FRA Members ratio in races

[ba-ba]

I was on the list up until the FRA organiser meetings in Jan (i.e. last year's organiser list).
Since those meetings I haven't received any RO blanket mail as I assume they have moved to this year's calendar list now.

WP: regarding your earlier point, (post #51) isn't it true that the WFRA have surcharges for non-members (Travs will know more than me on this)

As for the surcharge - it is my understanding there is no imposition of a specific amount imposed by the FRA. It is a suggestion that some organisers asked for and the FRA is allowing them to impose the surcharge if they wish - released a rule constricture from a while back. The extra funds will be allocated as per the individual organiser's discretion. Maybe this optionality could be more prominent in communication to the membership/general population?
I find this flexibility more accommodating than e.g. the IMRA (blanket surcharge/no entry to non-members); the trail runner's association (blanket surcharge goes to the NGB) and even EA (blanket surcharge, goes to organisers for small races and NGB for large city races)

As such, you don't have to add the surcharge to your race. At the organisers meeting I attended (in government approved County Durham) all organsiers were in agreement with the policy, with a few saying that for a few of their more 'entry level' events they won't add to their entry fee, for the reasons you state in promotion/easy entry to the sport.

I understand some of the safety issues. However I (and it seems the committee itself) was surprised at the lack of knowledge of the FRA at many races - even big gnarly buggers like Trigger, lakeland classics.

I feel that although the FRA has decent visibility and a wide armory of inititives to ensure racers are suitably experienced for the race of their choice (nav courses, entry vetting, safety rules on entry sheets), there is still some level of missunderstanding of the seriousness a fell race can unexpectedly take on. Some of the more recent initiatives - e.g. surcharge, membership stats - to 'advertise' the FRA and its safety requirements seem, to me, the use of nudge theory to increase FRA visibility and help get their message across better. Of course if everyone read the small print, was suitably grounded enough to know their limitations, what can go wrong in a race, we didn't have the litigious culture we now do , none of this would be required! Alas we do.

Your point about the British relays Nav leg stands - however in the event rules it is up to club captains to ensure their runners are suitably experienced. Some of the things I have seen at Relays makes me question if even some club captains appreciate the inherent dangers in the sport and the importance of experience - sometimes it seems to some like a nice jolly, sold to probably unexperienced club members as a slightly tougher XC, to fill a team, and some competitors would be in serious trouble and without the requisite SMJ were the weather worse/there not a larger amount of people on the hill to follow than at many races.

For the record, I am currently in contact with a few FRA committee members on other matters but am in no way a sock puppet. I have done a fair amount of internal grappling with a few initiatives/ideas and have come to the conclusion that there is often such a mine-field of stake-holders, ethos and keeping rules to a minimum in the manner the founding group of 1970 intended, that there is no nice and easy solution, nothing is quite as simple as it should be but at the same time nothing is as underhand or corrupt as you seem to think it is!