Editing National Association of Target Shooting Sports

The '''National Association of Target Shooting Sports''' (NATSS), was a working group comprising the representatives of the [[National Rifle Association of the United Kingdom|NRA]], [[National Smallbore Rifle Association|NSRA]] and [[Clay Pigeon Shooting Association|CPSA]] to explore the possibility of merging the UK's three main National Governing Bodies for Target Shooting.

Shooting in the UK had been criticised by a number of funding groups including UK Sport as well as it's athletes for its scattered and disparate governance structure, as well as the absence of a coherent development ladder for British [[Shooting_sports#Rifle|Target Rifle]] shooters to progress from grassroots to elite level.  

This misapprehension arose from the sheer ignorance of those criticising a series of systems (in all three disciplines) which was working well, and continues to work well.  
This is evidenced by the continuing successes of GB shooters at all levels.

Immediate reaction amongst shooters was mixed, with some embracing the possibilities that a single, consolidated organisation would bring, whilst others raised a number of serious practical considerations regarding the implementation and impact of a single coherent body. These included the fact that the CPSA did not have the same charity status as the NRA and NSRA, and would require substantial restructuring to amalgamate into a new body that would be eligible for charity status.

There was also some confusion amongst shooters who thought a third party was attempting to usurp the existing bodies, a myth perpetuated by angry postings to a number of Internet forums. Resistance remained even  when it was made clear that NATSS was formed of representatives of the existing bodies. Outright hostility was barely tempered,  and  serious practical concerns remained regarding the nature of a merger and how such an action would be implemented, and who actually wanted a merger to take place at all.

Much of the hostility to the merger proposal was  warranted as the NSRA and NRA are members associations, and therefore could not perform a merger without explicit permission to do so from their memberships at an AGM or EGM. The NATSS steering group had no powers beyond conducting research and the project was essentially one big viability study.

As the project was funded by UKSport, it was believed by the proponents there was no need to seek permission from members before undertaking the studies. The project was instigated by mutual agreement of the respective executive committees.  In fact, Sport ENGLAND was funding much or most of the exercise,  and as this was clearly A GB-wide matter,  that became contentious.

The accuracy or otherwise of the claimed NATSS "Surveys"  may be gauged by the fact that at a NRA Council Meeting,  the NATSS and amalgamation proposals were UNANIMOUSLY rejected.

==31 July 2007==
Following the "Bisley Forum" of 2007, the NATSS steering group was hosted by the CPSA on 31 July 2007<ref name="31st July 2007">[http://www.nra.org.uk/common/asp/content/latest.asp?site=NRA 31st July 2007]</ref>, where "Performance Matters" were appointed as facilitators. Performance Matters claimed extensive experience facilitating similar mergers and restructurings for sports NGBs, but there seems to be little evidence of that available to the members of the NGBs. The involvement of Performance Matters was supported through funding obtained from UKSport and CCPR.  In some way SportENGLAND seems to have been a contributor,  but recently this knowledge appears to be being suppressed. 

However,  the appointment of this organisation, and its remit,   was not approved by any of the MEMBERSHIP, and to thus day the there has been little or no information given about the so-called "extensive experience facilitating similar mergers and restructurings for sports NGBs".  Indeed,  even cursory enquiries caused concerns.

It was also announced that there would be a series of regional workshops to consult with stake-holders such as firearms dealers, owners and managers of shooting centres, county association representatives, as well as shooters themselves. John Perry of the CPSA was seconded from his usual duties to work exclusively on the NATSS project as the liaison between the constituent bodies and Performance Matters.

==The Workshops==
Nine workshops<ref name="Nine Workshops">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=159&Itemid=101 Regional Workshops]</ref> were held around the UK in March and April 2008. An online survey was also made available for those unable to attend the workshops, and to reach the wider shooting community. The survey results were published on April 30, 2008<ref name="Survey Results">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=244&Itemid=101 Survey Results]</ref>.

Generally,  those taking part in the Regional Workshops felt they were being presented with a "one issue" agenda, amalgamation, and all presentations questions and answers seemed to be directed with that single aim in mind. 

The so-called "survey" was taken by 2601 people, and unaudited reports claim that  54% thought there would be challenges and drawbacks to modernisation,  with  91.4% of the opinion that on balance the benefits of modernisation outweighed the drawbacks.
It was then claimed that ultimately 87.5% were in favour of a merger, whilst 10% opposed it.  There is no substantiation of these figures, which are widely accepted at fanciful at best, and simply nonsense otherwise.

Questions have been raised as to the validity of the survey however, as the survey permitted participants to skip questions. Although 2601 individuals participated, not all questions were answered 2601 times.
For example, the direct question on whether the respondant favoured a merger was only answered by ~1000 participants, so in reality, only ~35% of the participants explicitely stated outright support and ~4% stated outright opposition, with ~61% abstaining from the question entirely.

Five strategic priorities were identified from the survey:
# Protecting the sport
# Repositioning the sport in the media and public perception
# Education - target sooting in schools and in the National Curriculum
# Widening and increasing membership
# Protecting the heritage of the sport

In fact,  these were NOT identified FROM the survey - they were parts of the "agenda" prior to and at the "regional workshops". 

The participants were faced with one agenda from the start, amalgamation,  as if it was the ONLY possibility,  and decided upon. 

<br />The results of the survey were in large part validated by the feedback from the workshops, although the workshops naturally allowed more detailed discussion.
<br />A summary of the Workshop results was released on Wednesday 4 June 2008 <ref name="Workshop Results">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=278&Itemid=101 Workshop Results]</ref>, and updates from Performance Matters were made available throughout 2008 and into 2009<ref name="May 2008 Update">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=269&Itemid=101 May 2008 Update]</ref><ref name="July 2008 Update">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=314&Itemid=101 July 2008 Update]</ref><ref name="August 2008 Update">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=329&Itemid=101 August 2008 Update]</ref><ref name="January 2009 Update">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=439&Itemid=101 January 2009 Update]</ref><ref name="February 2009 Update">[http://www.nsra.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=469&Itemid=101 February 2009 Update]</ref>

==2009==
Work on NATSS stalled to some extent in late 2008 due to a focus on attaining £750,000 of grassroots funding from Sport England as part of a "whole sport" funding bid by NSRA, NRA and CPSA, under the umbrella of GBTSF (Great Britain Target Shooting Federation) which led to mass confusion regarding Sport England money being administered by a group with "GB" in its title.

In fact, this was a tactical blunder by the NATSS who failed even at that stage to realise and appreciate that there are FOUR "home nations" involved in each of the shooting sports, and that quite properly, "Sport ENGLAND"  wondered why it should be in effect subsidising the three others.

Following a CPSA Board meeting on 22 July 2009, the CPSA announced on August 3 its intention to withdraw from the process due to slow progress and the end of UKSport funding for Performance Matters.

Following the withdrawal of the CPSA, the NRA shelved the project indefinitely.

==Legacy==
Whilst NATSS itself remains shelved, the research and survey work performed in its name continues to be a valuable resource for the constituent groups. Shooting has been very slow to modernise to the internet age, and in the wake of the NATSS project, many issues that members had repeatedly emphasised as requiring action have been taken on board – most notably in the areas of communication and public relations, with new websites and mailing lists launched.

The NATSS "survey work" was so biassed and of a single issue (amalgamation) that there is little or no useful information to be gained from it. 

On 18 October 2010, the NRA also launched its own survey soliciting opinions from members and non-members to build on the work it has done since August 2009 and develop its strategy for the future<ref name="NRA Survey">[http://www.nra.org.uk/common/asp/content/latest.asp?site=NRA NRA Survey]</ref>.

The groups continue to cooperate on matters of elite sport through [http://www.britishshooting.org.uk British Shooting], and on broader shooting issues via the [http://www.bssc.org.uk British Shooting Sports Council].

Meantime, nation-wide in the Regions,  the principal discipline of "Target Rifle"  is dying out rapidly for want of facilities, and because access to MoD Ranges is being made in effect close to impossible.  

What might be more useful to the main shooting sports would be the dissolution of all but one bodies "above" the level of NRA/NSRA/CPSA.  These serve little useful purpose,  consume significant resources,  and dilute the proper authority and significance of the real NGBs.  Moreoever,  the ordinary shooters have no means to have a say in the affairs of these bodies, whereas they have "member rights"  in their NGBs. 

==See also==
* [[Clay Pigeon Shooting Association]]
* [[National Rifle Association of the United Kingdom]]
* [[National Smallbore Rifle Association]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:National Association Of Target Shooting Sports}}