Attn: Rob Taylor

Do You Still Love ATA Trapshooting?

Are You Willing To Step Up To The Plate And Make Changes That Need To Be Made?

Are you still the man of integrity that I feel you once were?

Take good long look at what has been happening, and has happened.

I hope you still do not want to shorten target distances, along with all the other softening that has been done.

Rob Taylor what do you think that needs to be done to bring the ATA back to what it used to be?

Your the HEAD MAN NOW, Do Something Constructive.
Dr.Longshot

 

Do you really think he reads and visits this site?

Lefty

 

Lefty, You never know. Somebody may give Rob a heads up.

 

He has been summoned to the Doctors office.

He wouldn't dare not show up.

 

Gary, why don't you send him a letter, and post a copy here for evidence. Spouting off here serves no purpose.

A copy of the letter is proof you advised/contacted him in writing. Posting here means little.

 

I'll see him this morning and ask him.

Lefty

 

I will write him a letter this morning, posting it here should get him the message, as many of his advisers, from the other site are looking at what we are talking about to save the Sport Of Trapshooting.

Rob Taylor is probably at the Dixie Grand on our tab anyway.

 

Gary, you might want to scan lines 333 to 339 (inclusive) of the minutes of the 2011 Annual Meeting.

Neil

 

Garry

Below is a cut and paste of your comments from 2013. I have attached the link as well.
See the second last sentence. The bold and underline were done by me the word are yours.

I am not sure Rob Taylor is going to be much help.



http://www.xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/threads/s...now-who-stood-for-3-hole.205753/#post-1970678


I have just learned that 4 shooters stood for the 3 hole target and did not want it changed they were Vic Reindeer, Frank Little, Kay Ohye, Neal Crausby.

We had some shooters that paid attention to what was happening with the ATA.

Commencing on October 1st 1993 The EC made some rules changes that eliminated the 2 hole target,that stated all targets thrown where ATA trophies were awarded will be required to be in the 3 hole, and the EC eliminated the 17 & 18
yard handicap, which made 19 yards the minimum handicap

President Bradford reported these rule changes to the delegates at the 1993 Annual BOD meeting.

Dean Bright challenged the new 3 hole requirement which was the old rule of a straightaway from posts 1 and post 5.

Delegates voted 36-18 on Dean Bright's motion to keep the previous language permitting the 2 hole target.

In the annual 1996 meeting it was voted on to delete the Winchester 1524 trap
language

More information will follow as I read more minutes.

What we need is more members that read what proposed changes are being considered.

I want you all to know that the doubles targets used to be thrown 48-50 yards.

Furthermore Rob Taylor wants softer shorter doubles targets thrown, his last request was turned down, which I hope the BOD and EC continue to turn down.

There are over 33 pages of Minutes covering the 3 hole to 2 hole target changes


Gary Bryant
Dr.longshot

Dr.Longshot, Dec 23, 2013 Re

 

Gary, a few corrections to the post wishbone put up quoting a 23 Dec 2013 post of yours.

1. You wrote:

"Delegates voted 36-18 on Dean Bright's motion to keep the previous language permitting the 2 hole target."

The vote as not to permit 2 hole targets. It was to rescind the EC's change which required 3-hole targets when ATA trophies we awarded. It's a small difference, but a difference.

2. You wrote:

"In the annual 1996 meeting it was voted on to delete the Winchester 1524 trap language."

This is not true. The motion by the Iowa delegate Phil Thyer made no mention of trap brands. What is did was specifically state that the minimum spread of targets for singles and handicap would be 34 degrees. (Edit: At least it is my recollection that Mr. Thyer's motion used the the same text as had my failed motion in the previous year. I trust I am correct about this, but it was 20 years ago....)

3. You wrote "There are over 33 pages of Minutes covering the 3 hole to 2 hole target changes."

This is not true. I'd be surprised if there were as many as three full pages. And since that meeting in August, 1996, there has not just been zero pages; there has not been a single word. No delegate or EC member has been moved to bring it up in any annual meeting in the intervening nineteen years.

Neil

 

Wow, 19 years-seems like yesterday-and my ex-wife broke here one and only 100 straight on those oh so difficult 3-hole targets!!

 

SCOTT: Our is every ATA Members a ATA fees money, not just my limited fees, but some of my Life Member Fees, Are you wanting to start an argument? Not with me you won't, you Instigator, not on this site you won't. You did not read the rules when you joined, did you?

 

Mr. Neil Winston you need to stand corrected, you are wrong according to the ATA minutes recorded by Kenny Ray Estes, who has the complete file, I will not enter into any confrontations with you, you agreed to the conditions of this site? Did you not? I am not participating in any confrontations, it serves no purpose, especially since 1996 there hasn't, no explanation is needed, I am abiding by our rules sir!!!~

 

Gary, I am not wrong. Remember, I was there. In fact, I have attended all of every Annual meeting since 1985. If Kenny Ray has documents that I am wrong, I hope he will post the evidence here and I encourage him to correct my memory if necessary, but I doubt it will be necessary. If I am wrong, and proven so, I will gladly admit it and accept correction. OK, we both know that you, yourself, did not write that post above, but as long as you were taking credit for it, I thought you were the right person to respond to.

The reason I know the text of Iowa Delegate's motion in 1996 is that I wrote it. (I did write all this in 1995, first in a letter in Shotgun Sports, second at the 1995 Annual Meeting when made a motion which was defeated (in 1995) but was taken over by Delegate Thyer in 1996 and under his leadership, passed. I did not say 34 degrees, instead I wrote "In ATA registered competition traps shall be set in not less then the Number 2 hole" and then went on to define it operationally, that is, a straightaway from a point 3.5 feet to the right of post 1 and so on. This the the 34 degree spread the rulebook talks about today and much of the remaining text in the rulebook even today is taken directly from my motion. There is no mention of brands of trap machines or any of the rest of that - just the way the birds were to fly.


I read the forum rules. I can't see how I have run foul of any of them. You just posted some inaccurate stuff and I thought that members here should get the facts. How can that not help them understand an event which most of them will only hear about second-hand. From me they get it first-hand. Once again, I was there.

Neil

 

So here we go again,

We have posters ganging up on Dr Longshot for posting the facts. Who the heck let these agitators in here?

 

The same people who let you post your drivel John Trap!

Isn't life, Liberty and Justice for all wonderful?

 

Are ya'll kinfolks or what?

 

The point is that the good Dr. Posted info with errors and it has now been corrected.

Lefty

 

I haven't seen leonidas or nudie post anything positive yet. Why don't all you trolls go back to where you came from? It's no wonder that the ata is dying, with people like these supposedly representing it!

 

The gentleman calls Mr.Winston out, and when Mr. Winston responds he is an agitator? You can't be serious...

Seems like this be a better example of agitation. What say you?

 

As in 'the cat is out of the bag"?

 

And John Trap is right in the middle, liking the post. Then he has the gall to accuse other of being agitators, calling for them to leave.

hypocrite, noun

I've been made to feel inadequate my whole life by someone who turns out to be a total hypocrite: pretender, dissembler, deceiver, liar, pietist, sanctimonious person, plaster saint; informal phony, fraud, sham, fake.

Big John, Big Bad John

 

Rob"s phone number is on his web. site why don't you just call him ?????????? I have !!!!!!!!!!

 

18 threads started on the first page

 

Neil the ATA minutes do not go back to 1996, I just looked. I see no way of going back further. Neil you were a moderator on the other site, You wanted me to remove a post I wrote about your post that I quoted you word for word on, I don't have the ability to bring up a thread you wrote, but I will be damned if I will remove a truthful post I wrote, that I quoted you word for word, I refused and you had me booted off that site, I cannot bring up any of my records of TS.com, I do not remember a quote in 2013 on a 1996 ATA Minutes, especially since I cannot bring it up, to refute it.

That's water under the bridge, from several years ago. Kenny Ray Estes has corrected you, regarding your response.
SCOTT CALHOUN: Because I have not spent much money on ATA shooting, does not stop me from wanting to bring back the ATA to what it was before it was DUMBED down w/easy targets, and Reduced hdcp to 18yds. The EC & BOD giving away 2 yard reductions, not once but twice.
LEFTOUT: I did not post errors and they were not corrected, they have been misconstrued, and un verifiable. That's why you have the name LEFTOUT your out of the information circle. I suggest you get in the information circle.
I am not a pushover Neil I will accept any trapshooting challenge you throw at me and I will WHUP your A**, you name it!!
From an ATA Life member that's 73 years old, still full of spunk and back up what I say, the Gauntlet has been thrown!!!
Gary Bryant Dr.longshot

 

ROSEY: Letter sent to him at ATA Office in Sparta Illinois 1/22/2015

 

I was never a moderator on any site, Gary.

I did not see where Kenny Ray corrected me, though I asked him to if he had counter-evidence. If there be such evidence, I'm sure his interest in accurate histories will move him to offer his insights here.

Neil

 

Thanks Gary. If this needs to be sent again or one like it Maybe all of us that feel the same way sign it.

 

Neil: He did it on this site

 

On this thread? Can you point it out? I really do want to make amends if I need to.

Neil

 

Scott Calhoun: For your information I have shot a total of 104,900 registered targets, 27 of those years I was on the 27 yard line, off yardage reduction then right back on, on hold 4 times because of wins for 2 years at a time, can you say that? Not bragging but I am a Hdcp Shooter and always will be, In 1970 I had one of the highest hdcp avgs in the country, the targets were harder then, but you probably wasn't a member back then. My past singles avgs were not too bad I had 98% several times lots of 96-97% but some of you will paw all over that and try to pull it down with innuendoes, I am proud of what I have shot over the years, and my collection of ATA Silver trophies, Belt Buckles, and Plaques.
Ohio State Southeast Zone member 8 times w/patches to prove it. I am also a Kentucky Colonel Champion. Annie Oakley Champion too. not the Female One!!!
That's a few dollars of ATA Money spent. + Life Membership I am not a Newbie

 

I hope you haven't forgotten about me, Gary. I am hoping you will point me to post wherein Kenny Ray corrects some of my mistakes.

Neil

 

I have no way of copying the letter, but is has been sent to his Sparta Office address

 

It was on this site and you responded to him, not this thread

 

Gary

If the letter was written as a word document just open it up and copy it and then paste it to this site.

I am sure it would be a good read.

 

I think you may be misremembering, Gary. Kenny did respond to Jo 2 about something he had mixed up but I don't see anything there which addresses my posts here. Here's the thread - is this what you thought was addressed to me? Kenny Ray's post is about 3/4 of the way down.

http://americantrapshooter.com/inde...he-ata-shell-specifications-been-changed.221/


Neil

 

Will this information help....This is where it all started......

Neil was elected ATA Delegate in 1987 and held the post until 2000. Highpoints were; Jim Bradford, past ATA President, and Neil were able to get the misfire rule changed, and Neil was instrumental in getting the 3-hole target rule rescinded.

Birddog, Lew D. Boyko
Minnesota

 

In 2000 he retired for a couple of years, then returned for an additional period, serving until 2009. He was on the EC from 2004 to 2009, serving as President in target year 2008.

Neil

 

Gary, HB did adivse me on a needed change in what I wrote above. I thus amend

"The motion by the Iowa delegate Phil Thyer made no mention of trap brands. What is did was specifically state that the minimum spread of targets for singles and handicap would be 34 degrees. (Edit: At least it is my recollection that Mr. Thyer's motion used the the same text as had my failed motion in the previous year. I trust I am correct about this, but it was 20 years ago....)

to

"The motion by the Indiana delegate Jon Moore made no mention of trap brands. What is did was specifically state that the minimum spread of targets for singles and handicap would be 34 degrees. (Edit: At least it is my recollection that Mr. Moore's motion used the the same text as had my failed motion in the previous year. I trust I am correct about this, but it was 20 years ago....)

I also now accept that there is is more in the minutes about the 2 and 3-hole controversy than I earlier thought, since Kenny is going back 50 years and I was considering only the "modern era," say 1980 to 1996. That does not change my opinion that it's over. Almost 20 years of total silence makes me think that there's more to the effectiveness of a wooden stake than many realize.

Neil

 

20 years ago. Wow, now that is hard to believe.

 

Neil, I remember as you stated per Phil's motion almost verbatim to your previous verbiage.

Because he doesn't speak the truth!!!!!

 

Well, since my name has come in the above disagreement, I have no choice but to state the facts as I understand them from discussions documented in Sportsmen's Review and Trap & Field. Again, I offer anyone the opportunity to offer correction to anything I say. It is my desire to always be truthful and accurate.

I apologize for the length of my response but it required a detailed explanation.

There has been much discussion over the years regarding the 2-hole and 3-hole setting as it relates to ATA rules. I have a file on the subject for two reasons. First I was interested in the evolution from the old wide 45 degree targets (quartering targets), to the 22 degree targets (straightaways from Post 1 & 5) or #3 hole targets to the present 17 degree target setting. And secondly, I consider myself a novice historian who has spent years typing and scanning old files on shooters, gun clubs, tournaments, trophies, exhibition shooters, targets, traps, state shoots and about anything else related to trap shooting. Oh, and I also like to be able to provide helpful answers to historical questions on trapshooting.

On the other FORUM, I offered comment on the subject about August 2013 and I think again in December or January 2014. All I tried to do was help answer questions. Sometime between those dates I provided my file to Dr. Longshot so he could have a better understanding of the written discussions on the ATA’s concern for uniform targets, discussions on rules changes and dates when they took place. In fact I’ve shared these and many other files with several people who were interested in the history. I recently sent my entire file to a gentleman who was writing an article about Lester S. German, for Parker Pages. I’m a true believer of preserving our history.

Until last night, I had no knowledge of the purported 23 Dec 2013 post mentioned above or the statements in quotations in Mr. Winston’s post. At least I don’t remember reading them because I’m certain I would have had a response at the time they were posted.

Since I was asked, here is my response to each question:

No. 1

You wrote:
“Delegates voted 36-18 on Dean Bright’s motion to keep the previous language permitting the 2 hole target.”
The vote as not to permit 2 hole targets. It was to rescind the EC’s change which required 3-hole targets when ATA trophies we awarded. It’s a small difference, but a difference.

Below you’ll find the minutes from Annual Meeting of the BOD, August 19, 1993, interpret them however you wish.

I hold the view that the Executive Committee showed the desire to enforce the rules that had been in place (minimum left and right angle target setting being a straightaway from Post 1 & 5), while also looking the other way by not addressing the #2-hole setting. If there were other reasons for establishing the language “where ATA trophies are awarded” I’d like to hear them, but it looks like a compromise for gun club managers to me.

But anyway you look at it, the attempt to confirm the 3-hole target as the only legal target recognized by ATA rules was in fact overturned by the Delegates who clearly wanted the narrow targets. I must the E. C. for trying to adhere to the written rules.

ATA NEWS
Minutes Of The Annual Meeting Of The Board Of Directors Of The
Amateur Trapshooting Association Of America
August 19, 1993​

7. REPORT OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE (Pg. 78 center column)

President Bradford informed the Directors that the Executive Committee have modified and amended various ATA Official Rules as required, and which it is believed will be in the best interests of the sport of trapshooting and all ATA Members. All modifications and amendments to ATA Official Rules will be fully reported in the Minutes of the Executive Committee Meetings. As examples, President Bradford informed Directors that the 17 and 18 yard lines will no longer be utilized as handicap yardage, and all handicap yardage will begin at the 19.0 yard line. Also commencing on October 1, 1993, all ATA Registered Targets thrown at any tournament where ATA trophies are awarded will be required to be thrown by traps set in the “3-hole”.
( TRAP & FIELD, December 1993, page 78 center column)

11. NEW BUSINESS

Mr. Bright, of Iowa discussed the Amendment to Official Rule III, N., FLIGHTS AND ANGLES, which the Executive Committee passed during their meeting at this Grand American, and which amendment was reported by President Bradford earlier in these meetings during his report. Mr. Bright discussed the effect of requiring traps to be set in the No. 3 hole and stated that in his opinion the effect on the sport of trapshooting would be to make it more difficult to break targets and would make the sport harder and less enjoyable for the majority of shooters. Mr. Bright made the following motion:

The Amendment to Official Rule III, N., FLIGHTS AND ANGLES, made by the Executive Committee shall be rescinded, and Official Rule III, N., FLIGHTS AND ANGLES shall remain as written in the Official Trapshooting Rules issued by the AMATEUR TRAPSHOOTING ASSOCIATION (October 1, 1992 Reprint).

Mr. Bright requested a roll call vote on this motion. The motion was seconded by Mr. Arvas of New Mexico, who likewise seconded the request for roll call vote.

Discussion on Mr. Bright’s motion included Vice-President Crausbay’s comment that traps commonly used cannot be made to properly throw a straightaway target set in the No. 2 hole.

Mr. Hastings of Delaware asked why, if it is not possible to throw straightaway targets when the trap is set in the No 2 hole as Mr. Crausbay stated, are the traps set in the No. 2 hole during the Grand American. Mr. Acklin of Ohio inquired why the Executive committee passed the Amendment to Rule III, N. requiring traps to be set in the No. 3 hole for gun clubs awarding ATA Trophies only.

The question was called and a roll call vote on Mr. Bright’s motion resulted in thirty (36) votes for passage of the motion and eighteen(18) votes against passage of the motion, and it was therefore, by majority vote,

RESOLVED that the Amendment to Official Rule III, N. FLIGHTS AND ANGLES,
made by the Executive Committee shall be rescinded, and Official Rule III, N.
FLIGHTS AND ANGLES shall remain as written in the Official Trapshooting Rules
issued by the AMATEUR TRAPSHOOTING ASSOCIATION (October 1, 1992 Reprint).
[ TRAP & FIELD, December 1993, page 80 ]​

No. 2

You wrote:

"In the annual 1996 meeting it was voted on to delete the Winchester 1524 trap language."

This is not true. The motion by the Iowa delegate Phil Thyer made no mention of trap brands. What is did was specifically state that the minimum spread of targets for singles and handicap would be 34 degrees. (Edit: At least it is my recollection that Mr. Thyer's motion used the the same text as had my failed motion in the previous year. I trust I am correct about this, but it was 20 years ago....)

The statement is a backwards.

As I stated in another “thread,” mention of the Model 1524 trap & #2-hole setting was short-lived. It came into the 1990 rules and was last seen in the initial 1995 rules (reprinted October 1994), which appeared in the 1994 Average book printed in January 1995.

At their February 1995 meeting, the E. C. voted to eliminate the language, due to other style traps being used which had no “hole setting” and because it was well documented, even by Winchester, that the #2-hole did not throw targets as per the defined angle rules.

Neil it was the 1996 Annual Meeting when you expressed your opposition to the E. C.’s amendment to the FLIGHTS AND ANGLES rules as they appeared on pages 22-26 of the March 1, 1995 Rule Book Reprint and made the motion:

“In ATA registered competition traps shall not be set in less than the Number 2 hole.
“ATA RULE III, N. shall be amended to read :

‘In singles shooting the trap shall be so adjusted that within the normal
distribution of angles thrown by the rap, the right angle shall be not less
than a straightaway from a point 305 feet to the right of post 1 and the left
angle shall not be less than a straightaway from a point 3.5 feet to the left
of post 5.’

According to the minutes you offered additional comments regarding your “perception of duties of ATA Directors, what he considered the unfairness of the ATA Executive Committee action in amending Rule III, N., and his feelings that the Rule change by the Executive Committee should not be allowed to stand.”

In hindsight it would certainly have been much better if the E. C. had thoroughly discussed their amendment with the rules committee and every State and Provincial Delegate. I don’t know that this was not done in advance but I’ve seen no mention of it other than the minutes. At least this did happen during the debate on your motion. As I’m sure you remember, 20 Delegates supported your motion and 33 opposed.

So as a result of the vote on your motion, no further amendments were made to the FLIGHTS & ANGLES rules and the content referring to the Model 1524 trap and #2-hole continued to be struck from the Official Rule Book.

Again, I believe the E. C. was trying to do the right thing by enforcing the rules in existence from the 1950s. Because the rules had not been enforced continually in the past, a blind eye was given to the use of the #2-hole, and I think many ATA members believed it was the rule and the E. C. was trying to make the game harder. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve been critical of many of the past decisions made by our Executive Committees, but I will not find fault with their decision to abide by the rules. We are all mandated to follow the rules.

At the annual BOD meeting, August 15, 1996, Indiana Delegate Mr. Moore, made the motion to amend the Flights & Angles rule, returning the reference for the Model 1524 trap and the #2-hole setting. This of course inspired a lively debate and it was at this time that Ex-Officio Crausbay spoke of opposition to the motion. The motion passed, (44 in favor; 8 against and 1 abstain), and the language regarding the Model 1524 trap and #2-hole setting once again accompanied the rules. It was put back into the rules, not deleted as stated in statement No. 2

No. 3
You wrote "There are over 33 pages of Minutes covering the 3 hole to 2 hole target changes."

This is not true. I'd be surprised if there were as many as three full pages. And since that meeting in August, 1996, there has not just been zero pages; there has not been a single word. No delegate or EC member has been moved to bring it up in any annual meeting in the intervening nineteen years.

I have no knowledge of the comment about 33 pages of minutes relating to the FLIGHTS AND ANGLES rule. I have personally typed 56 pages on the history of this subject. I estimate that perhaps 14 pages (12 font size) comprise ATA Official Minutes.

I hope my comments have been helpful to all.

HB

 

I for one Thank you for your response. I find it very enlightening.

 

I thank you too, Kenny. I can't say how much I admire the work you have gone to to clear this up. I know that you were not responsible for the words used in Mr. Bryant's post and would have corrected them, where needed, if you had known.

You suggested we make up our own minds and I have made up mine.

1. The assertion I addressed: "“Delegates voted 36-18 on Dean Bright’s motion to keep the previous language permitting the 2 hole target.”

My response: "The vote as not to permit 2 hole targets. It was to rescind the EC’s change which required 3-hole targets when ATA trophies we awarded. It’s a small difference, but a difference."

The motion as recorded by secretary Melton, provided by you.

"The Amendment to Official Rule III, N., FLIGHTS AND ANGLES, made by the Executive Committee shall be rescinded, and Official Rule III, N., FLIGHTS AND ANGLES shall remain as written in the Official Trapshooting Rules issued by the AMATEUR TRAPSHOOTING ASSOCIATION (October 1, 1992 Reprint)."

In my view, the original assertion was totally wrong (since the fall-back was not the 2-hole; it was the rulebook.) My own verson was correct, right down to use of the word "recind," which is not bad for recall without notes after 19 years.

2. The assertion I addressed. "In the annual 1996 meeting it was voted on to delete the Winchester 1524 trap language."

My response: "This is not true. The motion by the Iowa delegate Phil Thyer made no mention of trap brands. What is did was specifically state that the minimum spread of targets for singles and handicap would be 34 degrees. (Edit: At least it is my recollection that Mr. Thyer's motion used the the same text as had my failed motion in the previous year. I trust I am correct about this, but it was 20 years ago....)

(I have corrected the reference from Delegate Thyer to Delegate Moore as you pointed out on the shotshell-speed thread. I am entirely trusting my memory on this and can only say that I believe that Delegate Moore's motion was a duplicate of the my earler one which I think if you check will see was in the 1995 Annual Meeting. I will go forward on the assumption that I am right about this.)

The motion (again, assuming it was mine, just reintroduced) was not to "delete the Winchester 1524 trap language;" is was to make 34 degrees the official miminim angle which also explicitly included the 2-hole and that was in the motion too. But the guts was the operational definition (how you would go about getting it standing 3.5 feet to the right of post 1 to see a straightaway) of the new permitted angles.

In my view the the original assertion was totally wrong since the motion does not mention any trap brand. As before, I think my version was correct save for naming the wrong Delegate.

May I made an important peripheral point here, Kenny? I have often appreciated the accuracy of Secretary Melton's minutes, and this is a perfect example. As he reported, I did not make any comment as to the two angles we were deciding between; my whole point was the action of the EC in their March decision. The By-Laws enumerate the powers of the Board of Directors to make the rules and give the power to run the ATA to the EC when the BOD is not in session. It requires, however, "It shall be the further duty of the Executive Committee to at all times carry into effect directives of the Board of Directors." I held that Delegate Bright's motion, two years earlier, had prevented the EC from requiring srtaightaway target from 1 and 5, at least in tournaments were ATA trophies was given. But, in my view, they went ahead and did it anyway. I thought thay should not be permitted to do that. That's all. Nothing about 2- or 3-holes targets at all.

This is an important point. In my letter to the Delegates, in my article in Shotgun Sports, in my motion at the 1995 meeting I never expressed a preference for one target presntation or the other. My only point was that the action of the EC had been contrary to the By-laws of the ATA and should be overturned for that reason alone. So I was not the champion of the 2-hole as everyone has heard, I was only the champion of following the By-laws at that time. As time passed, of course, I saw that the two hole was better and now support that target setting. But I don't think that the present speed rules are any good since they should not put a cap on the speed a setter may use and the doubles targets are way, way too slow anyway.

When my motiion was defeated I took that to be the will of the BOD and did no more about it; in fact when it was taken up in the 1996 meeting, I did not even speak.

3. The assertion I addressed: "There are over 33 pages of Minutes covering the 3 hole to 2 hole target changes."

My response: "This is not true. I'd be surprised if there were as many as three full pages. And since that meeting in August, 1996, there has not just been zero pages; there has not been a single word. No delegate or EC member has been moved to bring it up in any annual meeting in the intervening nineteen years."

I see that you have access to minutes about the 2- vs 3-hole controversy I have never seen and accept your version that there are lots of them, but no 33 pages, as you agree. I'll call that a draw between Mr. Bryant and me and award you the trophy on that one.

Thank you again, Kenny, for doing all that work and straightening us all out about that particular chapter of ATA history.

Yours in Sport,

Neil

 

Truth reigns supreme .

GB shot down again. That man must be full of holes.

Lefty

 

Thanks HB for this enlightening story. You and I have discussed this issue in the past, but now I see exactly what happened. It was Confusing for an old guy, but now it is much more clear.

Dave

 

No, it is not GB shot down again and full of holes.... Maybe Dr. Longshot is not 100% correct but then niether is Mr. Graph Neil Winston. The bottom line, is what
will help bring back trap shooting to where is was in the 1960,s 1970's or 1980's. Reducing the Handicap yardage more yet, more trophies, more trinkets, whistles,,,,
I do not think so.
The increased youth shooting programs around the country should help, the reduced price of gas will help, but for how long.
I believe the main decline in shooting Reg. ATA is $$$ INCOME. In the last 20 to 25 years there has been big hurt put on Americas working middle class
and that is where your shooters come from. Good Paying jobs are in the past. Sure there are good paying jobs out there, but not like it used to be.
Having this debate about our sport of ATA shooting is the best thing there is. We know something has to change and that is where discussions like
this one will help us get down that road.

Birddog,
Lew D. Boyko

 

The youth programs are great and there's a lot of youth participation here in Ohio and some darn good young shooters. From what I've observed (and ya'll have too), once these youths leave the nest and have to pay their own way, most of those youths cannot sustain the costs of shooting so they stop doing it. Only those that are driven competitors will find a way to keep shooting and that's the minority. These young shooters need good jobs to keep shooting and that's a difficult thing to find when you're 18/19 fresh out of school.

 

They may be back in their 40's-50's.

 

We only can hope Trapshooting lasts that long-especially the ATA!

 

Well we will have to hope they post Garry's letter in the ATA minutes in about a years time.

I am sure it would be an interesting read.