Goldenstar
Well-Known Member
We can do DD as well if you want to .
Is Hunting becoming ridiculously 'Elite'?
- Thread starter spotty_pony2
- Start date
Sherston
Well-Known Member
In the past originally hunts did not charge a subscription caps or field money, this evolved to subscriptions that were not set but a recommendation was given and gentlemen subscribed to the level at which they were happy to do and caps were then started to be taken from visitors. This was in the times when packs were run by wealthy individuals or entities. Time has since moved on to where every pack I know has a set subscription structure and price list - so equality for everyone in modern terms as opposed to the elitism of old?
Hunts now have the challenge of setting a subscription pricing on a one size fits all basis with variations built in to provide a level of options but within a structure that does not undermine other subscriptions or subscribers.
As with any commercial entity the price elasticity of demand is key to working out how to price your subscriptions and this needs to be linked to the number of mounted followers likely to be out, (very few packs can handle more than 100+ mounted out regularly as the land owners do not want that many horses over their land) and the local competition. So pricing cannot be set individually as it upsets the balance of others (more generous or more wealthy) funding someone else's hunting but most hunt secretaries will help someone genuinely in need.
Comparisons to drag packs are erroneous as they will hunt a day a week with 10 couple of hounds in kennels and no other infrastructure, similarly harriers also have a cheaper infrastructure.
Final comment - supporting a hunt should not viewed by the subscriber as a purely commercial decision, its about being part of an organisation or club and buying into the hunt as an entity, not purely a transactional relationship. That is the relationship that the hunt needs to create.
Hunts now have the challenge of setting a subscription pricing on a one size fits all basis with variations built in to provide a level of options but within a structure that does not undermine other subscriptions or subscribers.
As with any commercial entity the price elasticity of demand is key to working out how to price your subscriptions and this needs to be linked to the number of mounted followers likely to be out, (very few packs can handle more than 100+ mounted out regularly as the land owners do not want that many horses over their land) and the local competition. So pricing cannot be set individually as it upsets the balance of others (more generous or more wealthy) funding someone else's hunting but most hunt secretaries will help someone genuinely in need.
Comparisons to drag packs are erroneous as they will hunt a day a week with 10 couple of hounds in kennels and no other infrastructure, similarly harriers also have a cheaper infrastructure.
Final comment - supporting a hunt should not viewed by the subscriber as a purely commercial decision, its about being part of an organisation or club and buying into the hunt as an entity, not purely a transactional relationship. That is the relationship that the hunt needs to create.
L&M
Well-Known Member
HTML:
As for being elitist, I am a single parent and work in a shop - to be able to hunt we do not compete, go on holiday, everything comes from ebay and hair cuts are done with the kitchen scissors, so it can be done on a budget!
Wishing all a fun and safe season.
Last edited:
Clodagh
Well-Known Member
I haven't read the whole thread but larger fields are not the answer. It may be OK in Leicestershire but here in Essex more than 50 out and there is an awful mess made in our small arable fields.
Yes hunting is expensive, I used to make so many sacrifices to go and I paid a full sub even though I could have hunted on a farmers donation. There are cheaper sports, maybe try those?
Yes hunting is expensive, I used to make so many sacrifices to go and I paid a full sub even though I could have hunted on a farmers donation. There are cheaper sports, maybe try those?
Happy Hunter
Well-Known Member
Hello Tory27 - You're in my neck of the woods 
One of the local packs around here does differing 'Young persons' and a 'Club 25-30' around 50 or 60% off rate for those who are no longer covered by the 'family' sub - but can't shell out £1500 ish for a full Adult sub. The hunts are trying their best to encourage anyone and everyone I believe.
Currently I have 'chosen' to compete during the summer instead. Actually when I go back to visit on foot, whilst I do miss the day out I no longer miss the people - as all the faces around here have changed anyway = That's not to say I dont like the new faces, but I just dont know them as well!
Oh how we all wish to climb back on that 13hh hairy jumping machine of a pony with our Pony Club tie on and pay £10 for the day!
Oh and when a friend rang to tell me her new Wales pack had a sub of around £400, I said something rather unpleasant in jealousy!
One of the local packs around here does differing 'Young persons' and a 'Club 25-30' around 50 or 60% off rate for those who are no longer covered by the 'family' sub - but can't shell out £1500 ish for a full Adult sub. The hunts are trying their best to encourage anyone and everyone I believe.
Currently I have 'chosen' to compete during the summer instead. Actually when I go back to visit on foot, whilst I do miss the day out I no longer miss the people - as all the faces around here have changed anyway = That's not to say I dont like the new faces, but I just dont know them as well!
Oh how we all wish to climb back on that 13hh hairy jumping machine of a pony with our Pony Club tie on and pay £10 for the day!
Oh and when a friend rang to tell me her new Wales pack had a sub of around £400, I said something rather unpleasant in jealousy!
RunToEarth
Well-Known Member
Hunting is getting far less elite IMO.
Cottesmore are a miserable bunch and I just wouldn't entertain them, first and last days' visiting them last season as half of them seem to have some misplaced sense of superiority. Go next door to the Belvoir, they are much more friendly and willing to take a view on cap days in you are willing to help.
I can see why longer standing members of a hunt should subscribe, there needs to be some certainty to what subs the hunt will be expecting to receive as to gauge their own budgets/needs for the season.
Cottesmore are a miserable bunch and I just wouldn't entertain them, first and last days' visiting them last season as half of them seem to have some misplaced sense of superiority. Go next door to the Belvoir, they are much more friendly and willing to take a view on cap days in you are willing to help.
I can see why longer standing members of a hunt should subscribe, there needs to be some certainty to what subs the hunt will be expecting to receive as to gauge their own budgets/needs for the season.
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
An interesting point, and one which has probably already been addressed by some packs. Those who are stablished or are long standing members 'are' the pack, and to encourage others to stay, by way of introduction, to have heavily discounted rates for 'visitors' makes perfect sense.
I agree with the first line of your post, though it clearly doesn't apply to all packs. I have no experience of the Cottesmore, but being a respected and long established pack, does no one any good by taking an elitist approach. Preserving the integrity of a pack is one thing, but how we go about it is something else!
Would now be the time to question the word 'Elite'? Hunting is expensive, and considering the cost of maintaining Hounds, Staff and the myriad costs attached to an established pack, I think that the subs are quite reasonable, considering that it isn't a profit driven business. If Elitism is considered to apply to those who can afford to ride to Hounds, then so be it. If however, elitism is to be attached to the attitude of those who are long term or established pack members, then they do themselves, and Hunting, a disservice.
Alec.
Bernster
Well-Known Member
Tis a fair point Alex. Elite could mean a variety of things to people. It's fairly expensive, so it's only for those who can afford it, so it's elitest in the sense of economics. But if what people are saying is true about being exclusive/superior and non-welcoming to new comers, then yes that's elitest in the sense of being in favour of old timers and long established subscribers. Which seems like a v poor strategy for the long term as you need to keep refreshing the membership as the older ones, ahem, toddle off. Although I had some fab times and met some nice folk along the way, I'm trying a new hunt this year, and from initial contact they seem like a friendly bunch.
JenHunt
Well-Known Member
I think hunting is less elitist that it's ever been. Yes it's expensive, but everything with horses is. Plus, in my opinion it's better value than eventing (think of cost per minute competing vs hunting and your eyes will water!)
But, there is also an element of getting what you paid for IME. I changed who I was hunting with a few years ago, partly owing to being too close to the politics of the previous pack, but also because a few days with the new pack showed me a totally different few days hunting, which suited my horse better, and I enjoyed more. I then hear similar stories from around the country about how good the days with the big packs, or those with the best country are, and how it almost makes the cost seem worthwhile... Yes the 'new' pack is more expensive, but it is my sole expenditure on horses outside of just keeping them. It comes down to choice, and mine is to spend my money on hunting and go without other things to do so.
That said, I limit my expenditure by taking a 6 day ticket at the start of the season. If i get to Christmas and have used them all up then I'll look at the meet card, decide if I'm likely to get enough days in the 2nd half of the season to warrant upgrading to a full sub. THat's only happened once. It means that if we end up with an injury thne I've not lost out, or if it's totally rubbish weather I don't feel like I have to go just to make it worthwhile. Last season I got to Feb before running out of days, but then really really wanted to go to 2 particular meets and spoke to the Hon Sec about what to do. We came to an arrangement about one of the meets, and the final one was a testimonial anyway so that was different again (and don't worry, i raided a piggy bank to put a decent lump in for Mr Townsend).
thanks for the reminder all... must get the zip on my boots mended this year!
But, there is also an element of getting what you paid for IME. I changed who I was hunting with a few years ago, partly owing to being too close to the politics of the previous pack, but also because a few days with the new pack showed me a totally different few days hunting, which suited my horse better, and I enjoyed more. I then hear similar stories from around the country about how good the days with the big packs, or those with the best country are, and how it almost makes the cost seem worthwhile... Yes the 'new' pack is more expensive, but it is my sole expenditure on horses outside of just keeping them. It comes down to choice, and mine is to spend my money on hunting and go without other things to do so.
That said, I limit my expenditure by taking a 6 day ticket at the start of the season. If i get to Christmas and have used them all up then I'll look at the meet card, decide if I'm likely to get enough days in the 2nd half of the season to warrant upgrading to a full sub. THat's only happened once. It means that if we end up with an injury thne I've not lost out, or if it's totally rubbish weather I don't feel like I have to go just to make it worthwhile. Last season I got to Feb before running out of days, but then really really wanted to go to 2 particular meets and spoke to the Hon Sec about what to do. We came to an arrangement about one of the meets, and the final one was a testimonial anyway so that was different again (and don't worry, i raided a piggy bank to put a decent lump in for Mr Townsend).
thanks for the reminder all... must get the zip on my boots mended this year!
Lucyad
Well-Known Member
Just taken the plunge and subscribed for the year, have previously paid a day cap for the maximum 6 meets per year permitted. it is direct debit over 6 months so not too bad, and, to be honest, I could spend the same on competing twice a month and not have half as much fun. Just hope the weather hangs out well enough for me to get my moneys worth, though of course hunt costs are the same regardless so I don't grudge if it doesn't, as without the income then they can't keep going.
spacefaer
Well-Known Member
We hunt with several packs, as we live on the boundaries of several hunt countries. We buy a book of tickets for each pack and then pick appropriate meets for the horses. Seems to work well - some of the packs let unused tickets run over into the following season as well.
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
JDH01
Well-Known Member
Even a small unfashionable hunt is expensive to run circa £60 - 90k and unless you are a fashionable pack your subs and caps are unlikely to cover that. There will need to be substantial fundraising by the supporters club and many will be running a deficit supported by the Masters as wages have to be paid and horses and hounds fed. We have a full sub of £575 for 2 days a week and a basic sub of £200 for as many days as subscribers want but at a higher cap - you break even on about day 12!
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
That's rather high. The moderate sized, and unfashionable hunt my husband was joint Master of had a guarantee of £40,000 2 years ago when he retired. He wouldn't have retired if the committee had half a brain between them - they wanted to drop the guarantee to about £30,000. My husband could have afforded to subsidise them but he couldn't see ANY reason why he should work his butt off AND cough up a 5 figure sum just so others could hunt on the cheap.
The subscription at the time I'm not SURE of but it was no more than £400 a year - and more likely been £350 - for a 2 day week with an occasional extra day. It had been stuck solid at £350 for at LEAST 4 years. Committee fund-raising was pretty limited!
Violet
Well-Known Member
I also found that I had to pay an extra insurance premium for each days hunting as I only did a couple.
Herne
Well-Known Member
I find that accusations of hunts being cliquey are often unrealistic - especially as I have heard newcomers accuse Hunt A of being cliquey, not like nice Hunt B, at exactly the same time as other newcomers are accusing Hunt B of being cliquey, not like nice Hunt A.
The reality is that whatever organisation you join, you are going to be at a disadvantage, because you are trying to enter already established friendship groups. You try joining a golf club and see how many established members will embrace you with open arms and invite you straight into their playing group, or join a gym and see how many people never talk to anyone else from entering to leaving.
When joining any new organisation it is usually dependant on the new member to make the effort to introduce themselves and be approachable - not just hunting.
In hunting, you actually have an advantage, because you are forced together with people in large groups simply by being "in the field" in a way that you are not with many other clubs. Don't sit there like a lemon. Introduce yourself to people, ask questions.
But, as I always tell people, the very best way to get ahead in a hunt is to join the Hunt Supporters Club and go to the functions - and then offer to HELP. At pretty much every function, there will be a team of poor sods who have to set it all up first and then clean up and put everything away afterwards - and it's nearly always the same people. Offer to be one of those and you will become extremely popular extremely quickly...
The reality is that whatever organisation you join, you are going to be at a disadvantage, because you are trying to enter already established friendship groups. You try joining a golf club and see how many established members will embrace you with open arms and invite you straight into their playing group, or join a gym and see how many people never talk to anyone else from entering to leaving.
When joining any new organisation it is usually dependant on the new member to make the effort to introduce themselves and be approachable - not just hunting.
In hunting, you actually have an advantage, because you are forced together with people in large groups simply by being "in the field" in a way that you are not with many other clubs. Don't sit there like a lemon. Introduce yourself to people, ask questions.
But, as I always tell people, the very best way to get ahead in a hunt is to join the Hunt Supporters Club and go to the functions - and then offer to HELP. At pretty much every function, there will be a team of poor sods who have to set it all up first and then clean up and put everything away afterwards - and it's nearly always the same people. Offer to be one of those and you will become extremely popular extremely quickly...
Last edited:
Bernster
Well-Known Member
Yes, am sure there is a lot in that Herne, but sadly a few 'less welcoming' folks can make a big impression.
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
I wouldn't dream of going up to strangers and introducing myself. I'm quite shy and reserved. I've nevertheless been made very welcome by the seven different packs I've hunted with, and had great days out even with the three packs that I only hunted with once.
These were all small, friendly, non stuffy packs though. Wouldn't have ever gone out with a stuck up pack.
Herne
Well-Known Member
But if they feel exactly the same way and don't go up to you - a stranger to them - and make you feel welcome, then they are cliquey or stuck-up...?
Convenient how all the stuck-up people live in one area and all the non-stuffy people live in another.
Imagine how confusing it would be if there was a mixture of both in every pack...
Judgemental
Well-Known Member
Having picked up my Western Daily Press this morning and read yet more unedifying information about the Huntsman of the Blackmore and Sparkford Vale Hounds, that he is on bail until 11 December 2015, until his next Crown Court appearance, where he has to answer a charge of GBH.
I would hardly call that ELITIST.
I would call it the lowest nadir that hunting has reached and shockingly badly handled.
http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/...latest-court/story-27723411-detail/story.html
I would hardly call that ELITIST.
I would call it the lowest nadir that hunting has reached and shockingly badly handled.
http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/...latest-court/story-27723411-detail/story.html
Last edited:
Tiddlypom
Carries on creakily
Ah, the difference is, in the packs I've been out with, the regulars soon strike up a conversation with any unfamiliar faces. 'Hello, we haven't seen you out with us before, have we?' and before long you're welcomed into a group, all happy to chat and to point out how best to enjoy the day.
Of course there are likely to be miserable types in every pack, but one hopes that they are very much in the minority.
Herne
Well-Known Member
What happened to people being innocent until proven guilty?
ester
Not slacking multitasking
and elite people are never prone to violence??
My current newish pack are always asking me questions about my life whereas I'm quite happy to have a quiet day.
My current newish pack are always asking me questions about my life whereas I'm quite happy to have a quiet day
.Judgemental
Well-Known Member
Ask The Western Daily Press who following hunting stories with their usual tenacious zeal.
Chuckle :wink3: Clearly there will be no 'Whitewash' in the 'Blackmore Vale'
Judgemental
Well-Known Member
Tiddlypom, how right you are, a very appropriate and timely comment at the beginning of the new season.
The old adage of, "always be nice to people on the way up, you never know who you might meet on the way down" is a very wise piece of advice in Hunting Circles.
There are some, especially at this time in the Blackmore Vale, who may care to reflect accordingly.
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
You may well ask!! After all, Mark Doggrell is NOT a 'huntsman' in our understanding of the word - he is a mounted follower, nothing more. After watching the ruddy video at LEAST 20 times, I am convinced that the only thing Doggrell was guilty of - up to the crash - was riding with his eyes shut.
From the second of the crash he behaved like a moron with absolutely no concern about the state he had caused for a female sab - which urned out to be some rather nasty injuries. (And no, I doubt they will put her off sabbing!)
The least he could/should have done would have been to pull up and ask if there was anything he could do - instead he kicked on and paid NO attention to what was probably one of the worst PR happenings of the last 12 months - and it's far from over - the trial is rescheduled for 11th December.
I think you knew me well enough Herne to know it's a bit odd that I am suddenly knowledgeable about a hunting PR incident. What's even odder is that I have spent a lot of time chatting to antis (including some undoubtedly extreme ones) on a largely anti-hunting FB page - and even odder (if you'd told me it would EVER happen when I was still a the CA I'd have been doubled up laughing) but I find I agree with the majority of them on everything and anything about animals, except hunting.
Last edited:
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
Wrongly perhaps, I've formed an opinion of Doggrell and though it's without ever meeting him, it isn't favourable. To ride on past someone who's clearly been knocked to the ground and by our own horse, should be unthinkable. As you say, it doesn't show him in the best light, does it? Whilst such conduct may influence the Court at the point of summing up, it's an irrelevance, and whether a decision is handed down of guilt, or not, the question is - Is he guilty of causing gbh, by his reckless or intentional conduct? No one in their right minds would consider that the act was intentional because the risk to both horse and rider would have been considerable had the horse gone down. I can't remember the stride of the horse, but would it be reckless to canter or gallop a horse whilst Hunting?
Several points occur to me; Firstly, the injured lady quite clearly stepped in to the path of the horse, and though only by a short stride, it affected a contact, and secondly, whether it was the horse or the rider, we'll never know, but an attempt to avoid her was clearly taken. Further, what ever we may think of the man himself, if he was going about his lawful pursuit, and the injured lady was trespassing and attempting to disrupt the day for him and for others, then she in part, clearly has to bear some responsibility for her own misfortunes. To expect others to take responsibility for our own reckless conduct, is a bit rich.
Considering the area where the trial will be held, I also wonder how justice can prevail. Most have views on Hunting, one way or another, and it will be bound to influence a Court decision. I don't know enough of Court proceedings, will the trial be by jury?
I'd suggest that both Doggrell and Hunting are in the spotlight, and though I care little for the man, his conduct following the collision will do little to persuade the 'floating-voter' that the Hunting field is filled with decent and normal people. That's the real shame of this sorry tale.
Alec.
Amicus
Well-Known Member
After years of not knowing what to think about hunting/hunters I finally started going out with a proper farmers hunt a couple of years ago. Everyone was lovely friendly and very tolerant to my muddling and when I finally had the option to go out enough for a Sub to me required they arranged one low enough that I could afford it. I know all hunts are different but I wouldn't consider them elitist at all, obsessed with hounds, horses and hunting maybe but that's surely no bad thing!
As to Doggrell agree completely with JG & Alec I can't see it being intentional not stopping is pretty idiotic not to mention callous whatever else was going on.
As to Doggrell agree completely with JG & Alec I can't see it being intentional not stopping is pretty idiotic not to mention callous whatever else was going on.
Fellewell
Well-Known Member
Trevor Morse lost his life to hunt saboteurs. Mike Lane was beaten unconscious with iron bars by hunt saboteurs. For all he knew, Doggrell was being ambushed and in imminent danger. He had a split second to decide. Would you have stopped?
Standing in front of a horse is a reckless act and another example of how saboteurs are oblivious to the consequences of their actions.
Standing in front of a horse is a reckless act and another example of how saboteurs are oblivious to the consequences of their actions.
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
Trevor Morse was a bit foolish - and careless - for the best of reasons. The pilot Bryan Griffiths had a teensy couple of excuses for what was undoubtedly careless and stupid behaviour - and I will always blame the presence of John Curtin in the 'copter for what happened (he is undoubtedly THE most evil man involved in the anti-hunt movement - there are very few people who have made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up as he did when I met him.)