This document will be of interest to all hunts that are facing difficulties at the minute. It looks like at this years AGM the MFHA are going to push through their “special measures” and will then be able to pick and choose which hunts are to fold and which are to continue. Amalgamations seen as the way forwards to keep fox hunting alive, this is something that many in the world of fox hunting are against as outlined in the This is Hunting UK Jan 2019 minutes.
Two maps, the first is a database that was titled “Hunt Members” as we went through the 1,000+ people listed on the original spreadsheet it became apparent that not everyone on there was in fact even remotely linked to the Barlow hunt, a common thread amongst the people who shouldn’t have been on there was that they had no notes, or as they refer to them “tag_list”. So we have removed all of the people who didn’t have a tag of some description, no doubt some of those people will have been involved with the hunt, but we have decided in this instance to do our best to protect people who may not have anything to do with the hunt. There was also a number of postcodes that were incorrect, we have done extensive searches and corrected postcodes. The second map, is the Barlow Hunt Officials (BHO) and Horsleygate Estate Company directors (HEC) these are the people who keep the hunt going, HEC are currently giving the hunt £4,500 per month to keep the hunt afloat.
As usual with our online maps, please zoom out.
Barlow Hunt Officials (BHO) and Horsleygate Estate Company (HEC)
Following on from the last set of TiHuk minutes that we previously published, where Jonathon Seed was revealed to be a regional organiser, even though he didn’t mention it as a councillor on his register of interest. We are now publishing internal documents from Jan 2019, today a regional organisers email, tomorrow the full minutes.
This document is an understanding between the two organisations and lays out exactly who is responsible for what, note that the CA includes in it’s remit gathering and holding information on hunt saboteurs. That is unlawful and we demand that the CA ceases immediately and starts to make amends to the victims.
Our website was created to highlight the fact that the Countryside Alliance and the Hunting Office hold databases on anti hunt activists, one is central and one is a round up of reports from across the country and sent out on a monthly basis to every hunt in the country. We believe the attacks on homes of activists is facilitated by these databases, in December 2020 an elderly couple were targeted by a gang of hunt thugs, they had nothing to do with hunt saboteurs and simply lived in a house previously occupied by sabs, you can read about it here.
Bricks through windows is frightening enough, but imagine having petrol poured through your letterbox, simply because you tried to stop some fox hunters from killing a fox? That’s what happened to West Midlands Hunt Saboteurs just recently.
So maybe the Hunting Office and the Countryside Alliance, might want to start considering reigning in their goon squad now that their details are public, we would ask everyone reading this: next time you hear about an anti hunt activist being attacked, please come back to this site and start contacting the people on this map and ask them what they are doing to stop hunt violence.
This map is all data that’s been gathered from public sources online, all of the people have attended Hunting Office meetings that have been published by us so far.
We do need your help, if you can search twitter, facebook and scour the internet using the details below to find out more contact details such as facebook profiles, mobile phone numbers, land lines etc please email them into us with a link to where you found the information at firstname.lastname@example.org
Please “zoom out” to see the entire map
Jim Barrington NOT ON THE MAP 07867 740154 email@example.com https://twitter.com/jimbarrington (It would appear he used to live in Tonbridge but that was quite a long time ago)
Tim Bonner East Wing, Furneaux Pelham Hall, Furneaux Pelham, Buntingford, Hertfordshire. SG9 0LB https://www.instagram.com/ca.timb https://twitter.com/CA_TimB
Alice Bowden NOT ON THE MAP 07827 488664 (believed to live near Tetbury born 1983)
Sean McClarron Pear Tree House, High Street, Snainton, Scarborough, North Yorkshire. YO13 9AJ
Benjamin Mancroft Markham House, High Street, Badminton, Gloucestershire. GL9 1DG https://www.facebook.com/benjamin.mancroft.5/about
Nigel Peel Kineton Hill Farm, Kineton Hill, Stow on the Wold, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire. GL54 1EZ 01451 850500
Andrew Osborne Wymondham Manor, 61 Main Street, Wymondham, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire. LE14 2AG 07977 431096 firstname.lastname@example.org
Lizzie Pinney The Old Post Office, 25 The High Street, Broadway, Worcestershire. WR12 7DP 01386 859360 / 07811 262859 / 07498 312158 https://www.bluecuckoo.co.uk/ email@example.com https://www.facebook.com/people/Lizzie-Pinney/100008720496027
What do you do when you’re the Hunting Office and the number of sabs is increasing every season? Call in the military! or in the case a security firm that specialises in events such as festivals: Matrix
The first document, which you can read here p1 and p2, starts off making a very unusual claim:
Hunt Saboteur Monitors Proposal
“lf the extremist element of the saboteur movement continues to go unchecked it can only be a matter of time before there is a fatality.
This alongside the manipulation of social media and the blatant lies and mistruths being spread is not only completely undermining hunting but the rural establishment it represents and if we fail to act it is impossible to see where it might end up and the sort of social change it might ferment.“
There have already been two fatalities, Mike Hill and Tom Worby, both hunt saboteurs. This document clearly goes on to explain how intel on saboteurs isn’t to prevent crime, but is actually planned to be used so that hunts can be informed in real time if their neighbouring hunt has been visited by sabs:
“Their brief on a day will be to contain the saboteurs legally, protect property, prevent aggravated trespass and evidence gather.
The plan is to have 5 teams in the field based in Yorkshire, the North West, the South West, the Midlands and East Anglia to tackle on a day individual hits and follow the Saboteur movements if from one Hunt to another. Key to the success of this will be knowing where the groups of Saboteurs are going on a day. This is part of the plan and will all need coordinating by one individual.
ln broad terms the costings for this for the coming season I estimate to be £165,000″
The Matrix were employed, but they failed to make much impact on hunt saboteurs so their ongoing employment was terminated, however the planning behind the matrix scheme is worth further investigation, especially as a number of anti hunt activists are now making GDPR claims against the Countryside Alliance and the Hunting Office.
Not only do we have that internal document from the within the Hunting Office, we also have their minutes from November 2019. There is a lot of effort and money going into spying on sabs, not just Matrix, but also private investigation companies, it is ridiculous to pretend that this is acceptable and lawful with current GDPR legislation.
This intelligence gathering, was further outlined later on in the meetings minutes:
You can read the entire Hunting Office meeting minutes here.
This report which we have in full but will not be publishing as it is entirely made up of saboteur and monitor activity, listed 30 different anti hunt activists, some of them multiple times. It also lists the vehicles and registrations, making the targeting of activists much easier. The Countryside Alliance claim to use the “prevention of crime” as an excuse to get round GDPR regs and then create these reports which they broadcast to every hunt in the country. Yet in this most recent of reports covering the entire country for four weeks there is not one incident where saboteurs have been arrested and charged.
Polly Portwin makes it clear that the data is used immediately when it is phoned in to inform surrounding hunts. We wonder how many sabs have been attacked after all the thugs from neighbouring hunts have been called in? the answer may well be calculated by this report and others that we now hold.
We are currently taking legal advice to make a claim as are many other individuals, multiple claims will soon be going in against the Hunting Office, The Countryside Alliance and a variety of hunts as every hunt that sends in information is also liable.
As we learn more of the legal proceedings and how to undertake them we will share them here on the site, if you have already contacted a lawyer and want to share your experience to help others make a claim, please email us on firstname.lastname@example.org
In the June exec committee, it was already resolved that this hunt would be “cutting costs” as much as possible when it came to the upkeep and care of their hounds. This section of the hunt accounts includes all costs relating to keeping hounds other than their food, which is provided by the fallen stock service.
Repairs and upkeep to their living quarters, cleaning products, medical supplies? All of these are areas which could have been targeted for cost savings.
15th June Exec Committee
In these sections of meeting minutes, the hunt hint at just how many hounds they kill each year. Since the end of the previous season only three months beforehand, the phrase “GP reported that we are 6 ½ couples lighter” shows that they have put down / killed (likely using a firearm) 13 dogs.
Point 4.12 shows us that the hunt currently have 80 dogs (40 couple), although they agree that by the autumn they should have killed 10 of these (to reduce to 35 couple). Brian Clothier suggests that they kill a further 5 dogs in addition to the planned death toll.
These are of course replaced by the hunts continual and irresponsible breeding of new puppies, none of which will die of old age.
22nd June Committee
2nd November Committee
Since the June meeting, we see that the huntsman (Mathew) has been hard at work killing off dogs in accordance with the committees wishes
So how much does the hunt spend on looking after their huge pack of hounds? Food is generally taken care of by the fallen stock (flesh round) service. However there are of course many other costs as any dog owner will tell you.
October 2020 Accounts, budgeted spend on hounds £3,000, actual spend nil.
By December 2020, the budget for upkeep of hounds was in fact reduced by £2k to only £1,000, of which, only £96 had been actually spent.
This is a hunt which have opted to put down significant numbers of hounds for “business reasons”, and aim to reduce kennel expenditure as much as possible for the poor souls remaining living there. They plan to charge up to £100 to their followers to sponsor a hound, but it is not discussed how they deal with the situation of the huntsman inevitably shooting a sponsored hound.
Hound numbers are clearly a source of financial strain and yet, they continue to breed replacements who will live a short life which is property of the hunt and ended by decision of the committee.