those practice ranges is not over 60-65 yards. Half of the arrows in an adult FITA round are shot at 60M and beyond. OR rounds are contested at 70M. None of the ranges you mentioned are good training ranges for FITA shooters or are capable of hosting a FITA qualifier.

Which one of the clubs do you belong to, btw?

So, instead of ripping Woodley Park, tell me, where and how do all of you people practice and train for FITA events? This is, afterall, the FITA forum you do all shoot FITA's from time to time, right?


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

tedzpony said:


> What I think most of us would really like to see is this: From one of the people who support the practice of "hot pulling," as we have now designated it, please give us a concise explanation of why you feel this is safe and worth the risk. And please make it something more substantial than "that's how it's done at training centers all over the world."
> 
> So far we have seen numerous posts from experienced shooters who can attest first-hand to accidents that have sent arrows into butts at least one over from where it was intended. Also, we have seen defenses of "hot pulling" that claim it is not even risky because such an accident "is an impossibility." This has now been roundly refuted.
> 
> Thus far, the only standing argument in favor of this practice seems to be expedience - that coaching time is valuable. Now, considering the aforementioned, personally-cited potential mishaps, can we please see a solid, well-thought-out defense of this practice?



I think I asked that already, the silence is deafining


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ShakesTheClown said:


> So, instead of ripping Woodley Park, tell me, where and how do all of you people practice and train for FITA events? This is, afterall, the FITA forum you do all shoot FITA's from time to time, right?


We don't all have the luxury of practicing at FITA ranges! GG park, I believe, is the only local range that has a 100 yard target over level ground.

If I really wanted to be serious about FITA I'd have to move to Sacramento. I'm afraid I'm not_ that _dedicated.

Second, and this is important, **all** archers share the public ranges, so this isn't some in-house FITA-only issue! Especially since it is likely that it is FITA shooters that are shooting past people back from the 90M. As Coach1 said, safety is everybody's business :wink:

I once again note the use of pejorative terms to characterize those arguing for higher safety standards. How dare we. Apparently, we are "accusers," "bashers," "speakers out of turn," and now I'm just "ripping" Woodley Park. Don't we know that advocating for anything other than the status quo is "bashing" and "speaking out of turn?" We should just go back to Shooting Sports Safety Land, where we came from, and leave the poor, besieged Woodley people alone. [/sarcasm]

Is it possible to argue for safe practices without being called names?

Remember what Coach1 says, "if you don't speakup and attempt to prevent a potential problem BEFORE it gets serious YOU ARE EVERY BIT AS GUILTY OF CAUSING THE PROBELM AS THOSE DIRECTLY INVOLVED." So, obviously we have to say something. Otherwise not only will the problem be our fault, Coach1 will get on our case.

Saying that people are "ripping" Woodley Park implies that they have no arguable point. I think it is rather clear that there _is_ an arguable point.

Ripping and bashing would be more like, "Woodley Park sucks eggs" or "Woodley Park--they shoot puppies!"--you know, things that have no basis in reality or an arguable point. But nobody is saying any such things.

Now it seems that I should visit "talk to someone who is a coach there to see how it really is run" so that I can learn to understand how safe it is to have somebody shoot past me from 90, or how safe it is to "hot pull."

It seems to frustrate some that I, and others, haven't just come around to the Woodley way of thinking as we rightfully should. Well, sorry, I'm an independent thinker, a contrarian sometimes, and it takes more than "that's the way we always do it" to convince me that something is a good idea.


----------



## dgardner (Aug 24, 2007)

I am not sure how you can say you are not bashing Woodley. I would suggest reading your posts again. 

I have done my homework on fire arms. This is a quote from the Attorney Generals office for the state of California

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php

All firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a licensed dealer under the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) process. California imposes a 10-day waiting period before a firearm can be released to a buyer or transferee. A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To buy a handgun, a person must be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) possess an HSC plus successfully complete a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption.

Della


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

I wrote:


> You keep mentioning "BASHING." If I have unfairly done so, please point out where that is so that I may respond. Otherwise, I'd consider un-cited, non-specific allegations of "BASHING" to be, well, nothing but "bashing."


You responded:


dgardner said:


> I am not sure how you can say you are not bashing Woodley. I would suggest reading your posts again.


I must say that you are just repeating yourself and making un-cited, nonspecific allegations, again.

I guess that it would be pointless to ask you again for an example, one example, where I have unfairly "bashed" Woodley?

I wrote:


> > Originally Posted by dgardner
> > In the state of California you must pass a fire arms safety course before you purchase a gun. You are incorrect in you statement about being able to buy a gun.
> 
> 
> ...


You responded:


dgardner said:


> I have done my homework on fire arms. This is a quote from the Attorney Generals office for the state of California
> 
> http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php
> 
> All firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a licensed dealer under the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) process. California imposes a 10-day waiting period before a firearm can be released to a buyer or transferee. A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To buy a handgun, a person must be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) possess an HSC plus successfully complete a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption.


What exactly is your point in citing this? It only confirms what I told you and the point that bdca made. No cert is required for long gun purchases--contrary to your claim--and no _course_ is required, even for handgun purchases, only a multiple choice test and a simple demonstration that the purchaser can load and unload the weapon safely--again, contrary to your claim.

Are you admitting your mistake or trying to claim you were right? Quoting a block of text without saying why or what point you think it makes really doesn't say much except that you are going to a bit of effort not to say much--and that sort of tactic didn't help Coach1 make good arguments. Why not just say what you mean rather than quote a block of text as if it is QED?


----------



## ShootintheX (Mar 13, 2007)

tedzpony said:


> What I think most of us would really like to see is this: From one of the people who support the practice of "hot pulling," as we have now designated it, please give us a concise explanation of why you feel this is safe and worth the risk. And please make it something more substantial than "that's how it's done at training centers all over the world."
> 
> So far we have seen numerous posts from experienced shooters who can attest first-hand to accidents that have sent arrows into butts at least one over from where it was intended. Also, we have seen defenses of "hot pulling" that claim it is not even risky because such an accident "is an impossibility." This has now been roundly refuted.
> 
> Thus far, the only standing argument in favor of this practice seems to be expedience - that coaching time is valuable. Now, considering the aforementioned, personally-cited potential mishaps, can we please see a solid, well-thought-out defense of this practice?


I have sat back and watched this thread for a while and am amazed at the postings here. On both sides! Or should I say three sides since there appears to be an "inaction" side here as well that has been stated as justifible because they were preventing an accident weeks after the fact that one might have happened. 

In any case, I will not take sides here either, but I have not seen (I may be wrong or missed something) one person state that pulling arrows at the next butt over is safe. The pulling of arrows as stated by Pete and Coach1 were at bales that were separated. Also the accidents posted with arrows ending on the next butt over did not specify the distance separation of bales. So the argument continues just to argue and not with any substance.


----------



## Targetbutt (Jan 19, 2006)

*So, what's the solution?*

I shoot at Woodley and El Dorado almost once a week. While I do agree that accidents can happen, I still shoot and have other people shoot over my head. I try as much as possible to be far away from anyone else on the range and show up very early in the morning(mostly to beat the heat). But sometimes it gets crowded, and we get into situations where all the bales are used. 

But let's say for an instance that we get to redesign the range. How do you design a range that is

1. Open to the public
2. Can host a FITA tournament
3. Be safe, as in no "hot pulling"

Seems like you can meet 2 of the criterias but not all 3, unless there's a way to make some sort of a moveable target that won't move off the range and end up in somebody's backyard.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

dgardner said:


> In the state of California you must pass a fire arms safety course before you purchase a gun. You are incorrect in you statement about being able to buy a gun.
> 
> I am glad you have people who dont have to work and can afford to sit at your range to police it, however this is not the case at Woodley.
> 
> I personally think if you dont like our range then dont shoot there.


I am a recent "Immigrant" and stand corrected if in fact that is the case. However, most states allow any non felon, state resident to purchase firearms (not hand guns) and most states give their citizens the right to carry concealed hand guns.

As I said, we have a range master only on the weekends 12-4. The gate is locked and only members have access. I assume Woodly is pretty quiet during the week and only weekends are at issue.

Don't get me wrong, I love your range and I would kill to have one like it within an hour's drive, but I found shooting at Woodley, disturbing, the one time I was there. I will definately stop by again, but I find it difficult to shoot when I have people moving in my forward field of vision. I guess that's just me.

My experience of FITA ranges on the East Coast, all in public parks, is that they are organized, have staggered moveable targets, not fixed butts and are managed. THere are range fees and a range master.

On the other hand, it seems there is the , "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" attitude in SoCal. Since there hasn't been an accident, the system is safe untill proven otherwise.

Cya!


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

dgardner said:


> bdca,
> 
> Are you a field shooter?
> 
> Della


No. FITA only.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

dgardner said:


> I never asked him to turn a blind eye nor would I ever do that.
> 
> bdca only shot at woodley once, who was the person who told this is the way it is always done, was the person a first time shooter at the range and speaking out of turn?
> 
> Della


There were a few middle aged experienced archers hanging out at the picnic tables. I quit when a bow hunter marched up to the butt next to mine (I was shooting 90 and it was WINDY!) and started shooting target sized groups at 20 yards. Clearly he had been there before. I hadn't. I assume this is his MO..oblivion. If he is the only yahoo that shoots at Woodley, then I was there on a bad day!

I asked the guys, serious competitor types, if that was normal. They said " We try to keep the longer shooters on the left..."

I am not bashing your club, and the phone book range was being managed, but there is room for improvement????


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ShootintheX said:


> The pulling of arrows as stated by Pete and Coach1 were at bales that were separated. Also the accidents posted with arrows ending on the next butt over did not specify the distance separation of bales. So the argument continues just to argue and not with any substance.


Unfortunately it isn't so clear cut. 

You can't cite a bail of separation as evidence for the safety of hot pulling unless you also advocate limiting the hot pulling to those circumstances. To my knowledge, none of the "hot pulling" advocates have conceded any necessary limits to hot pulling--and that is part of the problem. Additionally, safety in shooting sports has to do more with angles than horizontal linear feet. The further away you get from the shooting line, the less significant "a bale" of separation becomes.

Citing the distance for separation of bales in the accidents mentioned might have some relevance for Woodley or Tournaments in specific, but certainly would not support "hot pulling" at ranges that have those same specs. Additionally, the case was not being made that they shot two bales over and that that was the theoretical limit to the misfire, rather than misfires can travel much further than the posited "few feet" suggested by C3.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

Targetbutt said:


> I shoot at Woodley and El Dorado almost once a week. While I do agree that accidents can happen, I still shoot and have other people shoot over my head. I try as much as possible to be far away from anyone else on the range and show up very early in the morning(mostly to beat the heat). But sometimes it gets crowded, and we get into situations where all the bales are used.
> 
> But let's say for an instance that we get to redesign the range. How do you design a range that is
> 
> ...



1. I would have any member of the public sign a disclaimer and acknowledge the rules of the parke before being allowed to shoot.

2. Tournaments are usually shot on matts on movable stands. More work....more safety

3. Have butts at fixed ranges, have a few well seperated at 20 yards for bow hunters and the balance at 30-90 meters. The short butts can pull their own schedule, and the long pull on the whistle.


Cya!


----------



## mwarddoc (Aug 12, 2007)

*Educational*

Overall, this is a long thread that has gotten into quite a bit of discussion. However, it is educational in the sense that I would assume that "hot" pulling would automatically be considered "unsafe" by a majority of archers. I'll certainly keep in mind that this may not be the case at all ranges.

OTOH, is this in some areas a technique used by those who are "pushy" to gain control of the range and reduce their distractions as they practice by driving others away with this type of behavior. I know it would work, as in my case I and many others would probably leave if you shot past us and wouldn't stop. This would give those types an advantage in range time and positioning.

Where I practice indoors, this is not allowed, period, and if you do this you are asked to leave and not come back. Nobody is allowed to pull unless everyone has their bow racked.

BTW, I have run into this at a rock quarry that doubles as a rifle range on weekends, where the "crazies" come in, pull up and set up behind others, and start pounding away with rifles, shotguns, semiauto high capacities, and everthing else on earth while others on the line quietly pack up and get their kids and leave. I've arrived after those types do, and you simply cannot set up until they run out of ammo because they are simply less interested in safety.


----------



## Targetbutt (Jan 19, 2006)

bdca, I don't think you understood my question. 

If you have fixed targets at staggered distances, how do you shoot a FITA tournament? 

At your range, you said you have a range master on the weekends from 12-4. What about outside that time? The range is locked up?


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

Targetbutt said:


> bdca, I don't think you understood my question.
> 
> If you have fixed targets at staggered distances, how do you shoot a FITA tournament?
> 
> At your range, you said you have a range master on the weekends from 12-4. What about outside that time? The range is locked up?


The first time I have encountered fixed butts in a FITA environment was Woodley, but have also shot Long Beach and Discovery. Same problem.

I suppose the buts could be on skids and towed out of the way for the FITA. More work-more safety.

The range is locked and the road to the range is gated. Only club members have keys. Our park authorities feel that supervision and safety overrides the need for uncontrolled public access.

This is a field archery course with a small practice area with 3 butts and a maximum of 50 yards in the practice area. So we do not have the Challenges that WPA have.

Cya!


----------



## sundevilarchery (May 27, 2005)

I'll take my chance at "hot pulling" but wouldn't require that of anyone else.

I have done it because I take a look at the folks shooting around me... the distance between their bale and mine... whether they are left handed or right handed and where I am in relation to that... the equipment they are shooting and the condition it's in... the weather...

Then I consider the fact that USA Archery has never had an insuance claim of this type (thanks to all those who ARE so wonderfully responsible and aware) and the fact that I have never even heard of accident like this...

Then I consider that of all hospital archery related claims, something like 95% are related to falling out of a tree or cutting the hand or foot on a broadhead... the other 5% tend to be people tripping with arrows in their quiver or walking into the back end of an arrow at the bale.

Then I consider that even if something did go terribly and unusually wrong with the bow or the archer, and a bizarre once in a lifetime freak accidental arrow might fly... and that freak arrow might hit me... it would take even a bigger freak bizzare coincidence that the arrow actually hit me at a speed, angle, and in a place that would really cause damage or kill me (assuming no broadheads at the range).

Then I compare this to my gymnastics experiences, and driving a car, flying in an airplane, wearing high healed shoes, and the other risky things that I do in life... and I sum it all up and make the decision.

Sometimes I hot pull.

Can anyone guarentee my safety? No. Do I do this when children or newer archers are the field? No. Do I do it when the field is crowded? No. Do I do this if I can't put what I consider a comfortable space between me and another archer? No. Would I do this if someone else shooting expressed to me their discomfort with it. No (my choices and chances shouldn't be their responsability). Would I do this at an indoor range. Heck no... you can get some funky bounces off the walls and ceilings. However, I've done it outdoors and will likely continue to do it because the odds are just so absurdly in my favor. I am far more worried about the unchecked arrow with a ding in it or a string popping next to me on the line and ending up with graphite in my eye or my arm than I am with being a moving object hit by a moving object which wasn't being aimed at me but just happened to...

Not popular, I know, but nothing is 100% safe (and I don't expect anything to be). I'll tell you that A LOT of popular ranges have been hot pulling since the dawn of time. 

And I am not sure that I would consider this negligence because negligence is in fact defined by a "reasonable person" standard, and clearly reasonable people's opinions can differ on this topic and under different circumstancecs.


----------



## ShakesTheClown (Jan 25, 2003)

Thanks, sundevil. That pretty much sums up my feelings as well.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

sundevilarchery said:


> Then I consider the fact that USA Archery has never had an insuance claim of this type (thanks to all those who ARE so wonderfully responsible and aware) and the fact that I have never even heard of accident like this...
> 
> Then I consider that of all hospital archery related claims, something like 95% are related to falling out of a tree or cutting the hand or foot on a broadhead... the other 5% tend to be people tripping with arrows in their quiver or walking into the back end of an arrow at the bale.
> 
> And I am not sure that I would consider this negligence because negligence is in fact defined by a "reasonable person" standard, and clearly reasonable people's opinions can differ on this topic and under different circumstancecs.


The insurance claims data is interesting.

As to negligence, you are the lawyer, but I wonder about JOAD tournaments where Coaches may be acting _in loco_. What is "reasonable" for adults may not be reasonable for kids and what may seem reasonable to archers might not strike a jury as reasonable...just my lay-person/potential juror's view, of course.

I should also note that Kari is laying out a more balanced approach than others have. Her stance is a qualified one:

"I'll take my chance at "hot pulling" but wouldn't require that of anyone else."
and
"Do I do this when children or newer archers are the field? No. Do I do it when the field is crowded? No. Do I do this if I can't put what I consider a comfortable space between me and another archer? No. Would I do this if someone else shooting expressed to me their discomfort with it. No (my choices and chances shouldn't be their responsability). Would I do this at an indoor range. Heck no... you can get some funky bounces off the walls and ceilings. "

This is not the same as others have advocated and is not an absolute position. I may not entirely agree with her position but at least it is one that can be discussed and she has a deference for people who are uncomfortable. I think reasonable people can have a discussion with out characterizing people as "bashing." Now if she wants to hot pull while I'm shooting, I'm hoping she'll sign an a waiver and an indemnity agreement. I sure as heck don't want to accidentally shoot a lawyer!


----------



## ShakesTheClown (Jan 25, 2003)

OK, the only instance I ever heard of a person being shot on a range...and I cannot confirm this story to be true...was on a field range.

The path from the shooting stake to target was blind and archers were supposed to yell "clear" before shooting the target.

Just as a woman club member released an arrow, her own husband stepped out in front of the target and took one to the head. It was not fatal or even a serious injury, or so the story goes...

Accident? You decide.

True story? Who knows. Although, I have seen that target and it's certainly possible.

Funny? Yep.

Now, this opens up a whole new can of worms...unsafe field ranges.

Several field ranges I've been on scare me more than "hot pulling".


----------



## Archerone (Mar 30, 2006)

I was given a life lesson when I was young and started a High School shop class. The Shop teacher gave us lecture I have never forgot. He said it was human nature to try to take chances or to push their luck. He said that we see it every day all around us. Car drivers, people carrying too much, people trying to get away with doing something dangerous. That last puff of air in a balloon that made it burst. The last turn on a bolt that broke it. His list was long and was too much to remember it. After he said to us all 'Do not take chances in his class!'

This thread seems to be about taking chances. Only a fool could guarantee that someone else will never get hurt. We are responsible for our actions whether smart or foolish. Our choices decide our odds when we take chances. The Darwin Awards are full of examples. Safety means do not take chances.


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

SunDevil,

Thank you for the well-defended statement of your position that this discussion has been lacking.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

I did a Google on archery accidents on target ranges and this was the only thing I came up with...

Cya!


----------



## Targetbutt (Jan 19, 2006)

I heard somebody got shot at the OTC a few years back, was that true?

So I guess we can't have a public FITA field that is "safe". Unless you build some sort of a rail system that the bales sit on. 

Makes me curious then, are there no other public archery range in the US?


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

I'm stuck on flightline duty all day tomorrow, but it just ocurred to me -- if so many people seem to think this is so safe with people downrange, I wonder if I can get away with shooting while the helicopters are operating out there... :brick:

:aero:


----------



## sundevilarchery (May 27, 2005)

Warbow said:


> The insurance claims data is interesting.
> 
> What is "reasonable" for adults may not be reasonable for kids and what may seem reasonable to archers might not strike a jury as reasonable...just my lay-person/potential juror's view, of course.
> 
> Now if she wants to hot pull while I'm shooting, I'm hoping she'll sign an a waiver and an indemnity agreement. I sure as heck don't want to accidentally shoot a lawyer!



Agreed, and if you were uncomfortable, I simply wouldn't do it. No need for documents. :tongue:


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bdca said:


> I did a Google on archery accidents on target ranges and this was the only thing I came up with...
> 
> Cya!


That's funny. When I googled "archery accident" I got this: Risk Assessment redact.doc--a document by Kari at Sun Devil Archery at Arizona State, 2005 from www.sundevilarchery.com

It goes on to say that Archery is very safe, but the rules section has things like this:



> Hazard	Risk Factor	Risk management
> Inadequate control of shooting may result in personal injury to an archer or spectator	Low	Shooting MUST always be under the control of an experienced archer acting as the Range Captain or a qualified Coach. All archers must understand that this person is in charge of the shoot and must obey his/her commands.





> Sun Devil Archery RANGE RULES
> 
> Archery is one of the safest sports we can do, but there are some precautions that need to be considered before, during and after shooting:
> 
> ...


Now, I don't know if those rules are current or if they are only for class time and such, but I do think that it shows that how people act and what they are willing to put down on paper can be different things.

I'm not saying that this rebuts Kari's position. She laid her reasons down separately and didn't directly cite the paper she wrote up, so it isn't necessarily directly contradictory. I also respect her statement that she'll defer to people's comfort level--which is a statement Coach1 said too, but for some reason I find Kari's statement more convincing.

I will say this, though, although Kari is the law expert I'd think as a lay-person that a set of official range rules typed up by her that say you can't shoot and pull at the same time because it isn't safe is the kind of document used to rebut arguments of reasonability in court. Hopefully, the accident that would engender such a case will never happen.

As to insurance claims, the paper cites insurance data from 2000-2004 that puts youth archery claims in between Bowling and Tennis at .65 claims per 1000 participants, several orders of magnitude below basketball.

It turns out that the sundevils produced this handy compilation a while ago. It is, however, important to note that a a high safety rating is not an endorsement of taking on additional risky behavior and that the high safety rating may be an indication of the effectiveness of safety procedures rather than an endorsement for ignoring them.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Sundevil's argument is concise and does express cognisance and consideration for others rights at the venue,

What I do believe is that at any venue shooters have the absolute right to practice their sport without and fear of endangerment from another shooter. For various reasons some stated previously here a shooter may feel uncomfortable or intimidated in expressing that discomfort, and therefore I maintain that a global ruling of "don't do it" covers the spectrum without causing undo hardship to participants. Play on the side of caution.

As for insurance stats, all well and good, however I have witnessed the one in a million accident (not shooting) that could not happen and the devastating results for the injured person , family, spectators and all concerned. In that one millisecond lives are altered forever, and there is no need for that form of grief to be experienced when a simple rule could have avoided it.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

sundevilarchery said:


> Second, and this is to caution those who will jump on the quoted phrases... there's more to those rules... important phrases... "safety zones" and "behind the target butts" and "never stand in the _shooting lane _forward of an archer."


I saw those, but I didn't cite them becase they didn't support my case. The forum is an adversarial system, after all 

Of course the bit about "in the shooting lane forward of an archer" doesn't contradict the more general exhortation "Only when everyone has finished shooting should the signal to move forward to collect the arrows be given," so I'm fairly sure that the additional rules do not contradict my point. Otherwise, the stated rules would be self contradictory.

The rule "Only when everyone has finished shooting should the signal to move forward to collect the arrows be given" doesn't have an exception that says "unless you are in a different lane."


----------



## Love4Archery (Aug 30, 2007)

*Unsportsmanlike Bullies*

ukey:Bullies.

I have been reading all these posts and I think the behavior of some of the people posting is rude and unsportsmanlike. No matter what ArcheryCats who started by asking for help, dgardner, kfoss, and others they are going to get slammed by Warbow and BDCA and a few others. It fine to disagree, but you are over the line.

I have shot a Woodley and it a great range and the club there really seems to do a great job. Yes the range is not monitored all the time, but our sport is very small without a lot of money. If you think that Woodley and other ranges should be monitored all the time I would HIGHLY recommend they call Easton and as for them to higher someone to sit there all day and just watch that everyone follow the rules.

I have seen archers not use their brains, but we need to be responsible for ourselves. 

I truly believe that these two posters are mean and are just bullies. Warbow doesn’t even sign his ignorant posts. No matter what others post they will find something wrong with it.
These are the kind of people hurting our sport. And they should be ignored.

Ok guys …..Start slamming me. I am waiting…….I'm ready......bring it

Ann S


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Welcome to Archery Talk Ann. Keep posting.


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

The vast majority of documented injuries on archery ranges (that I am aware of:embara come while pulling arrows. Not pulling hot, but pulling with other people standing too closely, and being struck by the nock end of the arrow as it is pulled from a bale. And this is a safety issue that we enforce 100% in our JOAD program...archers other than the one pulling his/her arrows must stand at least three meters behind the bale.

That said, I would never pull hot. I would never allow any of my students to pull hot. Speaking for me only, I see no reason to tempt fate...and will err on the side of caution every single time.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

Love4Archery said:


> ukey:Bullies.
> 
> I have been reading all these posts and I think the behavior of some of the people posting is rude and unsportsmanlike. No matter what ArcheryCats who started by asking for help, dgardner, kfoss, and others they are going to get slammed by Warbow and BDCA and a few others. It fine to disagree, but you are over the line.
> 
> ...


Ann, it is simply their opinion. You also have an opinion. Why should anyone's opinion be more important than any other? No one has a right to silence the other. If you don't like what is being said, you have the right not to read it.

A very common ploy when someone has no argument is to simply make it personal. Instead of offering an opinion about the subject, divert the discussion by name calling. How does this post differ from what you are faulting them for? Ann, you can be above that. I would think that anyone that claims to truly "love" archery would be in favor of making the sport as safe as possible?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Love4Archery said:


> pukey Bullies.
> 
> I have been reading all these posts and I think the behavior of some of the people posting is rude and unsportsmanlike. No matter what ArcheryCats who started by asking for help, dgardner, kfoss, and others they are going to get slammed by Warbow and BDCA and a few others. It fine to disagree, but you are over the line.
> 
> ...


I must say that the only perjoratives being slung around here seem to be directed and those who are advocating strong safety practices.

Several times I have entreated those who allege grievous behavior on my part to cite an example of this alleged behavior so that I might respond. In all cases these entreaties have gone unanswered. By all means please, please post an example of this "slamming," "BASHING," "ripping," "rude," "over the line," "unsportsmenlike" and "bullying" behavior that has offended you so that I might answer your charge. Otherwise I must assume that no such offenses actually exist and that the only "bashing" that exists in this thread is directed at myself and other pro-safety posters.

As CM JOAD has pointed out, attacking the person rather than the argument is usually a sign that someone doesn't have a rational argument to make and has resorted to name calling. It is also often the case that when one doesn't have a rational argument to make that one may resort to Rovian tactics and accuse ones opponent of ones own biggest fault. Such a tactic can be temporarily rhetorically effective but it is no more than a dirty trick and is not a substitute for reasoned discourse.

You have directly called me a mean, rude, ignorant and unsportsmanlike bully. _I_ have used no such pejorative terms in _any_ of my posts. If you can't cite examples that prove your point, I'm sure you'll apologize, since you find such behavior to be so egregious and, of course, wouldn't want to be a party to it yourself


----------



## Love4Archery (Aug 30, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> Ann, it is simply their opinion. You also have an opinion. Why should anyone's opinion be more important than any other? No one has a right to silence the other. If you don't like what is being said, you have the right not to read it.
> 
> A very common ploy when someone has no argument is to simply make it personal. Instead of offering an opinion about the subject, divert the discussion by name calling. How does this post differ from what you are faulting them for? Ann, you can be above that. I would think that anyone that claims to truly "love" archery would be in favor of making the sport as safe as possible?


I have a question, I keep reading how unsafe Woodley is, but when someone says they are doing the best they can, they get slammed.....My quesion is what should Woodley and other ranges do?


Ann


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Love4Archery said:


> I have a question, I keep reading how unsafe Woodley is, but when someone says they are doing the best they can, they get slammed.....My quesion is what should Woodley and other ranges do?
> 
> 
> Ann


I think for starters posting a "No Archers over the firing line while shooting is in progress." sign is a good beginning.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Love4Archery said:


> I have a question, I keep reading how unsafe Woodley is, but when someone says they are doing the best they can, they get slammed.....My quesion is what should Woodley and other ranges do?
> 
> Ann


And second, keep the dialogue open rather than condemning those who advocate for increased safety by saying, "These are the kind of people hurting our sport. And they should be ignored." 

I really doubt that the people who are "killing" archery are those who think that staying behind the shooting line while shooting is a good idea.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

...still waiting for those citations of all the "bashing" and "ignorance" I'm told I'm propagating...

...still waiting...

ttt

ttt

[crickets chirping]


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

Love4Archery said:


> I have a question, I keep reading how unsafe Woodley is, but when someone says they are doing the best they can, they get slammed.....My quesion is what should Woodley and other ranges do?
> 
> 
> Ann


Ann, that is an excellent question and would be a great subject of another thread. Why don't you post that thread and see what comes out of it?

Now, how do you define "slammed". Does simply disagreeing with your position qualify as "slamming"? As a matter of fact, what is your position? Are you in favor of "hot pulling"? Are you in favor of having "elite" archers "hot pulling" in front of JOAD kids?


----------



## RecordKeeper (May 9, 2003)

Ladies and Gentlemen....please....

This is a great thread, and a great topic. Please help me keep it on topic without personal attacks and insults. Quite frankly, I think we owe it to the great heratige of our sport to conduct our online conversations in a civil manner, just as we would if we were truly sitting across the dinner table from one another.

Thanks much,

RK
Administrator


----------



## Love4Archery (Aug 30, 2007)

CM JOAD said:


> Ann, that is an excellent question and would be a great subject of another thread. Why don't you post that thread and see what comes out of it?
> 
> Now, how do you define "slammed". Does simply disagreeing with your position qualify as "slamming"? As a matter of fact, what is your position? Are you in favor of "hot pulling"? Are you in favor of having "elite" archers "hot pulling" in front of JOAD kids?


Slammed does not mean that they disagree, I just want to know what Woodley should do when they have said that in all the classes no one pulls while anyone is shooting. On their long range I am not sure how you would inforce that with out a Range Master....And that would have to be full time paid job on a field that size.

The slamming for example: dgardner posted that archery should have maybe the same laws as buying guns do and Warbow attack her....She even posted the laws for California he keep telling her she was wrong. I read the website that she posted he is wrong.

This tread is all over the place, its was started by Tori Archerycat....She inforces the range safety rules to the extreem so I am not sure what else can been done.

I think asking what should be done for range safety instead of just keep saying it unsafe should be on this treat...

Ann


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Love4Archery said:


> I have a question, I keep reading how unsafe Woodley is, but when someone says they are doing the best they can, they get slammed.....My quesion is what should Woodley and other ranges do?
> 
> Ann


I'm also not sure that Woodley people are only saying they are doing strictly the best they can they also argue that the status quo shouldn't be questioned.

Certainly there are mitigating circumstances that have been cited, the public nature of the range, the lack of staggered butts due to FITA shoots and other considerations. These pose legitimate issues that make shooting past and hot pulling more inviting.

Some solutions have been posed, though they all have practical implications. Among these are, portable staggered butts. One can presume that vandalism, theft and maintenance issues make this less than a simple suggestion. Another is formally segregating the field into long and medium sides with a safety lane in between so that archers in similar distances categories could pull at the same time. Other suggestions include _mandatory_ unused shooting lanes on both sides for hot pulling, no hot pulling while children are present or mandatory no shooting past or hot pulling when _anyone_ present is uncomfortable.

There are a lot of ideas in this thread if you are looking for them rather than looking for reasons to be upset.


----------



## CM JOAD (Oct 9, 2005)

Warbow said:


> It is also often the case that when one doesn't have a rational argument to make that one may resort to Rovian tactics and accuse ones opponent of ones own biggest fault.


Warbow, I haven't heard this term before. Is it Karl "Rovian"?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Love4Archery said:


> The slamming for example: dgardner posted that archery should have maybe the same laws as buying guns do and Warbow attack her....She even posted the laws for California he keep telling her she was wrong. I read the website that she posted he is wrong.


Thank you for the example. I appreciate the opportunity to address your concerns directly.

If that is your example of slamming then we may be in trouble--by "we," I mean our dialouge.

By your definition dgardner was "slamming" bdca when she said he was wrong. And then I was slamming dgardner when I said she was wrong. And then she slammed me when she posted the CA law to try and prove me wrong.

Is your definition of "slamming" when someone says some one else is mistaken in the facts? Is it only "slamming" when the person making the correction is in error?

While telling someone they are wrong on the facts can be done in a rude manner, I would hope that it can also be done in a polite, or at least neutral manner that would not be considered "slamming." I'm hoping to do so now.

Here is the discussion at issue:

dgardner said:


> If archery is so dangerous then why can any idiot walk into an archery store purchase archery equipment and take it to the range. I am not saying archery is not dangerous, maybe equipment should not be sold to just anyone.


bdca responded:


> Any idiot can walk into a Wallmart and purchase a _rifle_ or_ shot gun_ if he has a clean record, a driver's license and a body temperature over ambient.{emphais mine}


dgardner said:


> _In_ the state of _California *you must pass a* fire arms safety *course before you purchase a gun. You are incorrect* in you statement about being able to buy a gun_. {emphais mine}


I responded:


> *California* does _not_ require any cert for_ long gun_ purchases...
> 
> As _for handgun purchases_, two simple tests are required in CA: the Handgun Safety Certificate--a multiple choice test*--and the Safe Handling Demonstration. Neither requires a safety course or firing of the weapon and both can be administered by participating gun stores. There are Handgun Safety Certificate *courses*, but those are just to facilitate learning and passing the test--they *are not required*. Gun buyers can study the free PDF or buy a subsidized training video for $5 from gun dealers.{emphais added}


{The relevant law may be reviewed here:


> individuals must possess a Handgun Safety Certificate (HSC) prior to purchasing or acquiring a handgun.
> 
> HSCs are acquired by taking and passing a written test on handgun safety, generally at participating firearms dealerships
> 
> The handgun safety demonstration protocols and DOJ Certified Instructor standards have been established and implemented by DOJ. An explanation of the handgun safety demonstration can be found starting on page 45 of the Handgun Safety Certificate Study Guide.


This _only applies to handguns_, and even then *no course is required*. There is no certificate required for rifles and shotguns.}

In response, dgardner cited the following text without explanation:



> This is a quote from the Attorney Generals office for the state of California
> 
> http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/pubfaqs.php
> 
> All firearms purchases and transfers, including private party transactions and sales at gun shows, must be made through a licensed dealer under the Dealer Record of Sale (DROS) process. California imposes a 10-day waiting period before a firearm can be released to a buyer or transferee. _A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun._ To buy a _handgun_, _a person must_ be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) _possess an HSC_ {a Handgun Safety Certificate} plus successfully complete a _safety demonstration_ with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption.{emphais mine}


Note that the only requirement *to purchase a rifle or shotgun *is to be 18 years of age. Note that *no course is required.* *To purchase a hand gun*, you must pass the written 30 question written test to acquire an HSC and pass a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased. *No course is required.* 

I hope this clears up your concerns and I hope you will tell me if, upon reading and reviewing the material I have provided, you still consider this an example of "slamming" dgardner? I also hope that you will not consider this review of the facts as best as I can provide them not to be a case of "slamming" you.

I do hope you will take the time to respond to me as I have to you.

Thanks,
Warbow.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

CM JOAD said:


> Warbow, I haven't heard this term before. Is it Karl "Rovian"?


Indeed. However in this particular case it also serves as proof for ARCs 1st law


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

OT:


Hutnicks said:


> Indeed. However in this particular case it also serves as proof for ARCs 1st law


Nope! ARC's 1st law only applies to "progressive" threads. _This_ thread is most certainly not progressive 

BTW, in this case "Rovian" is only in reference to a kind of tactical and rhetorical methodology popularized, and perhaps perfected, by the person so named.


----------



## Hutnicks (Feb 9, 2006)

Warbow said:


> OT:
> 
> 
> Nope! ARC's 1st law only applies to "progressive" threads. _This_ thread is most certainly not progressive
> ...


You may wish to have a look into Mosley and his entry into British politics in the prewar era. Whats old is new and somethings never change


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Hutnicks said:


> You may wish to have a look into Mosley and his entry into British politics in the prewar era. Whats old is new and somethings never change


Alright, _Moslian_ tactics...


----------



## tedzpony (May 15, 2007)

Everyone on here has actually been very civil, but anyone who is going to stick their opinion out there needs to also be willing to have it criticized. If you are not, then don't post in the first place. But there is no way to have open discussion about a very important topic (safety or anything else) if everyone is going to be offended over the simplest disagreement.

Disagreement is not bashing, it's not slamming, it's not unsportsmanlike, mean, rude or anything else. Hey, I don't like being told I'm wrong, either, but sometimes it happens, and sometimes it's true.

All of western society, back to the Greeks, is based on the principle of reasoned debate, and sometimes even heated debate. That's how things get done and how problems get solved - by reasoned debate about important issues without the bias of personal feelings.

People nowadays get offended over far too little things, but if we are never even allowed to tell anyone that they are wrong, our culture and our way of life has a very dismal future. Just think about it. If, for the sake of someone's feelings, you remove the avenue of rational discourse as a means for resolving conflict, how else will they be resolved? There will be nothing left but a digression to the ways of our ancestors who settled everything by fighting over it - bigger guy gets his way. Now which method is more offensive?

Again I'll reiterate my much earlier post, a premise which I think we have all been good about:

Bashing = bad
Bringing to light a safety hazard = good

And I'll add one

Discussing options to correct a safety hazard = good, even if that means trying to correct another person's apparnetly unsafe tendencies.

Finally, a failure to sign one's posts means absolutely nothing. That's what internet forums are, and that what we all accept them to be by signing on here. The forum places the poster's name at the top of his/her comments and that's sufficient to identify the author. He had to log-in to post in the first place. His name is Warbow and mine is Tedzpony, and that's all you need know.


----------



## bdca (Apr 9, 2007)

Targetbutt said:


> I heard somebody got shot at the OTC a few years back, was that true?
> 
> So I guess we can't have a public FITA field that is "safe". Unless you build some sort of a rail system that the bales sit on.


I have shot on public ranges in South Africa, England and the East Coast. ALL used round matts and target stands often with wheels so 1 person could easily move the stand.

Matts were stored at night at some ranges, left out at others. All were secured with a perimeter fence and access was controlled at night. Of course Woodley and Discovery Park have controlled access since the park is closed and you can't get close with a vehicle to steal matts and stands. Theoretically one could have concrete distance posts in the ground and lock stands to the posts if really necessary.

So that would be my suggestion. Invest in matts and stands, charge the public a fee for shooting and set the targets as described in an earlier post. 

Cya!


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

Those are some good suggestions, bdca. If the moveable butts were secured to the ground in some fashion, as you suggested, then the city parks dept. could have them set for staggered practice distances as a standard setup and then provide organizations such as 4h clubs with a way to have the butts moved to the same distances and then have a standard to describe what the organization has to do to reset the field for the staggered practice field when they were done.

Something such as requiring a rep from the parks dept. to be on hand to certify the butts are once again secured to the ground. Or have a recognized set of individuals within the organization that can certify the butts are secure with no less than two persons agreeing the butts are secure. The purpose is to remove liability from a group that would be unable to make compensation should one or more of the butts were to disappear.

Obviously, the best option there would be to have a dept. rep on hand to unsecure then resecure the butts should they need to be moved to accommodate classes and tournaments.

Either way, I personally would not be comfortable in any case of hot pulling or overshooting other archers. Although the chances of someone getting injured may be ridiculously small, it only takes one freak accident to change at least two lives in a terrible way.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Mulcade said:


> Either way, I personally would not be comfortable in any case of hot pulling or overshooting other archers. Although the chances of someone getting injured may be ridiculously small, it only takes one freak accident to change at least two lives in a terrible way.


That would be the main point, but such an accident could also lead to elimination or lock down of a range. It has has been described in this thread, where the public range is only open for a few hours a week when it is staffed. That would drastically cut the practice time available to responsible archers.

I'd like to see the ranges stay safe and stay open without a staff requirement that will kill the number of hours a range is open. That is why I favor functional changes to the ranges that encourage optimally safe practices even when the range is not staffed.

So far, this thread has demonstrated that accidents in archery are rare. If safety is no accident then we must do what we can to insure that this low accident rate stays that way.

Sometimes safety can be inconvenient, but often not as inconvenient as the consequences of an accident.

Everyone in this thread agrees that we should be safe, we just don't all agree on what the level of reasonable precautions should be.


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting there needed to be staff onsite at all times. Only those times where an event was scheduled such as an organized practice or tournament in order to facilitate the moving of the stops. The non-scheduled times would be subject to using the stops as they are in whatever default configuration is decided upon by the dept.

The practices shouldn't be a big deal since they should only be an hour or two in duration. Tournaments I would think the dept would want a rep onsite anyway just for policing and reducing liability for the city.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Mulcade said:


> Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting there needed to be staff onsite at all times.


I didn't think you were. My point was that such an idea as staggered targets should improve safety--a good thing.

Part of my reason for arguing for safety fundamentals is to keep chances of accidents to a minimum. I figure if there is an accident, park officials are likely to overreact and close the range down except during times when it can be staffed--I don't want such a thing to happen.

Someone already posted that their range is only staffed--and open--for a few hours a week. That would suck.


----------



## spatan (Jul 10, 2006)

*spatan*

Hello everyone, 

I did read a good deal of the thread, because I am interested in all the does and don'ts of coaching and owning or rather opening a puplic archery range.

It seems to me that as one develops in the skills of the bow the tedecies are to relax a little with regard to some safety issues. It is easy to forget where we were when we started the sport and it was all very new and frieghting, and every second arrow we loosed hit the wall, or worse still your neihbours target. Never perhaps witnessing first hand the conseqices of equipment failure or arrow malfuction problems. 


In my piont of view. The entire future of the sport as we know it hinges on our ability to act in a responsible manner. The rules.... the few there are, are in place to protect archers (of all mental capasity and ability) spectators, helpers, animals and property.

1.The Golden Rule always beable to see where the your arrows would go if they missed their intended target.

2.Never aim at anything you don,t intend to shoot.(shoot into the sky vertically)

3.Never move onto or forward until the shooting line was clear.(stand back when you done shooting)

4.Never aim your bow down range while the are poeple there.(I was called to rights at a local club on Sunday for standing on the shooting line with my recurve in my hand showing a fellow archer a loose center serving. the Guy down range was'nt sure exactly what I was doing and conseqintly nearly had heart faiure. He was right to call me on it it made me more aware...less blarzee if you will.)

5. Check your equipment over periodically. and don't shoot if not comptetely satisfied with what you see. 

There are undoughtadly some more, these are the ones that I believe should be cast in stone and upheld by absolutely everyone involed with the sport and associated with the sport we have come to cheeish so much.


Spatan in the U.k:cocktail:


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

Check with your local authorities and find out what kind of liabilities you take on by opening an archery range and then also ask how best to protect yourself. If you have any friends that are attorneys, talk to them as well. Also, regardless of whether or not you are required to have insurance of some sort where you are, talk to some insurance companies and get their take on it.

Granted, I think we've established here that the chance of an accident is very slim, but we all agree that it could still happen. If someone were to be injured, or God forbid, die on your range, you want to be as protected as you possibly can from absorbing the legal responsibility for that occurrence.

Also, it would be a good idea to contact FITA (www.archery.org) and see if they can point you to a local group that is already established so you can get pointers on setting up your lane.

Lastly, I would recommend starting a new thread if you still have questions as your questions, while have some relation, are a bit off topic. Besides, you'll probably get more responses from a new thread that doesn't have a heated debate inside.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Mulcade said:


> Also, it would be a good idea to contact FITA (www.archery.org) and see if they can point you to a local group that is already established so you can get pointers on setting up your lane.


Setting up archery ranges is part of the basic Level One training by NAA. Additional info is available from the ATA.

However, I don't think anyone has asked about opening a new range in this thread. People are mostly discussing current practices and whether--and how to--change those practices.


----------



## Cat Freak (Mar 13, 2006)

*Woodley Range*

Just wanted to give my two cents regarding this range.

This range is supposedly run by Don Rabska and Easton. There is a new plaque installed on the range that states who built it and what it’s really called. (Easton Archery Range) The local club has little to no say in the range other then some classes. They have tried, but some archers just do what they want.
The club and other archers have asked for someone to be Range Captain or master or whatever, but the powers the be haven't done anything.

In the past there have been some good people who have tried to keep it safe and make it a nice place for people to shoot, but they usually get shut down. There was a woman who worked her ass off for years, but the last I spoke to her she said she would have nothing to do with anything anymore and that she just wants to shoot for herself. 
Now that I think about it there was another woman named Karen Curley, but she too had gone.

This range could be really nice, but egos have run it into the ground and it increasingly become more and more dangerous. 

CF


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Interesting!!!!*



Cat Freak said:


> Just wanted to give my two cents regarding this range.
> 
> This range is supposedly run by Don Rabska and Easton. There is a new plaque installed on the range that states who built it and what it’s really called. (Easton Archery Range) The local club has little to no say in the range other then some classes. They have tried, but some archers just do what they want.
> The club and other archers have asked for someone to be Range Captain or master or whatever, but the powers the be haven't done anything.
> ...


The plaque reads Easton Archery Range known as Woodley Park ARchey Range or something very closed to that.

What everyone needs to know is that this is a PUBLIC RANGE..Shot at your own risk.

Tori K


----------



## CloverArchery (Dec 28, 2006)

I am very sorry to hear about the situation at Woodley Park. I was very fond of shooting there when I lived down south. Unfortunately the board for the Woodley Park Archers do not have direct control over the archers that shoot there since it is a public range. Tori, Have you tried to talk with Don Rabska about the problem since Easton is a large contributer to the range there?

Unfortunately it sounds like this is something that you might have to take to the NAA and see if they would be willing to back you. I know of the person you are talking about and I agree with you that safety must remain a priority, especially at a range as large as Woodley Park. The safety rules are plainly stated at the entrance to the park, it may be possible to tell the park rangers that come by frequently there about the lack of safety from this one coach and they may be willing to escort him from the premises. Have you or anyone of the other archers from Woodley videotaped him doing anything that was unsafe. This would be very beneficial in helping support you. Otherwise it is a case of your word against his. 

Dee


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

*Responding only*



CloverArchery said:


> I am very sorry to hear about the situation at Woodley Park. I was very fond of shooting there when I lived down south. Unfortunately the board for the Woodley Park Archers do not have direct control over the archers that shoot there since it is a public range. Tori, Have you tried to talk with Don Rabska about the problem since Easton is a large contributer to the range there?
> 
> Unfortunately it sounds like this is something that you might have to take to the NAA and see if they would be willing to back you. I know of the person you are talking about and I agree with you that safety must remain a priority, especially at a range as large as Woodley Park. The safety rules are plainly stated at the entrance to the park, it may be possible to tell the park rangers that come by frequently there about the lack of safety from this one coach and they may be willing to escort him from the premises. Have you or anyone of the other archers from Woodley videotaped him doing anything that was unsafe. This would be very beneficial in helping support you. Otherwise it is a case of your word against his.
> 
> Dee



I was only responding to Cat Freak, I have NO Comment regarding the range other then its a PUBLIC RANGE, The range is part of the Los Angeles park system. It is the responsibility of the LA Park Dept to decide who should be running it.

There are some really nice and good people there, it is a nice range and everyone just needs to use comment sense.

Someone gave me some really good advice once. “Just shut up and shoot” so I am.

Tori K
:zip:


----------



## xxvkxx (Feb 19, 2007)

Over the past 5 years, I have probably spent more time on the Woodley Park Range than anyone else. I have seen and heard it all. 

A. The morning shooters consist of a group of gentlemen compound shooters and an occassional barebow shooter, who are always pleasant, friendly, and totally harmless. On the long range there are a few of us practicing for competition, coaches with students, and compound hobbiests. No issues to speak of. 

B. The evenings offer classes which are run by very professional, qualified, and organized VOLUNTEER coaches. In fact my fisrt experience with archery was during those classes, which I highly recommend. Other evenings offer 18 meter competitions and JOAD, again, run by very qualified coaches. Those shooting on the long range are either practicing for tournaments or taking the opportunity to shoot after work and enjoy the great L.A. weather.

C. Saturday morning offers another beginners class, and the once a month FITA qualifiers. 

D. Sunday offers once a month clout shoots and 900 rounds. A Korean group of JOAD's practice in the afternoon. 

E. Woodley now hosts 2 Star FITA tournaments a year: The Blue Heron Fall FITA and The Easton Cup. 

F. We all need to give many thanks to Don Rabska and Easton for maintaining the range. They replace the hay bales and as of next week will install new foam backing on the short range. 

The only time I have EVER seen any safty issues are on the weekend afternoons when "the Dad who has just bought his 8 year old kid a cheap bow from Big 5" shows up and they are there to try it out. Believe me, us regular shooters NEVER hesitate to inform these newbies of the safty rules if we see something that seems risky. 

We love our range and are forever grateful that we can spend our days there shooting arrows. VK


----------



## Archerycat (Mar 1, 2007)

xxvkxx said:


> Over the past 5 years, I have probably spent more time on the Woodley Park Range than anyone else. I have seen and heard it all.
> 
> A. The morning shooters consist of a group of gentlemen compound shooters and an occassional barebow shooter, who are always pleasant, friendly, and totally harmless. On the long range there are a few of us practicing for competition, coaches with students, and compound hobbiests. No issues to speak of.
> 
> ...


Nice post VK

It’s nice to see someone at least sticking up for the range’s.

I would like to add a couple things though. The Woodley Park Archery Club which at times had come under some fire in the past, buys and maintains all equipment loaned and used in the beginner classes. 

Also, I would like to thank personally Jeff Gardner and Greg (Last name?) for fixing at least temporarily the short range backstop until a more permanent solution can be done.

Tori


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

Thanks for the good info. It's hard to find places to shoot here anyway, without people giving bad impressions.


----------



## Shadow_Archer (Sep 21, 2008)

People are not so much as "stupid" as misinformed. We all have to start somewhere unfortunately some people start with less common sense than others. No matter where you are shooting whether it be an indoor or out door range, pro shop, or a field somewhere safety should always come first. If some one is down range whether that means down range in a formal range or on the opposite end of a field or clearing you should not even be thinking of picking up that bow, to do so is a careless act. Lets face it accidents happen every day and some one with no common sense is born every minute which is why the duty to educate such people falls on others of more experience. I find my self trying to practice and having the iconic father and his 8 year old son walk in with a bow from wall-mart that doesn't fit and has a cracked limb. Because for one I value my life and two the safety of others if I see something that needs to be commented on I politely inform them of their mistake and tell them what to do to next time to avoid any problems. I also see many hunters who are not used to shooting on formal ranges and will gladly lend them a helping hand. 

Please don't hang people out to dry for doing something that may be obviously wrong to you but perhaps not to them. But there are those who will totally and selfishly disregard rules and do whatever they please and that is a time to nicely ask them to leave. I have seen some people do some very stupid things, I have also been down range and have had someone not pay attention and start to shoot which really doesn't make my day. We participate in a sport that involves a weapon, you may not agree that it is a weapon but face the fact that if it will kill a deer it will kill a human. 

Have fun, be safe, and bring more people into our sport to keep it alive. 

Shadow


----------

