[Archers] New rule

[WHITEGRIFN at aol.com]

I haven't seen anything about a need for inspections by the DEM-TA  either.
 
I also haven't seen any updates since 3/8.  Also on that  date, our 
Baronial Archer Marshal (Lodwig von Neusohl) submitted a  waiver request to Allen 
by e-mail.  We had our Baronial Birthday event  coming up the following 
weekend, and it looked like we might need one  to hold our Baronial Archery 
Champion shoot.  We never got a response from  Allen, but as it turned out, we 
had to move the event location because the  original site got flooded out, and 
the emergency site had nowhere to shoot  anyway.  The important point 
though, was that if we hadn't been flooded  out, we would have had to cancel our 
archery shoot at a range that should have  been acceptable, because we 
couldn't get a response from the  DEM-TA.  I realize that normally a waiver 
should be requested more  than 5 days before an event, but since the visibility 
requirement had just been  addressed, and the event scheduled when it was, we 
didn't have more time.   Anyway, It's been 2 weeks now, and we still 
haven't heard anything at all  from Allen.
 
I am still not entirely clear what situations actually require a  waiver.   
 
 
As Siegfried pointed out, there is an obvious disconnect between what the  
rule currently says: "A waiver may be requested for shorter ranges provided 
there is a  physical barrier, which will stop arrows", and what Kynnyth 
indicated  is his and Allen's interpretation: " If you have a structure that  
provides the protection described in 3.9.3.2.3 you are alleviated of the 
burden  to grab a waiver."
 
One problem is that, even though 3.9.3.2.3 gives a better definition  of 
what is required than any other kingdom rule I could find, it still requires  
some judgement.  It states: "The barrier must completely cover the safety  
zone in order to count.  A small barrier that could be shot around is not  
sufficient."  To me, this says that the barrier must cover the entire  width 
of the safety zone, but the height is apparently still left to the  judgement 
of the MIC.  No practical barrier (other than one in an indoor  site) will 
stop 100% of possible overshoots.  Even a 200 ft high barrier  could 
conceivably be shot over, so the MIC has to make a judgement on  what is reasonable 
based on the height of the barrier, how far it is down range,  and other 
factors.  This rule (3.9.3.2.3) was fine when the local MICs were  allowed to 
use their own judgement to determine if a range was safe, but it  doesn't 
make sense to use it as a criteria for determining whether or not a  waiver is 
needed.  
 
This comes into play with our local practice site.  We use a permanent  
archery range at a city park, which has a 6' to 7' berm behind the target  
butts.  Behind the berm is a very large, lightly wooded area with "Danger -  
Archery Range" signs all around.  The berm stops most overshoots, but  because 
it also obscures our view of the area behind, a waiver might now be  
required (depending on interpretation).  We are working up a detailed  waiver 
request, just in case, but regardless of the outcome, we are not going to  stop 
using the range for practices.  The city of Newport News has an  ordinance 
against archery, but has provided an exemption for this  range.  If the DEM-TA 
deems that our range is not acceptable, then we  will just make the 
practices "unofficial".  
  
Tnek 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/pipermail/archers-atlantia.sca.org/attachments/20100320/6452251e/attachment-0003.htm>