Quote Originally Posted by wkb21 View Post
Not necessarily. If you read the objectives of SHR (http://www.shr.uk.com/WhatWeDo.aspx) they are very inclusive and promote open access. Their championship is open, the calendar is freely accessible, race organisers are given priority support. It does not have a rule book (although it has a safety code of course). This is the model to go for.

Some points you should consider before voting:
{snip long list of very sensible questions}
An excellent set of questions, Keith. I wish the sub-committee's report could have been based along these lines. I also think it's pertinent to ask if the sub-committee contacted WFRA and SHR when they went out on their quest for the 'facts'. Here we have two UK-based fell running organisations which split from UKA some time ago and which have doubtless gained useful knowledge in the process which could have been of benefit to the FRA in the current debate. Were WFRA and SHR consulted - there's no mention of either in the report?

Cheers, Steve