This an excellent article by Mr. Burkhill and I had to put it here to share it with you.
The Evolution of the Target Rifle Shooting Movement in Australia
On 1st September, 1860, the Australian Volunteer Corps. was formed at a ceremony in Sydney. In the same year the Victorian and New South Wales Rifle Associations were formed. Their objectives were "to give permanence to the Volunteer Corps. and to promote rifle shooting throughout Victoria and New South Wales".
The formation of these two associations was followed by annual open championships and interstate teams matches with the respective State Governments paying the teams travelling expenses and the military lending staff to aid in the conduct of these events.
Other States followed the lead of Victoria and New South Wales and established their own associations. Initially funding for these fledgling organisations was totally by subscription. Members contributed to enable their associations to undertake their limited activities in pursuit of their common objectives. However, it did not take long for the governments to recognise the military training potential of the rifle movement, so, even in those early days, funding and encouragement on a limited scale was forthcoming.
The military presence grew and exerted a strong influence on the newly formed associations however, while the problems of distance, communications and travel were highlighted as obstacles which had to be overcome, very little was able to be done about them at this early stage.
In 1888 the General Council of the Rifle Associations of Australia was formed at a meeting in Hobart. It had amongst its objectives the promotion of Inter Colonial Rifle Competition and the standardisation of match conditions and shooting regulations.
Government assistance continued and with Federation markedly increased as the accurate marksmanship of the Boers in South Africa taught the Colonial troops a bitter lesson. Of course with increased funding came increased control and this influence reached its zenith when in 1903 the Defence Act was passed into law and with it the Australian Rifle Club Regulations.
From that time and over the years, in varying degrees, subsidies were received from the Commonwealth Government. These subsidies took the form of free ammunition, subsidised rifles, provision of rifle range facilities, range staff, subsidised travel and more.
With this strong government involvement and spurred on by Australia's commitment in the two World Wars and the nationalistic fever which accompanied it, the rifle movement flourished throughout the country. Distance, communications and travel were now even greater problems due to economic constraints brought about by the Great Depression and war time rationing. In an effort to overcome these ever existing problems, rifle ranges along with rifle clubs were established all over the country until it seemed as though every little town and community boasted one.
It was in this environment throughout the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s that the rifle movement reached its height.
It was in these heady days of recognition, status, government involvement and subsidies that some members of the rifle shooting movement developed a "cargo cult" mentality. An attitude of "all we have to do is to ask for it and it will magically appear", "The Military" will provide. Unfortunately utopia does not exist and if anything is to succeed it must be worked for, fought for, agonised over, sweated over and finally nurtured to fruition. Some of this "cargo cult" attitude persists even today but thankfully it is a diminishing trait.
During the 1960s big changes started to take place. These conditions of change would continue and were destined to alter the face of the rifle shooting movement forever.
Firstly, the military were no longer involved in major armed conflict and with the development of sophisticated long range weapons of mass destruction throughout the world, the value of the individual soldiers "one shot, one kill" principle was considered no longer relevant. Costs in the form of subsidies were increasingly seen in government circles as inappropriate and consequently pressure on the military to start to trim this expenditure was applied.
The Rifle Club Regulations were amended to reflect these changes and influence was exerted on the national body of the rifle shooting movement to start to accept a larger share of the responsibility for its own administration. The then Secretary of the Department of the Army, Mr. Bruce White, who through the Rifle Club Regulations was given the powers to control and co-ordinate the activities of the shooting fraternity, promulgated the Standard Rules for Australian Rifle Clubs and District Rifle Associations. He also developed a standard constitution for all State Associations and insisted that all of these rules and regulations be adopted by all levels of administration throughout the movement. This was duly done. These rules reflected the start of the handing over from the government, the control and administration of the shooting movement to a very reluctant shooting administration.
A large number of subsidies were withdrawn, the most significant being, the subsidised ammunition and rifle purchases. This withdrawal was followed by the actual change in calibre of military ammunition from the .303 in to the 7.62mm. The change of ammunition now meant that the rifleman's competition equipment was obsolete and the seemingly bottomless bucket, which had been the military, could no longer provide. This change of military ammunition calibre was accompanied by a change of the basic military weapon from the Lee Enfield rifle to the F N Self Loading Rifle. To the rifle movement's dismay this new military rifle was inappropriate for the new target competition environment which was evolving not only in Australia but throughout the world.
A new target rifle was consequently developed by the shooting movement's administration to accommodate the change in ammunition but this new rifle was not of a military design and had no military application. Along with this, it was discovered that, without major modification, the rifle was not competitive internationally. A substantial list of modifications was authorised by the rifle shootings national body together with a list of other "approved rifles".
At about the same time as the changes in rifles and
ammunition were taking place, a new black and white target was introduced by the rifle
movements national body to replace the old military sand and buff coloured targets with
their distinctive "tin hat" aiming marks.
The target rifle movement was beginning to "come of age".
Rifle ranges had always been on the military's Register of Assets but, during the late 1960s it was recognised that these ranges were assets which were not being fully utilised for the purpose for which they had been bought, developed and were currently being maintained. Political pressure was brought to bear to allow viable rifle clubs to continue to use those ranges with which they identified. Leasing arrangements were established and, where there was a shared facility with the armed forces, continued use of these ranges when not required for military training was authorised.
The Command Secretary in each State still exercised supervisory control over the State Rifle Association activities however, the position of Supervisor of Rifle Clubs was abolished and the requirement for representatives of the three armed services to be members of the State Associations Council was dropped. Because rifle ranges were recognised as valuable assets owned by the Government, and safety on these assets was a Government responsibility, the position of Inspector of Rifle Ranges was retained to look after those interests. However, the duties and responsibilities of those abolished government positions were once again thrust onto a reluctant shooting administration.
The 1970s saw large sections of the Rifle Club Regulations repealed and amended to reflect the changing attitude of the Federal Government toward the rifle shooting movement. Gone were the heady days of nationalistic and patriotic calls to duty and training requirements. They had been replaced by the changed strategic concept of the military; a dramatically changed philosophy on Defence by Governments who were now concentrating on economic growth and national development and who viewed the shooting fraternity purely as a sporting body which was maintaining valuable land assets for them at very low costs and, which was able to consistently raise the Australian flag at international sporting events; and an increasing presence of anti gun propaganda which was tarnishing the once shining image of the rifle shooting movement. The recently formed National Rifle Association of Australia was floundering under the weight of the newly acquired, unaccustomed and unwanted administrative responsibilities with which it had to drag the movement into the twenty first century, now less than thirty years away.
The military and government involvement had now almost entirely diminished. Anything resembling a subsidy was a thing of the past and more and more, the rifle shooting movement, at all levels, was being forced to take responsibility for its own existence and to chart its own future.
Membership of the movement, not surprisingly, started to drop markedly. This in some cases saw clubs disbanded, ranges closed and eventually sold and a general dropping in morale throughout the movement was very evident. Reasons for this membership drop and low morale can probably be found in the increased costs to the shooter who still longed for those golden days of almost free everything. Also a considerable drop in prestige and the status of the marksman, whose very title now stirred visions of murder and violence instead of, bravery, heroism, valour and the champion of days gone by. A changing emphasis by the population at large to the economic ethic, accumulation of wealth, personal images, corporate presentations and faction fighting tended to diminish the once important values of the rifle shooter of all equal in range clothes, mud and dust, mateship, the striving for individual excellence in performance under sometimes adverse conditions and the recognition of the achievement of personal best performances at whatever level of competence that may entail.
As the 1980s were entered, the sporting aspects of the rifle shooting movement started to be further highlighted. Rifle clubs had always had their champions and those champions had progressed through Districts and onto State Titles, but now there was a National Champion of State Champions to embrace. The move by the NRAA to establish this status was seen as a very positive step towards enhancing the image of the shooting sportsman within the movement at all levels.
The inclusion of shooting teams in the Australian Commonwealth Games Teams was also a big step forward and, when those fullbore team competitors started to return with medals won on the world sporting stage, members of the shooting movement collectively started to lift their heads a little higher.
State and National Rifle Teams started to spread their international representative wings and soared to greater heights. Trans Tasman events were being organised on a regular basis. Oceania Games Teams were being entered with considerable success and regular visits by international teams to Australia saw not only increasing triumphs by our representative members but also, recognition by different government bodies.
A National Coaching Director was appointed and a National Coaching Accreditation scheme launched. Coaches were being trained and accredited at club level and were progressing through their State organisations. The once military trainers were now being trained in different, more specialised skills.
Diversification into 300 metre ISU shooting was encouraged with Australian representatives competing at World and Regional Championships with marked success.
Diversification also into the Military Rifle Clubs and competitions together with the Field and Service shooters with their own style of shooting being catered for.
All of these changes resulted in a brighter outlook, a change of the concept of the sport of shooting and a general lifting of morale. Younger shooters were starting to join the movement despite the still present stigma attached to it by the anti-gun lobby, the membership levels were beginning to consolidate. The face of shooting was changing from a paramilitary occupation to one of sporting pursuits and excellence.
Other shooting disciplines were recognising this change as were the governments at both State and Federal level. The Australian Shooting Association was formed, of which the NRAA was a member, and funding for international teams, coaching, promotion and administration was provided by the Commonwealth Government through the Sports Commission. At State level funding was also made available for administration, development and promotion by the various State Governments through their respective Departments of Sport and Recreation. The sport of target rifle shooting had arrived.
Rifle Clubs, District Rifle Associations, particularly in the country areas, and the State Associations were still loosely organised and operated on the old Standard Rules for rifle clubs of the 1960s and the now totally out of date Rifle Club Regulations of 1903. These were no longer appropriate as they referred to non existing appointments supposedly exercising repealed powers over an organisation which was by now a long way toward self control and administration. Recognising this, a lot of clubs and associations incorporated under laws administered by the various Departments of Corporate Affairs throughout the country.
A consistent requirement of these laws is to formulate and document a constitution, for which, in a lot of cases, quite tight guidelines are established. These new constitutions, in most cases, bore very little, if any, resemblance to those which were required to be adopted back in the 1960s and as a consequence further erode the relevance of the Rifle Club Regulations and any rules made under them.
The NRAA recognising the advantages of these actions, has recently restructured into a Management Board organisation and has incorporated.
The State and Federal Governments, together with the shooting movement as a whole, have applauded the changes which have occurred over thirty years and the past twenty to thirty years and recognised that an ever strengthening sporting organisation was emerging to take its rightful place within the sporting arena. They also recognise that the problems of distance, communications and travel have been diminished by an ever developing and improving technology. Armed with this information, working parties and committees have been established to research the direction which should be taken to develop the sport of rifle shooting into a disciplined organisation and to transport it into the twenty first century.
As distance, communications and travel no longer pose the problems which they did in years gone by and as the Commonwealth Government is liquidating an increasing number of its assets, including rifle ranges, a consolidation of like sports is being implemented into common venues. Sports centres are being built by State Governments to accommodate such sports as basket ball, netball, handball, indoor soccer etc. Other centres accommodate gymnastics, weight lifting, table tennis, badminton etc. World class arenas to cater for Australian rules football, soccer, rugby league and union etc. are being developed.
In line with this thinking, parcels of land are being identified on which to establish shooting complexes and accommodate such disciplines as fullbore rifle, smallbore rifle, pistol, shotgun, sporting shooters, service rifle etc. These parcels of land are being acquired in some areas either by the occupying bodies or State Governments and are serving regions of a similar size as an existing District Rifle Association. They are being administered by representative bodies formed from all resident users of the land. Similar scenarios are currently being developed and investigated by governments and shooting bodies alike and in some cases, have already been funded and put into operation.
Where are we headed as we approach the year 2000?
I believe that shooting will continue to develop as a purely sporting pursuit on a vastly reduced number of ranges which will be developed to accommodate all shooting disciplines within a specific geographic area These complexes will be largely self supporting and self administering but will attract some funding from State Governments through sports development appropriations.
The NRAA, I believe, shall continue to be the principle administrative and controlling body of fullbore shooting movement and will also be the coordinating body for international teams and competitions. It will coordinate national coaching and development programmes and standardise all rules, match conditions and equipment regulations. As well as this it will, develop all administrative procedures, centralise the procurement of ammunition, spare parts for all rifles and equipment together with all end items required for the operation of the rifle shooting movement. The NRAA will also attract funding for elite shooters development and for the promotion generally of our sport. The Fullbore Register of Assets I see as being maintained by the NRAA with land being purchased, developed and sold as required. Also, major investment assets would be administered and controlled by this the central body on behalf of the movement. Representation on major sporting bodies, advice to the Commonwealth Government as required and input into the development of the sport of rifle shooting at the Australian Institute of Sport would also be areas of NRAA responsibility.
The State Associations, I believe, will reduce to organisations not dissimilar to the existing District Rifle Associations and would co-ordinate State teams and inter-regional matches between teams from the shooting complexes. Representation on combined shooting organisations to provide a body to advise the State Government on sporting shooting matters and to make recommendations to the State government on the allocation of funding for fullbore shooting. I can see it also exercising some delegations on behalf of the NRAA as required.
I consider that the Rifle Club Regulations will be repealed in total and that all existing ties with the Department of Defence will be severed.
Departments of Sport and Recreation should become the interested tentacle of the various State Governments but, all administration and co-ordination of our sport will remain the responsibility of the NRAA.
The various State Ministers for Police, I believe, will develop standardised safety procedures and gun licensing regulations based on the existing military and international guidelines with very little variation to which currently exist. They will, however, I believe, tighten the implementation of the safety regulations and I would expect more thorough safety inspections of all aspects of our sports operations, competitions and facilities.