redial Posted September 11, 2017 Report Share Posted September 11, 2017 I understand the NT are voting at their AGM if trail hunting should be banned on their land. Has anybody else heard this ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
figgy Posted September 11, 2017 Report Share Posted September 11, 2017 Not heard a thing of late. Know it was a bit of a issue raised in the past. They need to be careful as they have already stopped a few activities on land they control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stevo Posted September 11, 2017 Report Share Posted September 11, 2017 Heard about this week or so ago from the C/A , That will be the end of that then . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted September 11, 2017 Report Share Posted September 11, 2017 It was in a Saturday paper few weeks ago, the fella behind the counter was reading about it, and the C/A sent out an email asking members to vote in favour of trail hunting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted September 12, 2017 Report Share Posted September 12, 2017 (edited) All in the CA's latest email. Ranulph Fiennes ( I think ) has stirred up a few folk to vote for a ban, whereas the CA are claiming hypocrisy on antis part as the ban was based on welfare and cruelty issues. They are asking where is the welfare and cruelty involved in trail hunting. Edited September 12, 2017 by Scully Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McSpredder Posted September 12, 2017 Report Share Posted September 12, 2017 Trail hunting involves hounds following an artificially laid scent. Trail hound racing also involves hounds following an artificially laid scent. It is a feature of country shows in and around the Lake District which, judging from the number of times it is shown on TV programmes, seems to be very popular with both locals and tourists. Have the National Trust explained exactly how they would distinguish between the two? Or might trail hound racing, traditional hobby of the lower income groups, be banned on order to please Fiennes and some other super-rich NT activist toffs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1440 Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 Vote for the banning of trail hinting on NT land was narrowly defeated by only 299 votes. This is worrying as the missleading messages from the pro ban anti's is hitting a chord with those who have no idea what the difference betweem trail hunting and live quarry hunting is. They can't put uo the proposal again for 4 years but. You can bet as soon as the 4 years are up they will spin theor fake news with even more vigure. The CA and other NGOs need to be on top of this and through the BBC or other media need to get the facts across in prep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 (edited) Vote for the banning of trail hinting on NT land was narrowly defeated by only 299 votes. This is worrying as the missleading messages from the pro ban anti's is hitting a chord with those who have no idea what the difference betweem trail hunting and live quarry hunting is. They can't put uo the proposal again for 4 years but. You can bet as soon as the 4 years are up they will spin theor fake news with even more vigure. The CA and other NGOs need to be on top of this and through the BBC or other media need to get the facts across in prep. I'm glad the vote went OK. As a NT member I voted and to be fair to the NT they did send out all the voting papers with the AGM agenda and board member voting papers etc to all members, so there was no excuse for anyone not knowing about it. From memory (I've thrown the blurb away) the NT outgoing board recommended against the ban and only had to hold the vote because it was raised by a section of the membership. Like many organisations, the NT has a (very small) minority of 'activists' who make a disproportionate of 'noise' and are not what I would consider 'truthful' in their publicity. Edited October 21, 2017 by JohnfromUK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1440 Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 +1 I voted not something I useually do for these types of organisations. Glad I did too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zetter Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 national trust facebook page is worth a read the losing side is throwing a serious wobbly. Glad I voted on this as the margin was very tight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 We'll done those who voted, did it say what sort of percentage of members voted? I'm not a member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panoma1 Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 national trust facebook page is worth a read the losing side is throwing a serious wobbly. Glad I voted on this as the margin was very tight. If you look down the list of people who have "liked" the antis and loonies postings, they are all from the same small group of ignorant, fascist, class hating, anarchist nutters! Lol! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billytheghillie Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 this subject was on the Border news on friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovercoupe Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 They really show there true colours now they have lost! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanj Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 sanity prevails Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grrclark Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 Reading the majority of the comments on the NT Facebook page makes me despair a little bit, not for the anti hunting sentiment which I can understand people feeling strongly about, but because of the level of sheer stupidity and wilful ignorance of those commenting. I don't mind people having strong opinions, in fact I welcome that, but it actually does scare me just how much stupidity exists and the remarkably myopic view of the world that so many people have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 According to the Sunday people, 30,686 people voted for the ban and 30,985 voted against. Looking on the national trust website it says over 4 million members!! Philippa king of lacs said "this is a shot in the arm for animal cruelty" I've no idea? Still an awful lot of people didn't bother to vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 According to the Sunday people, 30,686 people voted for the ban and 30,985 voted against. Just shows alot of members dont really have an opinion or care if it happens I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 The AGM voting papers were sent to all members, and were clear, both in the resolutions up for voting, the method of postal/internet voting and the boards recommendation (to reject the ban). As you say, most members not caring is probably the main factor, though hunting, for whatever reason is a fairly 'toxic' subject with the general public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 Probably because the media make it out to be rich toffs and conservatives charging around on horse back, but we know this already, and like you say John most folk really don't care as it doesn't affect them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 I wonder how long it will take until they attempt another vote? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/21/national-trust-members-narrowly-vote-against-ban-trail-hunting/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShootingEgg Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 The AGM voting papers were sent to all members You say this. Ive had a conversation with the olds and they never even knew it was happening, and have had no info about the agm. They've been members for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 You say this. Ive had a conversation with the olds and they never even knew it was happening, and have had no info about the agm. They've been members for years. Well, I get a newsletter/magazine by normal post periodically (quarterly I think). This came (I think in early in September) as a pack wityh the magazine, the 'local newsheet', some advertising material and also had quite a large (10 pages?) AGM agenda and voting forms. There were a number of 'resolutions', the trail hunting, one relating to the A303 re-route/tunnel near Stonehenge, and I think one or two others. There was also a list of board members showing who was retiring and there were (again from memory) about 8 places to be filled - and there was a list of about 15 or 20 candidates for those places and a short CV/resumé for each candidate. At the back there were two voting forms, one for the member and one for spouse (in case of joint membership) - and also details of how to use the chairman as a proxy vote and how to return it bu post. There were also directions of how and where to log in to vote by internet. I wonder if (since it was part of a pack that comes regularly,) your 'olds' may have binned all but the magazine without reading? I have to admit being guilty of that in some instances. You did need to read the material to see what the voting was about, but I would expect that since none of the resolutions were 'major policy' issues for the NT at that time. Certain factions were obviously campaigning hard for a ban and I'm not likely to see that as I don't follow that side of the case, but I saw nothing in BASC, CLA, Countryside Alliance and I think only a very small mention on this site) about it, though I don't follow any very closely I'm afraid. Perhaps I and other NT members here should have raised the profile of the vote earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 I wonder how long it will take until they attempt another vote? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/21/national-trust-members-narrowly-vote-against-ban-trail-hunting/ I did read that the 'same' resolution cannot be returned for at least 4 years, but that may be not quite correct - as it may be the policy only comes up for review every 4 years. There is no doubt that they will try hard again because these people are determined and many have little better to do it seems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted October 23, 2017 Report Share Posted October 23, 2017 I'm an NT member, and it's the first I've heard of it! 4 million members, really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.