1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Category Shooter Queston for Neil Winston

Discussion in 'Shooting Related Threads' started by mkstephen, Oct 3, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mkstephen

    mkstephen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2008
    Messages:
    676
    Location:
    Middletown, Indiana
    Neil,

    In previous ATA rule books a junior or sub-junior shooter was allowed to enter a registered shoot for half-price with the understanding that he or she was not allowed to play any options or receive any trophies. If that shooter shot for full price then they were allowed options and trophies.


    My question is; has the half-price entry for junior and sub-juniors been eliminated? I have searched the current 2008 rule book and do not find anything in it about this issue.


    To clarify I'm talking about registered shoot entry and not membership in the ATA.


    Michael Stephenson
     
  2. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,864
    Michael, I think you are maybe thinking of some shoot programs - many states and the Grand do it, for example. The only reference in the rule book is - and has been, I think - to allow it. (III,B,2)

    Neil
     
  3. BDodd

    BDodd TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,594
    Not to climb Neil's platform, but, in other words, Michael, the ideas you speak of are basically added to programs by shoot management and are not outlined or governed by the ATA rules beyond allowing such a thing.....breakemall.....Bob Dodd
     
  4. jevoliva

    jevoliva Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    889
    And most places will allow the Juniors to shoot 1/2 price for trophies and added money, just not options...

    John
     
  5. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    The rule (III B 2)was changed about 10 years ago to allow a club to charge a reduced price for Sub Jr and Jr shooters. Before that change, the rule required that clubs charge all shooters the same prices and many clubs were violating this rule by charging younger shooters a reduced price.

    One could ask if the reduced price for young shooters helps the future of our sport or the parents of young shooters. The cost of reducing the price for young shooters is passed on to all other shooters.

    Pat Ireland
     
  6. Wilma Harris

    Wilma Harris TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    188
    I have no problem with the price reduction for Jr. and sub-Jrs. but the restriction of NO OPTIONS played should be removed.

    If the reasoning behind this reduction is to reduce the expense so the parents can better afford their kids shooting, and playing options indicates they can afford to shoot without a reduction in target price, then why are they allowed to walk out there to shoot with a Crown Grade Krieghoff or a top end Perazzi or simular priced gun? Kinda looks foolish to me to see two Jr. or S-Jrs. shooting and one using an 870 while the other has a $10,000+ gun of his/her own. He/she could also use a 870 and have several thousand dollars left to pay for targets and ammo.

    Give them the price reduction without any strings attached with the reason behind it being they are school kids normally without a source of income and we just want them to come shoot and enjoy the sport. Who knows, they just might grow up to be pro-gun.
     
  7. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Southbend that is a very interesting slant you have on options. Personally I feel that if the Jr. Sub-Jr(or their parents)wants the reduced price on target then they should not be allowed to play the options.

    If the reduced price is help the parents afford the cost of their children's shooting then take the break. If they want to play the options then pay full price.

    I have no problem with a reduced price for the youngsters. However I do not condone teaching a child to Gamble at an early age and put cash in Dad's pocket. If Dad wants to win option money then let him pay just like you and I have to pay. BTW just like he has to pay if he is shooting.

    I don't consider it fair to other shooters that have to pay for their own options. While Joe Blow buys his child's targets at a reduced price and put the option money for that child's shooting in his own pockets. If this is to be the case then let him pay like all of the other shooters have to.

    Now understand this is just my own opinion.

    Bob Lawless
     
  8. shot410ga

    shot410ga Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,794
    If a kid shoots for 1/2 price. He/she should get a kids trophy (cheap). He/she should not be allowed to play any options or win any money or additional trophys that the full price shooters enjoy. I should not have to help support anyone else's kid..........
     
  9. mike31z

    mike31z Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    260
    Location:
    Highland, WI, USA
    Here is a Side effect of allowing juniors and Sub Juniors to shoot the options. They may loose there amateur status in school sports.
     
  10. jimbotrap

    jimbotrap TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    791
    Why are we so worried about some kid winning something. I do not, and have never understood, why there seems to be so much worrying. After well over 10 years in club management the ones, I almost always have complaining, are the shooters that have countless trophies in their collections. And want more. For the sake of the sport stop for a moment and try to understand. A lot of clubs have been promoting youth shooting programs. Almost all give a reduction in shooting costs to those juniors involved. We are working for our FUTURE. And, as a plus, there are a lot of parents, grand parents, other family members and friends that become involved in the sport. And we need them. We do not do much else to promote this great sport.

    I personally believe if we let the kids shoot, regardless of price, there should be eligible for all trophies, just like any other category, class or yardage shooter. And if their parents want to play the monies let them do it.
    It just puts more money into the sport. All of you that continually complain about this aspect of the sport just think it is wonderful for the professional shooters to do so.

    Quit worrying about thinkgs like this. Enjoy the sport. - Jim
     
  11. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    Jim- I do not disagree with anything you have said. But, I wounder if we are making a good investment in our future. Several years ago I tracked the shooting of a significant group of Sub Jr and Jr shooters after they became adult shooters. Our investment in the future did not seem to pay well.

    Pat Ireland
     
  12. Gary Waalkes

    Gary Waalkes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,403
    If your club or association can afford the youth subsidy, great. Let em shoot for less money. If your club or association wants kids to learn about gambling and or enable them to gamble that is also fine with me - not my kid and not my problem.

    Asking for it to pay is a different issue. Sometimes it pays just because it gets a couple of Mothers on the pro-gunner side. Nothing to do with trap and everything to do with supporting gun ownership.

    The affordability equation can only be resolved by your club or association.
     
  13. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,864
    Roger, I'm getting the uneasy feeling you may be right, but (really) so far don't quite get it yet. Could you add more detail? Especially about exactly what was said when you signed up for the shootoff.

    Neil
     
  14. jevoliva

    jevoliva Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    889
    Pat,

    When you looked at this group of shooters, how far out did you look? Personally, I do not think the ATA or the State Associations will see "returns" on this investment for 15-30 years after the shooter leaves the rank of Sub Jr/Jr.

    I have (albeit quietly) voiced an opinion that there should be one additional category in the ATA: collegiate. No reduced price on targets, shooters in the category shoot for own trophy at state championship events, satellite grand championship events, zone shoots, and the Grand. One of the reasons we see a drop off of these shooters once they get out of Jr. rank is ridiculously high rate of competition once they leave that category. Check out the last 10+ years of All-Americans in the Junior category. How many are still shooting? Sure, economics play a big role in it, but couple that with the fact that at the age of 18, now the shooter is "leaving the nest", most often the parents are not picking up the tab and if they move onto college, are carrying a load of classes. Add in a PT/FT job and the pressure of now having to compete with Leo/Ricky/et al, it can become very discouraging very quickly. If I did not shoot for Purdue for my 5 years there, I question how involved I would be in this sport at 32 years of age. I have 5-7 buddies that are in the same boat. We were still able to shoot with the club program at Purdue and compete in shoots against other collegiate shooters, which kept out interest high. We all continued to shoot after our time at Purdue and most of us now can hold our own on a state, zone or even Grand American level. Those shooters that attend schools that do not offer the club sport can/will get discouraged very quickly.

    If your group did not have this, then the timeline returns back to the 15-30 years after they turn 18 to return to the sport. My wife and I married a little later in life (25 years old) and started the family a little later also (29 years old). Having the second one on the way November 6th, I can't imagine trying to shoot solely from an economic standpoint if it weren't for the ability to get my professional legs for a couple of years before starting the family. Again, looking down the barrel of competing the with Rickys and Leos of the world adds another level of frustration to the equation. Once the shooter can get the kids into the 9-10 year old range (now THEY can start shooting) and the shooter is a little more economically stable, we will start seeing them re-enter the sport.

    I know that everyone will howl at adding another trophy to the mix, but to some of the people I have spoke to about this subject, there were always several reasons of why they were not currently shooting. The common item amongst ALL of the (11 people to date) was "I am just not competitive anymore". When asked if a designated trophy for collegiate shooters would help, about 1/2 said that it probably would.

    How to police this? Simple -- prove your class load to the ATA. Set it at so many hours from an accredited institution that you have to the ATA each semester and you keep your status. My suggestion is that this can be done up to 23 years of age.

    Something to ponder...

    John
     
  15. phirel

    phirel TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    9,556
    John- You are correct, I did not, nor do I intend to follow the shooting history of the young shooters who quit when they become adults. That would take around 20 years. The "typical" new member who continues shooting for at least 10 years does first join the ATA when they are 40 to 45 years old. Certainly some join earlier and some join later.

    I was simply raising the question (and I don't profess to know the answer to the question) that if offering a reduced price to young shooters is a method of attracting new members, it might not be a very good method. It could be possible that a club, and the ATA, would attract more new members by adding trophies for shooters who are first year members rather than spending money allowing young shooters to shoot at 1/2 price.

    Pat Ireland
     
  16. primed

    primed Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,119
    Pat

    I also did a little research and obtained similar results. I looked at our Junior and Sub-Junior state teams going back 20 years. These teams included several All Americans. Can't seem to find them anywhere now. So many kids come to our state shoot and shoot the free targets and ammo and are never heard from again.

    I for one, would like to see recruitment efforts redirected from youth to league shooters. League shooters know the cost, have the equipment and the obvious desire to shoot.

    I see youth registered shooting subsidies as a waste of resources for the ATA and many state organizations. I see 4-H and scout shooting programs as much more worthwhile and much less costly and much more likely to retain shooters into later years.

    Just my personal and deeply held opinion of course.

    Bob
     
  17. ivanhoe

    ivanhoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,539
    Location:
    Oxford MA
    Pat and other that are in this discussion. First let me say I also fell that reduced prices for youth shooters does nothing to promote new shooters(my personal opinion)

    It does however make it easier for the parents to afford to have the Child/Children shoot and learn the joys and the discipline involved in this sport.

    I also believe that as young shooters mature they develop other interests as in the opposite sex as an example, also many others. Eventually they come back to trap but not a 100%

    I also believe that there has to be a way to promote the shooting sports

    Bob Lawless
     
  18. jimbotrap

    jimbotrap TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    791
    Pat - I agree with you about a significant number dropping out the sport. But there are many more benefits to consider.

    1. We are introducing, (in many cases) kids that come from non shooting (or hunting) families to our sport. This has a great deal of benefit to all shooting sports and gun ownership, especially in our environment today.

    2. It does create a significant increase in gun and ammo purchases. Not to mention all the other accessories involved. And most are purchased from the same vendors that support us.

    3. I have monitored our clubs history in the SCTP program. We still have a few kids shootings, as adults, and several parents that have gained an affection to the sport.

    And there are other benefits. I took a the child of a lady that worked in our office about 6 years ago. As a combined result. She brought her sister's son.
    Now both shoot recreationally, as well as their husbands. The sister invited her next door neighbor and thier 2 sons. Now both these boys are still in the program as well as their parents. I figured out one day these 2 families have purchased over 12 guns and hundreds of cases of ammo, not to mention accessories and travel to small and large shoots. How do we a value on things like this. Old adage 1 + 1 = 2. And so on.

    As for kids not following the sport. Could name a few more, but the names of Sean Hawley, Jimmy Heller and David Kelly are 3 that have followed the sport or returned to it from their days as Juniors.

    It is my opinion we need programs like the SCTP and/or any other program that introduces Juniors, or for that matter adults, to the shooting and/or outdoor sports. - Jim Elliott
     
  19. laura!

    laura! Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    438
    I think the reduced fees go a long way toward getting more youngsters shooting. I know you're all aware of how costly our sport has gotten - ammo, shot, gas etc. I have one son that's been shooting for 3 years and another that just started. It's alot of work and expense - reloading for 4 shooters!

    I've noticed in our local leagues, particularly the 25 16's & 25 caps leagues, a substantially greater number of youth shooters than at ATA events. In some cases, it's because the parents don't shoot ATA, but I believe the expense has a great deal to do with it. The leagues charge youths a reduced rate if no options are played just like ATA, but overall its cheaper than ATA - half the targets & half the shells.

    I won't be too surprised if my oldest son doesn't drop out of shooting for awhile - girls are more interesting. School is important and when he hits 18, he probably won't be able to afford it for many years. But he'll always be a gun owner, always support gun ownership and one day he'll remember how much fun it is to shoot trap and what a great group of people trap shooters are. One day he'll have a kid of his own and will rember how great it was to shoot with his family and start shooting with his kid.

    I hope gun clubs continue to help support our sport by investing in our youth and remember, just like all investments, some pay out quickly and some require patience and time.
     
  20. Neil Winston

    Neil Winston Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,864
    Thanks, Roger. I'll check the program and get back to you.

    Neil
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.