# How are most hunts run?



## Countryman (13 January 2013)

The title says it all really. I've been hunting for two seasons now and thought I understood how most packs were organised but the thread on hunting without masters has made me wonder. 

So could someone explain the difference between committee/Master-led/subscription packs please? 

Also, I'm a little confused about the role of a master in some hunts. I understand some act as amateur huntsmen but is it the case that often Master's are paid a sum of money to be Master? I know that that used to happen 100 years ago but not that it still happened.

In our hunt for example, the Master's certainly don't get paid! In fact I think they end up paying rather a lot themselves... 

Anyway if somebody could clear all this up I'd be much obliged. Different types of pack and different roles of Master's really is what's confusing me. 

Thanks in advance


----------



## Ditchjumper2 (13 January 2013)

Well, some hunts are run by committee. The committee will have a treasuer who pays the bills, banks the money etc. A huntsman will be employed to hunt hounds and will be paid a salary. There will be one or more Acting Masters to take charge.

Or the hunt pay a guarantee (a set amount of money)to a Master(s), or Master huntsman. They are then responsible for certain agreed expenses ie hound food, horse expenses, utility bills etc and have to pay it out of that money.  If they overspend they have to meet the difference.


----------



## Countryman (14 January 2013)

Is it not ever possible that the Master's run the hunt rather than the committee?


----------



## Ditchjumper2 (14 January 2013)

If they operate under a guarantee then yes.


----------



## Herne (15 January 2013)

Most Hunts are run by a committee, which is elected by a combination of subscribers, farmers landowners, suporters  or whatever, as defined by its constitution.

The committee will then appoint Masters to run the Hunt for the season.

Once in place, the mastership will be responsible for the day to day running of the hunt, supposedly without interference fr om the committee.

At a specified point towards the end of each season, the committee will meet again to either confirm the existing mastership for the next season or to seek a new mastership.

Part of this process will be working out the agreement between the committee and the mastership about the finances of the hunt.

In the olden days, the Masters would agree to invest money into the hunt, for the payment of wages, purchase of horses, feed, vets bills etc. This was called &#8220;the guarantee&#8221;.

These days, it is more likely to be the other way around &#8211; where the committee guarantee to pay the Masters a specified sum each year from subscriptions, hunt supporters club, point-to-point etc with which the Masters then have to pay all the expenses of the hunt, thereby meaning that they don&#8217;t have to pay for it themselves.

Traditionally, the Masters would employ staff to run the kennels and the stables, including a professional Huntsman.

It is becoming increasingly common, however, for one of the Masters to hunt the hounds, in which case he is referred to as an &#8220;amateur Huntsman&#8221;, regardless of whether or not he receives payment.

In many hunts with amateur huntsmen, the guarantee will be greater than is needed to pay staff, animal bills and other expenses and the amateur Huntsman will live off the remainder.

The assets of the hunt (kennels, stables, land, vehicles, animals, etc.) tend to be owned either by the committee or sometimes by a trust, controlled by a separate group of trustees (who may or may not be committee members or Masters).

250 years ago, hunts were owned by one individual and that individual made all the decisions, took any income and paid all the bills. These were &#8220;private packs&#8221; and there are still a small number of these in existence.

Some hunts do not appoint official Masters, but rather have one or more acting Masters who carry out the duties that Masters would undertake. These hunts are said to be &#8220;run by committee&#8221;. In practice, there is not much difference from a normal mastership-run hunt. The main difference lies in where the responsibility for the actions of the hunt, both legally and within the rules of the M.F.H.A., lie.


----------



## Countryman (15 January 2013)

Ah many thanks Herne for that very comprehensive explanation. So technically every year the Master's are re-confirmed? They don't necessarily have a place as Master for as long as they like? (despite some Masterships lasting 10 years +)

Also I understood that in the old days having the Master hunt the pack was also quite common, until around the 20th century? (and even well into it with some famous names)  Would you say that's broadly correct, or?


----------



## Herne (15 January 2013)

Countryman said:



			Ah many thanks Herne for that very comprehensive explanation. So technically every year the Master's are re-confirmed? They don't necessarily have a place as Master for as long as they like? (despite some Masterships lasting 10 years +)
		
Click to expand...

This depends upon the rules of the individual hunt. However, I think that it is probably fair to say that the majority of Hunts work on the principle that Masterships willl just run on continuously, year on year, until either the Mastership resigns or the Committee makes an active decision to replace them. If the Mastership does run on, however, this will still normally be rubber-stamped by the Committee and the AGM each year.

If a Master resigns from office, this has different effects in different hunts. Many hunts consider a Mastership to be the sum of all of its parts and that, therefore, if one Master resigns, the whole Mastership has to resign - those that do not wish to finish having to re-apply to form a "new" Mastership, either on their own or with new members.

Other Hunts allow an existing Mastership to change its members without going through that process.

Other Hunts change the rules each time dependant upon the hunt politics at the time and the preferences of the committee members of the time.





			Also I understood that in the old days having the Master hunt the pack was also quite common, until around the 20th century? (and even well into it with some famous names)  Would you say that's broadly correct, or?
		
Click to expand...

Some did, some didn't. My gut feeling is that more didn't, but that is a guess. TBH, I don't know.


----------

