# Heythrop Hunt



## Hunters (26 October 2011)

Is anyone going to the EGM regarding the new potential incoming master huntsman and and the potential demise of Julian Barnfield?


----------



## EarlRonan (27 October 2011)

Yes am attending! this is a very important meeting as we need to sort out the running of the hunt asap.


----------



## Hunters (27 October 2011)

So whose camp are you in?  

The huntsman, potentially soon to be out of a job or the new fast furious and uncompromising master huntsman?


----------



## doodleberry (27 October 2011)

tell me what is the situation here i am intrigued??


----------



## Hunters (27 October 2011)

You need to read Valerie Elliott's article in the Mail on Sunday (not last Sunday - but the Sunday before)


----------



## doodleberry (27 October 2011)

i am aware of what is being proposed but not sure what people of each camp are thinking? Isnt it about time the heythrop had some new blood?


----------



## Hunters (27 October 2011)

The hunt masters want to bring in a new master Charles Frampton.  He has agreed to the mastership provided he hunts hounds.  This puts current huntsman Julian Barnfield out of a job or demoted at best.

Kate Hoey MP has written to the hunt chairman expressing her displeasure at these suggestions not least because the huntsman has: 

a) Done nothing wrong - although some are suddenly discrediting the huntsman
b) The huntsman is facing court for hunting illegally & for his hunt to sack him at a time like this beggars belief - not a good defence when your hunt gets rid of you.
c) The new master apparently will be less cautious to 'antis' - this could lead to a Labour government tightening hunting laws...

The hunt is divided and there is to be vote on Sunday at an EGM.  Many landowners feel justifiably very loyal to Barnfield and do not want a so called 'arrogant master' coming in and taking over. 

Equally, they do not want to be seen as the hunt that could change hunting for the worst - all for five minutes fun, some have gone to the press.

See Valerie Elliott's report in the Mail on Sunday two weeks ago.

Finally, it was put to the potential new incoming master that he hunt the bitch pack & the current huntsman hunt the dogs.  This compromise was not acceptable to the new master, so if the landowners don't win - well it could be a right old mess.


----------



## Dobiegirl (27 October 2011)

Brings back memories, I remember the glory days of Capt Ronnie Wallace and Percy Durno. I would love to know what they would have to say about the current situation.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (28 October 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			Brings back memories, I remember the glory days of Capt Ronnie Wallace and Percy Durno. I would love to know what they would have to say about the current situation.
		
Click to expand...

ditto this.


----------



## Aleka81 (28 October 2011)

Yep will be there


----------



## marmalade76 (28 October 2011)

I heard that anyone who wants to vote has to pay for the privilege!!


----------



## Hunters (28 October 2011)

I think that the whole thing is a mess and has been handled badly.  The Heythrop are supposed to be a premier hunt... I will be there casting my vote (paid for or not!!)


----------



## Hunters (30 October 2011)

Well that's it then for Julian Barnfield - Can't be nice knowing you're on your way out.


----------



## doodleberry (30 October 2011)

i believe its karma!! good luck to frampton!! the heythrop did the same to anthony adams!!


----------



## JanetGeorge (31 October 2011)

Hunters said:



			Well that's it then for Julian Barnfield - Can't be nice knowing you're on your way out.
		
Click to expand...

I'll bet there are half-a-dozen offers heading Julian's way as we speak!  He's a superlative huntsman, an outstanding horseman, and a very nice guy to go with it!  And he's done a hell of a lot more good for 'the cause' than most!


----------



## Hunters (31 October 2011)

Hunters said:



			Well that's it then for Julian Barnfield - Can't be nice knowing you're on your way out.
		
Click to expand...

Whether he's got offers or not - not nice to be chucked out of your hunt when you are facing criminal charges & as for the chairman of the MFHA to be punching the air with joy at the decision beggars belief.


----------



## JanetGeorge (31 October 2011)

Hunters said:



			Whether he's got offers or not - not nice to be chucked out of your hunt when you are facing criminal charges & as for the chairman of the MFHA to be punching the air with joy at the decision beggars belief.
		
Click to expand...

Agree 100%!  I personally think it's a disgrace the way some hunts treat their professional huntsmen - but sadly, money talks!


----------



## dunkley (31 October 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			Agree 100%!  I personally think it's a disgrace the way some hunts treat their professional huntsmen - but sadly, money talks!
		
Click to expand...

^^^^^ THIS ^^^^^

I personally know of another professional huntsman who has just been 'made redundant' after service of almost 30 years.


----------



## Hunters (31 October 2011)

So, Do you or do you not think that this sort of practice is out of the dark ages?  Or is it that because they are hunt servants/ sorry hunt staff - they are throw away people?

I for one, am apalled by the behaviour of some of the people at the highest level and their treatment of loyal staff in a 'sport' that I love.  When I became involved in hunting I niavely believed that some of the most noble 'men' led from the top.

Of recent years, I have found it to be woefully lacking in many areas and badly led by those that should know better.  The meeting on Sunday held by the Heythrop was ridled with deceit.  The Heythrop chairman claims that Julian Barnfield is to be made redundant.  To my book this means that a 'job' is no longer.  Apparently not so...  The hew huntsman will be an 'amateur' huntsman.  Clever weasel wording.  The new huntsman will be paid £25k in expenses followed by £15k from a kind donor. 

Off you go Julian - off to court - thanks for your service - but we're finished with you now -As I said led by people/regulatory bodies who should know better.  It brings hunting, a sport I love with a passion into disrepute!


----------



## Alec Swan (31 October 2011)

I'm a little confused.  Am I right in saying that the huntsman has been relieved of his duties, _before_ a court appearance?

Alec.


----------



## Herne (1 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			The Heythrop chairman claims that Julian Barnfield is to be made redundant.  To my book this means that a 'job' is no longer.  Apparently not so...  The hew huntsman will be an 'amateur' huntsman.  Clever weasel wording.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair - and I am in no way commenting on the rights and wrongs of this individual case, in which I am not in any way involved -  that's not really weasel words, it's the way hunting generally works.

A "professional pack" will have a master or masters (who may or may not be paid) and employ two (or more) "professional" members of Hunt Staff - the Huntsman and Whipper(s)-in. 

An "amateur pack" will combine the post of Master and Huntsman  (who probably will be paid) and only have one (or more) "professional" members of hunt staff - the whipper(s)-in. The terminology is slightly confused by the fact that the (senior) whipper-in will be referred to as "the Kennel Huntsman (KH)", but the fact is that with an amateur Master/Huntsman, the professional Huntsman position is redundant.

(Which is, of course a bad thing for Hunting in general, because without professional Huntmen's positions to aspire to, fewer and fewer people want to become professional whippers-in.)


----------



## Hunters (1 November 2011)

Dear Hearn

I am well aware of how the system works. 

What I find staggering and so do most others is that a professional huntsman facing court proceedings for illegally hunting is dismissed by his hunt before a court case, in what was effectively a public hanging.  

This is taking place in David Cameron's constituency which attracts media attention.

Our huntsmen are quite often in difficult positions at the best of times & to sack a huntsman as he is going into court is quite staggering.

The Heythrop are seen as leaders of hunting and to behave in this way sending this signaal to other hunts is dismal.  I'm glad I'm not in hunt service.


----------



## Dobiegirl (1 November 2011)

I see this as another case of hunting shooting themselves in the foot. This sort of in fighting is playing into the antis hands.

If this is going to alienate the landowners the Heythrops country is going to be drastically reduced.


----------



## Herne (1 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			The Heythrop are seen as leaders of hunting...
		
Click to expand...

Mostly by the Heythrop...


----------



## Stark Dismay (1 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			not nice to be chucked out of your hunt when you are facing criminal charges & as for the chairman of the MFHA to be punching the air with joy at the decision beggars belief.
		
Click to expand...




Hunters said:



			c) The new master apparently will be less cautious to 'antis' - this could lead to a Labour government tightening hunting laws...

The hunt is divided and there is to be vote on Sunday at an EGM.  Many landowners feel justifiably very loyal to Barnfield and do not want a so called 'arrogant master' coming in and taking over. 

Equally, they do not want to be seen as the hunt that could change hunting for the worst - all for five minutes fun, some have gone to the press.
		
Click to expand...

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?


----------



## 4x4 (1 November 2011)

Hey Starkey, I think it happened on sunday!


----------



## JanetGeorge (1 November 2011)

Herne said:



			Mostly by the Heythrop...
		
Click to expand...

That's about right!!  I remember a couple of 'incidents' involving that hunt and they were THE most impossible lot to deal with - lived on another planet!




			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?
		
Click to expand...

It never has been IMHO!


----------



## EAST KENT (1 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			Dear Hearn

I am well aware of how the system works. 

What I find staggering and so do most others is that a professional huntsman facing court proceedings for illegally hunting is dismissed by his hunt before a court case, in what was effectively a public hanging.  

This is taking place in David Cameron's constituency which attracts media attention.

Our huntsmen are quite often in difficult positions at the best of times & to sack a huntsman as he is going into court is quite staggering.

The Heythrop are seen as leaders of hunting and to behave in this way sending this signaal to other hunts is dismal.  I'm glad I'm not in hunt service.
		
Click to expand...

 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.


----------



## Alec Swan (1 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			Our huntsmen are quite often in difficult positions at the best of times & to sack a huntsman as he is going into court is quite staggering.

.......
		
Click to expand...

If in reality,  that's what happens,  then it will be a disgrace,  and will serve nothing to hunting.

Alec.


----------



## Hunters (1 November 2011)

EAST KENT said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, this huntman and many many others have been true to their 'masters' Even Kate Hoey could not save the fate of the Heythrop Huntsman...  'Orf with his head' !!


----------



## Hunters (1 November 2011)

Stark Dismay said:



			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?
		
Click to expand...

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 (1 November 2011)

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 (1 November 2011)

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 (2 November 2011)

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


----------



## JanetGeorge (2 November 2011)

Hunters said:



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

Oops - done!


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2011)

EAST KENT said:



			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.
		
Click to expand...

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


----------



## EAST KENT (2 November 2011)

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 (2 November 2011)

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 (2 November 2011)

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 (2 November 2011)

doodleberry said:



			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....
		
Click to expand...

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 (2 November 2011)

EAST KENT said:



			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 !

Click to expand...

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


----------



## rosie fronfelen (2 November 2011)

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


----------



## JanetGeorge (2 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			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)
		
Click to expand...

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 (2 November 2011)

rosiefronfelen said:



			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!!
		
Click to expand...


----------



## doodleberry (2 November 2011)

Hunters said:



			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...
		
Click to expand...

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 (2 November 2011)

there are always two sides to a story!!


----------



## JanetGeorge (2 November 2011)

doodleberry said:



			there are always two sides to a story!!
		
Click to expand...

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 (2 November 2011)

Well said JanetGeorge.


----------



## Alec Swan (2 November 2011)

Horsesforever1 said:



			Well said JanetGeorge.
		
Click to expand...

and again.

Alec.


----------



## doodleberry (2 November 2011)

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 (2 November 2011)

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 (2 November 2011)

doodleberry said:



			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!!
		
Click to expand...

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 (2 November 2011)

doodleberry said:





rosiefronfelen said:



			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!!
		
Click to expand...

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....
		
Click to expand...


----------



## doodleberry (2 November 2011)

Mrs B said:



			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....
		
Click to expand...

you are quite right i will shut up now!!


----------



## Hunters (2 November 2011)

Mrs B said:



			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....
		
Click to expand...

Very succinct Mrs B


----------



## Jerroboam (3 November 2011)

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 (3 November 2011)

Jerroboam said:



			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).
		
Click to expand...

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.
		
Click to expand...

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 (3 November 2011)

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 (3 November 2011)

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 (3 November 2011)

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...


----------



## Hunters (3 November 2011)

I should confirm that the person in the balaclava was never identified, so of course I am sure it could have been a dog walker.


----------



## Jerroboam (4 November 2011)

The antis have catergorically NOT followed our terrierman, without our country man the Heythrop Hunt would be rendered useless. Penny Little and Judy Gilbert hound Julian because a) he, whilst at the Worcester, before the ban, stood out again the anti hunt lobby on TV and in the media (nobody is saying that this is a bad thing) but many at the time said that he would soon regret such decisions. Many claim that this is the exact same reason why the Blencathra struggle with monitors too. b) as YOU yourself mentioned Hunters, we are West Oxon, the Prime ministers constituency and therefore are ALWAYS likely to attract such awful attention. I will NOT hear our country man slated in such a way. He is a great asset to our hunt and he is nothing to do with the Frampton vs Barnfield debate. Quite Frankly Hunters, whilst you are entitled to your opinion in such a forum, you must realise that the decision to enrol Charles Frampton went to the committee, then went to an Emergency General Meeting and the farmers and landowners used their right to vote and voted for change. This was the most democratic way of going about proceedings. He has NOT been made redundant or indeed 'given a secret push'. You, Hunters, continually go on about the Heythrop being a 'premier' pack, if Mr Barnfield were a premiership football manager or a top banker and was NOT delievering the goods the members/fans would ask for change. Our sport has been, at times, awful. Lets see how many of the people who are casuing trouble at this moment are hunting in the 2012/13 season, I doubt much land will be shut up at all.


----------



## Hunters (4 November 2011)

Your countryman was with the VAGSBH now known as the Kimblewick before he joined you, the same country that Gilbert & Little live in.  If you choose to believe that they visit you for other reasons that's your choice.  However, I can tell you this, the Kimblewick are mighty glad you've got them & have had them since way before Mr Cameron took position.

Regarding, Mr Barnfield and his 'not' being made redundant - call it what you like - he was got rid of him before a court case, I think you'll find even Kate Hoey is aghast at the decision.

I can only hope that the 'desision makers' don't live to regret their decision and spoil everyone elses hunting for the future - bacause that is what I believe they are playing with.

Finally, hasn't exactly unified your country, still so long as you have more fun.


----------



## JanetGeorge (4 November 2011)

Jerroboam said:



			The antis have catergorically NOT followed our terrierman, without our country man the Heythrop Hunt would be rendered useless. Penny Little and Judy Gilbert hound Julian because a) he, whilst at the Worcester, before the ban, stood out again the anti hunt lobby on TV and in the media (nobody is saying that this is a bad thing) but many at the time said that he would soon regret such decisions. ......I will NOT hear our country man slated in such a way. He is a great asset to our hunt and he is nothing to do with the Frampton vs Barnfield debate.
		
Click to expand...

Gee Jerroboam - you're mates with Penny and Judy, are you - and know WHY they do things??  If Julian's sterling efforts at the time of the Foster Bill ARE the cause of their attentions to the Heythrop, why has it taken them so long (after all, the Foster Bill WAS 13 years ago!)

Of COURSE they've followed your country man from the former VofA - and no-one is slating your countryman in any way!  After all, if those two hate him he was obviously very good at his job!

It's impossible for 'outsiders' to know the true and full reasons for Julian being turfed out in favour of Frampton - but if it has anything to do with the presence of those two - and Julian's caution in dealing with them - then you will not have solved the problem.  Penny Little is a dangerous enemy - and anyone who thinks otherwise and acts accordingly WILL live to regret it!

But the FACT remains - with a court case pending against Julian, sacking him is a demonstration of extreme stupidity!  Our professional huntsmen take the rap for these cases - and we should be backing them to the hilt!!  Not dumping them at the worst possible moment!  After all, IF Julian is convicted it is very BAD news for hunting and we will ALL suffer for the Heythrop's selfish and thoughtless behaviour!


----------



## Hunters (4 November 2011)

This will be my last post on this subject: 

I am deeply saddened for the treatment of Julian Barnfield and his family.

I am ashamed to have a sport that I love deeply brought into disrepute by these actions.

I am furthermore hugely concerned that an arrogant hunt, through these actions will cause a future Labour government to tighten the law, which in turn could finish hunting.

Enjoy your hunt ball tomorrow night - I'm sorry to hear the marquee had to be shrunk due to loss of numbers.  I truly hope it is not a sign of things to come.


----------



## 4x4 (5 November 2011)

I am confused as to why this debate (which is very entertaining and informative) has been allowed to continue whilst several similar debates about the hunt which shall not be named, beginning now with a K, have been deleted.


----------



## Judgemental (7 November 2011)

4x4 said:



			I am confused as to why this debate (which is very entertaining and informative) has been allowed to continue whilst several similar debates about the hunt which shall not be named, beginning now with a K, have been deleted.
		
Click to expand...

4 x 4 I think the answer lies in the following extract from H & H's own report today;

"The Heythrop will be hunted by Charles Frampton, currently senior joint-master and huntsman of the Portman, next season. 

His appointment follows a split at the Heythrop over the future of current huntsman Julian Barnfield. 

_The wrangle went public after Countryside Alliance chairman MP Kate Hoey intervened on Mr Barnfield&#8217;s behalf, writing to Heythrop chairman Mikey Elliot. _

An extraordinary general meeting was held on Sunday (30 October) in Chipping Norton, and the vote as to who should hunt the pack was 207 to 163 in favour of Mr Frampton. Farmers had two votes and subscribers one".

A vote of 207 to 163 is a fairly close run affair, given that the farmers have two votes each.

I have to keep reminding myself it's 7 November 2011 and not 7 November 1811!


----------



## Countrygirl (9 November 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			Agree 100%!  I personally think it's a disgrace the way some hunts treat their professional huntsmen - but sadly, money talks!
		
Click to expand...

JG as always you are the voice of common sense, perhaps you should be sitting on the MFHA commitee.
Don't forget though that it is not just the Huntsmen that suffer in these situations - I know of whips that have been treated in an equally appauling manor. It appears that some things are still dealt with in an archaic manor within hunting.


----------



## doodleberry (9 November 2011)

there is no smoke without fire


----------

