Heythrop Hunt

[Hunters]

I've been reading this with interest - let me get this straight? The MFHA chairman, who was in the post when the ban came in, is now unashamedly expressing delight at a situation that could bring hunting further into disrespect?

Would this be the same MFHA who presided over the 're-branding' EGM of the huntwhoshallnotbenamed? Rather than bring about a united front there a blow was dealt that left that hunt bleeding at one edge, all apparently at the suggestion of the MFHA. It would seem if your hunt needs to call an EGM, the last people you would want there for any reason are senior officials from the MFHA. Which begs me to ask, is the association fit for purpose?

The MFHA, from what I witnessed on Sunday were totally behind the demise of Julian Barnfield. Charles Frampton clearly 'fits' the bill. One chap at the meeting asked if the chairman and committee had asked about the legal ramifications regarding their actions. The chairman just stood there mumbling and scratching his head, 'til he admitted he hadn't done anything about the legals!

If you have children keen on hunting, would any of you send them into hunt service? Hunt staff are being treated as totally disposable people - shameful !!

Move into the 21 century MFHA - or resign - you are making matters for all hunt supporters far far worse!!

 

[JanetGeorge]

Is this an immediate 'sacking' - or has Julian been given notice that he won't be required after the end of this season. If it's 'immediate' then it's an even bigger disgrace!! It is normal for hunt staff to be given notice in December if their services will not be required after the end of April! That gives them a chance to find a new job (and a new home!)

 

[Hunters]

Whilst in the 'normal hunt' way - he would be duty bound to stay one season, this case is slightly different for the reasons below:

1) The huntsmman concerned is facing prosection for illegally hunting & faces court in January. Without his hunt fully supporting him, he is a 'sitting duck' - to be sacked by your hunt whilst these proceedings are ongoing is the worst kind of hunt politics I have seen.

2) He has suddenly apparently been slandered by some of those within the hunt & I am told is considering legal action.

He is to finish the season and leave with or without a criminal record for serving his masters, his hunt and his farmers.

This has divided the country and in my opinion leaves an 'open goal' to the antis. I consider some of the governing body of hunting who perhaps in their last year of service are throwing caution to the wind at the risk of not only throwing the huntsman to the lions but risking ruining hunting furthermore.

 

[Hunters]

Janet George - thanks for your message - Alas I cannot reply until some of your messages are cleared...

 

[JanetGeorge]

Janet George - thanks for your message - Alas I cannot reply until some of your messages are cleared...

Oops - done!

 

[rosie fronfelen]

Well it is so nice to see loyalty still holds true in hunting circles,is`nt it? This particular huntsman has done a great deal for the cause,but as soon as money appears available the Heythrop cannot wait to shaft him .Lovely people.

Is this going to be a case of dejavu i wonder EK?

 

[EAST KENT]

Just so very typical of people in general;but I really do think the Heythrop is the absolute pits to do this to a loyal huntservant,maybe Karma will get them in the end;they richly deserve it.
It is the way of going so often observed though..the going gets tough and support is nowhere. Dispicable.

 

[doodleberry]

is everyone quite sure that Julian is being sacked because of the court case? maybe it's because he may not be upto the job anymore??I can see both sides but don't be too quick to say Julian is without fault....

 

[EAST KENT]

If someone in the course of working for you gets into trouble it is the decent thing to be there as backing and support.NOT the time to scatter and run for cover !

 

[Hunters]

is everyone quite sure that Julian is being sacked because of the court case? maybe it's because he may not be upto the job anymore??I can see both sides but don't be too quick to say Julian is without fault....

Doodleberry, the huntsman is not being sacked 'because' of the court case, I think you may not have possibly read all of the previous posts.

If you have ever been a master, you know that the huntsman 'follows' instructions from the relevant master. The master of the day has organised country and what areas are to be hunted. The huntsman follows orders...!!

Julian Barnfield is considered one of the best huntsman in the country. He has been dismissed for 'other reasons', namely his face no longer fits & the two younger masters would rather have somebody faster. The fact that this leaves him facing criminal proceedings seems to have escaped the MFHA, the hunt chairman and the two young masters (one of whom is the chair of the MFHA's daughter)

Kate Hoey has become involved in supporting Julian, and quite a number of landowners are welcoming Julian to hunt on their land - but not the field & that's THIS season.

The decision has split the country and disappointed many to say the least.

I suspect there is still trouble ahead...

 

[Hunters]

If someone in the course of working for you gets into trouble it is the decent thing to be there as backing and support.NOT the time to scatter and run for cover !

EAST KENT = Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[rosie fronfelen]

oh for the days of Ronnie Wallace and Anthony Adams,this would never have occured.

 

[JanetGeorge]

Julian Barnfield is considered one of the best huntsman in the country. He has been dismissed for 'other reasons', namely his face no longer fits & the two younger masters would rather have somebody faster. The fact that this leaves him facing criminal proceedings seems to have escaped the MFHA, the hunt chairman and the two young masters (one of whom is the chair of the MFHA's daughter)

If I hunted with the Heythrop I would be praying for Julian to slow down. He was one of the fastest riders across country I've ever seen when he was at the Worcestershire, and I doubt he's slowed down much since then. After all, speed across country is about hunting your hounds well and being a good horseman - and Julian is the BEST pro. huntsman I've ever seen on a horse (and I've seen quite a few!)

I hope the farmers who support Julian (and I'll bet that's the vast majority) stand up to the Masters and shut more country - there's no better way to drum sense into the vacant heads of Masters who have no understanding of loyalty or decency!

 

[doodleberry]

oh for the days of Ronnie Wallace and Anthony Adams,this would never have occured.[/Q



unfortunately they did exactly the same to antony after he had broken his pelvis and was considered not fast enough for all the thrusters!!

 

[doodleberry]

Doodleberry, the huntsman is not being sacked 'because' of the court case, I think you may not have possibly read all of the previous posts.

If you have ever been a master, you know that the huntsman 'follows' instructions from the relevant master. The master of the day has organised country and what areas are to be hunted. The huntsman follows orders...!!

Julian Barnfield is considered one of the best huntsman in the country. He has been dismissed for 'other reasons', namely his face no longer fits & the two younger masters would rather have somebody faster. The fact that this leaves him facing criminal proceedings seems to have escaped the MFHA, the hunt chairman and the two young masters (one of whom is the chair of the MFHA's daughter)

Kate Hoey has become involved in supporting Julian, and quite a number of landowners are welcoming Julian to hunt on their land - but not the field & that's THIS season.

The decision has split the country and disappointed many to say the least.

I suspect there is still trouble ahead...

so basically they are sacking him because he no longer meets the requirements of the hunt? isn't this quite normal in everyday life?? also after the ban each hunstman had a choice to carry on as normal or hunt within the law are you saying they held a gun to his head and told him to hunt illegally??

 

[doodleberry]

there are always two sides to a story!!

 

[JanetGeorge]

there are always two sides to a story!!

So either you're clueless (this is the Heythrop we're talking about!) or you think it's perfectly acceptable for a hunt to chuck out a very capable and decent member of staff for no adequate reason!!

Frankly, if huntsmen were to take hunts to Court for wrongful dismissal, the archaic employment practices condoned and supported by the MFHA would almost certainly be declared unlawful! And - IMHO - it's about time!

How would you feel, doodleberry, if you had a job that you'd given your all to for - say - 10 years. (And which provides your house and your social life.) And your boss comes in one day and says: "Gee sorry doodleberry old chap, but I've got a mate who wants your job. He's younger than you, so pi** off old chap! But you can keep working until the end of the season - tough luck if you feel betrayed - and humiliated by the fact that EVERYONE knows you've been given the boot!" And - just to add injury to insult, you're facing criminal charges for doing your job - brought upon you not because of YOUR 'crime' but because someone has it in for your employer!! Won't it look good for you when you go to court to defend yourself and the prosecution says: " Ah well, doodleberry has now been sacked by his employers!" (PROOF he was guilty!)

If that's not the way YOU would like to be treated, then why are you defending the Heythrop?? If it is, then get yourself into hunt service immediately!

 

[FairyLights]

Well said JanetGeorge.

 

[Alec Swan]

Well said JanetGeorge.

and again.

Alec.

 

[doodleberry]

OH AND BY THE WAY YOUR DECENT HARDWORKING SAINT JULIAN HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAY BUT NOT TO HUNT THE HOUNDS ! HARDLY THROWING HIM OUT ON THE STREET AND JUST CAST YOUR MIND BACK TO WHY HE LEFT/ WAS PUSHED OUT OF THE COTSWOLD !!ITS ONLY HIS EGO THAT IS CAUSING ALL THE FUSS!! WHY NOT HAVE A CHANGE OF MASTERSHIP ITS NOT THE FIRST TIME AND WONT BE THE LAST THIS IS HUNTING THIS IS LIFE AND HE HAS ACTUALLY ONLY BE THERE SINCE 2005!! HE ALSO TOOK ANTHONY ADAMS JOB WHEN THEY DID THE SAME TO HIM AFTER HE BROKE HIS PELVIS I SAY IT;S 6 TO ONE HALF A DOZEN TO THE OTHER !! IN MY OPINION HE IS NOT THE BNEST HORSEMAN IN THE WORLD IN FACT FAR FROM IT AS FOR HUNTING THE HOUNDS I HAVE NEVER DONE IT SO THERFORE I CANNOT POSSIBLY SAY EITHER WAY!! GOOD LUCK TO FRAMPTON I SAY!!

 

[Judgemental]

Wearing my bipartisan hat for a moment: be you ever so high you are not above the law.

It seems to me that the High Command are placed in great difficulty, should anybody hunt illegally, because any real chance of repeal and getting those opposed on-side, in the hope they can be persuaded with the Self-Regulation ticket is lost.

Simply because those politicians opposed, will say if you can't hunt within the law now, how are you going to manage things with self-regulation.

The other element, somewhat overlooked, is the fact that the Hunting Act 2004 makes it a criminal offence by any landowner, farmer whether he be an owner occupier or a tenant, to knowingly and unknowingly to permit illegal hunting.

Therefore the High Command has to be seen to, shall we say, making examples.

The High Command have only one sanction, to enforce hunting strictly legally and that is to make sure anybody breaking the Hunting Act 2004 is instantly dismissed.

On the other hand, I suppose some form of financial fine could be implimented and paid by the hunt collectively to the MFHA.

I am constantly told on this forum it has to be repeal or nothing and my ideas of tweaking the Hunting Act 2004 by means of a Statutory Instrument, mainly in respect of Section 8 are unsustainable.

Well then, if it has to be repeal in total and therefore everybody concerned may not hunt a fox, hare, deer. They may only hunt an artificial scent.

That way the High Command can prove to the politicians that hunting can operate with a repeal and with internal self-regulation.

If a few scalps have to be taken to prove the point, that is part of the price of wholesale repeal and not dismantling piece by piece.

 

[Mrs B]

OH AND BY THE WAY YOUR DECENT HARDWORKING SAINT JULIAN HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO STAY BUT NOT TO HUNT THE HOUNDS ! HARDLY THROWING HIM OUT ON THE STREET AND JUST CAST YOUR MIND BACK TO WHY HE LEFT/ WAS PUSHED OUT OF THE COTSWOLD !!ITS ONLY HIS EGO THAT IS CAUSING ALL THE FUSS!! WHY NOT HAVE A CHANGE OF MASTERSHIP ITS NOT THE FIRST TIME AND WONT BE THE LAST THIS IS HUNTING THIS IS LIFE AND HE HAS ACTUALLY ONLY BE THERE SINCE 2005!! HE ALSO TOOK ANTHONY ADAMS JOB WHEN THEY DID THE SAME TO HIM AFTER HE BROKE HIS PELVIS I SAY IT;S 6 TO ONE HALF A DOZEN TO THE OTHER !! IN MY OPINION HE IS NOT THE BNEST HORSEMAN IN THE WORLD IN FACT FAR FROM IT AS FOR HUNTING THE HOUNDS I HAVE NEVER DONE IT SO THERFORE I CANNOT POSSIBLY SAY EITHER WAY!! GOOD LUCK TO FRAMPTON I SAY!!

Speaking as someone who supports hunting but has no side to take as I don't know the parties involved or the circumstances beyond what I've read here, may I say; you may be in 'Timbuktoo' but there's no need to shout. That coupled with the lack of punctuation and failure to even glance at what you've written (if the typos are to be taken into consideration) makes you look rather.... out of control and hardly in a fit state to put forward your argument. Plus one to Julian, I would say... and own goal to you....

 

[Hunters]

oh for the days of Ronnie Wallace and Anthony Adams,this would never have occured.[/Q



unfortunately they did exactly the same to antony after he had broken his pelvis and was considered not fast enough for all the thrusters!!

Actually, I do not blame either huntsman. Yet again the huntsman are usually the ones saying 'yes sir - no sir'. Unless you are new to hunting and as you are now writing in capitals and clearly feel very strongly about Julian (I'm guessing not a fan) You will know that hunts are generally committee run, therefore the hunt staff are employed by the committee, thus making hiring and firing decisions.

What the majority of people feel (& judging by this forum as a straw poll) is that your sentiments are in the minority.

Most I dare say found the Anthony Adams situation repulsive, yet the hunt committee have repeated their mistake. Clearly learning nothing -led by the MFHA??

The real difference, here, of course is that the huntsman more than likely will receive a criminal record. This will of course effect his ability to hold a firearm licence, which in turn could affect his future employment. How many have thought of that?

Furthermore, you state (correctly) that he has been offered a KH job. Whoopee, lucky him. Will you give him the crumbs off of the table too....

 

[doodleberry]

Speaking as someone who supports hunting but has no side to take as I don't know the parties involved or the circumstances beyond what I've read here, may I say; you may be in Timbuktoo but there's no need to shout. That coupled with the lack of punctuation and failure to even glance at what you've written (if the typos are to be taken into consideration) makes you look rather.... out of control and hardly in a fit state to put forward your argument. Plus one to Julian, I would say... and own goal to you....

you are quite right i will shut up now!!

 

[Hunters]

Speaking as someone who supports hunting but has no side to take as I don't know the parties involved or the circumstances beyond what I've read here, may I say; you may be in 'Timbuktoo' but there's no need to shout. That coupled with the lack of punctuation and failure to even glance at what you've written (if the typos are to be taken into consideration) makes you look rather.... out of control and hardly in a fit state to put forward your argument. Plus one to Julian, I would say... and own goal to you....

Very succinct Mrs B

 

[Jerroboam]

It must be said that some of Doodle Berry's points are indeed correct. May I adjust a few peoples opinions on the Heythrop. Many who hunt, especially on a Mon and Thurs do not believe we are a premier hunt. We are a hunt with the same issues as every other, yes we have been divided but now we must move forward. If I said to you that Mr Barnfield ignores his farmers (Hounds are allowed to cross our land- on a weekly basis- but yet my land owning Father-in-law has NEVER been introduced to Mr Barnfield and there are many others like this). He is not being discredited, he has worked incredibly hard, especially with the monitors constantly on his case, but our sport has suffered greatly. We need a fresh pair of eyes on an ever changing situation- otherwise we are constantly running in circles. I agree that the treatment of Mr Adams was awful, he was my hero as a child, but Mr Barnfiled was more than willing to replace him. Our hunt must move forward, we need a mastership who are willing to work with their farmers (not just their wealthy landowners) and have firm links with gamekeepers. I always read Mr.Peels comment in H&H and so often I think "if only our hunt behaved like that"..... We need a modern hunt that yet holds onto its historical, traditional values. I do not envy Charles Frampton but I am willing to support him, if he can bring our hunt into the 21st century.

 

[JanetGeorge]

If I said to you that Mr Barnfield ignores his farmers (Hounds are allowed to cross our land- on a weekly basis- but yet my land owning Father-in-law has NEVER been introduced to Mr Barnfield and there are many others like this).

Strange then that the greatest support for Julian has apparently been from the farmers!

I do not envy Charles Frampton but I am willing to support him, if he can bring our hunt into the 21st century.

As it's barely made it to the 20th Century yet, he'll have his work cut out! And of course the antis will be looking for another scalp - Julian is of little interest to them once he's left the Heythrop!

 

[RunToEarth]

I am not involved with the Heythrop in any way, but I had heard all was not well.
From a hunting point of view I feel the masters have acted rather foolishly. I can't think I am too wrong in saying that every hunt will have their politics and issues from within, to a certain degree, but to the outer world the idea is to always act united and pull together, what hope does a hunting community have if it cannot get on with the like minded neighbours. It is very sad the Heythrop should be going as they are, it really shows a bad light on hunting as a whole, and the antis must be cracking the lambrini back in anticipation for the season.

 

[Judgemental]

Some years ago, I accompanied my Father on a visit to the Heythrop, unmounted.

My father was studying the pack amidst all those gathered at the meet. We had been there about ten minutes, when there was a shout, ‘master’ and there was a parting of the people.

The next thing I knew, the late Captain Wallace had seen my Father and they were engaged in animated conversation about one or other of the Captain’s hounds.

This held up proceedings and the moving off very significantly. I vividly remember there were some extremely, shall we say, some rather haughty ladies who were not best pleased about this delay and were wondering quite loudly, “who on earth was the Captain bothering to talk to at such length”.

I learnt at a fairly youthful age and at first hand, ‘close up and personal’ the Heythrop people think themselves to be important but, as many will testify, not as important as the Captain’s hounds and if he wished to talk to a like minded person, everything else and everybody had to wait.

Perhaps the present management should reflect upon the thinking of Captain Ronnie Wallace and the splendid way, in which he ran the Heythrop.

 

[Hunters]

I have never met Captain Wallace, but he sounds like a true gentleman. Sadly I don't see too many gentlemen in hunting at the moment. It all seems to be a very 'selfish' persons sport.

Julain Barnfield (in my opinion) is under intense scrutiny due to the rather ample attentions of Penny Little & Judy Gilbert. They followed the terrierman from the Vale of Aylesbury to the Heythrop. They had been determined to 'hound' him until they captured him or the huntsman of the next hunt that he went to. No huntsman will do any better whilst the terriermn/countryman attracts this attention. That combined with rather a famous political landowner in the country - was always going to be an added incentive for the antis.

And there lieth the problem.

What the MFHA have done, is not found out all of the facts (I could put as usual) but I do not wish to be more inflammatory. The antis not so long ago placed cameras into trees to 'catch' the terrierman - but the terrierman couldn't be identified doing his work as he had on a balaclava - So my friends - not matter who you have hunting at the Heythrop, you will have the close scrutiny of the 'antis'...

By bringing in Frampton - you have just ensured that:

a) The antis will feel they have weakened you & may just 'up their game'
b) Shot yourselves in the foot regarding Barnfield and a court case
c) Potentially ruined a good huntsman's career - cheque books at the ready.
d) By bringing in a 'more bold huntsman' - potentially more prosectutions thus resulting in a tightening of the law - should the unthinkable happen & Labour return to power & tighten the laws.

Sorry, but your MFHA mis-judged the ban - they do & have previously got it WRONG...