The company proposing a controversial police shooting range outside Collector didn't charge NSW Police for use of the range.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
After their first town hall-style meeting with residents on Saturday afternoon, the owners of Australian Target Systems confirmed the deal.
"We were aware of the NSW Police's operational need and made the decision not to charge for use of the land," spokesperson Lee Bath said.
Standing near the edge of his farm outside Collector, farmer John Reardon said the deal seemed at odds with the business case ATS had been trying to put to residents.
"Sounds ridiculous," Mr Reardon said.
Mr Reardon's wife, Tina Freund, was concerned their idyllic country life was coming to an end and asked if it was necessary to destroy a community for the sake of a gun range.
Over the ridge near the farm, established by Mr Reardon's family 170 years ago, is the proposed controversial new live fire shooting range for police.
"People move out here to get away from the hustle and bustle," Mr Reardon said.
He said sheep on his property had been mismothering at the sound of the gunfire: spooked sheep had fled at the noise, leaving their lambs behind.
In Collector's small memorial hall, locals aired their misgivings to the gun range operators, who stressed it would be good for the town.
Residents were mainly concerned about the noise, which can be heard in town, four kilometres from the range known as Samuel's Run.
ATS' chief executive Paul Burns and operations officer Lee Bath pointed to their report where an audiologist they'd commissioned had described the noise from a single shot test as "barely audible".
But they conceded they hadn't tested for the noise of rapid fire.
"That knocks the credibility right out," one resident said, saying the noise was destroying their piece of "Australian life".
Outside, resident Geoff Grey, said the meeting had come too late.
"With the submissions due to council due by the end of the week ... it's very late in the process for people to make an informed decision," he said.
Local James McKay was just as unsatisfied.
"There's an underlying attitude of never asking permission but begging forgiveness," he said.
"The revelation today that they allowed 47 riot squad officers on their property for $1. That's their major client and they give it away for a $1."
The license fee was $1 for the use of the land but only "if demanded" according to Ms Bath, who said they didn't charge police.
Locals Charley Stanford-Smith had business plans for a animal boarding shelter, but said it would be untenable considering the noise would spook the animals.
"Their [noise] testing doesn't even vaguely resemble how they'd use it. At best, it's incredibly ignorant of them, or deliberately misleading," Ms Stanford-Smith said.
