Calling all National Trust Members

[Mrs H]

Lumpy Lycra has just put this on the HOC website

..... please check the AGM resolutions winging their to you as there is a "members resolution" proposing that dates, times and exact routes of sporting activities on NT land should be published on the trust website not less than 14 days beforehand.

It's opposed by the board of trustees as impractical but we still need to ensure interested parties vote against it. I'd post it to Nope but can't remember my login!

What is she like

Haven't had any paperwork yet so can't shed any more light on it.

[Scott]

You can find the motion (and the Trustees' response) on pages 6 and 7 of this pdf. I think it's supposed to be aimed at country sports, but the wording is certainly ambiguous.

[andypat]

Lumpy Lycra has just put this on the HOC website

..... please check the AGM resolutions winging their to you as there is a "members resolution" proposing that dates, times and exact routes of sporting activities on NT land should be published on the trust website not less than 14 days beforehand.

It's opposed by the board of trustees as impractical but we still need to ensure interested parties vote against it. I'd post it to Nope but can't remember my login!

What is she like

Haven't had any paperwork yet so can't shed any more light on it.

Well if this goes through I'm going to make a killing at the bookies!

[Mrs H]

Lumpy now says this

it seems to be aimed at "trail hunting" so I'd guess it's from the anti-hunting campaign, which I remember being rather well organised within the NT. As worded it does, as Babs says, remove a certain something from orienteering

I wonder if BOF know or if they're too busy chasing government targets to notice Is there a nationally agreed access agreement as per the Forestry Commission? The NT have loads of permanent courses and have actually promoted orienteering in their magazine as I have mentioned before - are our interests being represented at a national level - or is it down to us - the individual orienteering NT member?

How come this has had to wait for a noper (who has admittedly forgotten her log in - can someone fix that?) to come to our attention:?

[Scott]

I wonder if BOF know or if they're too busy chasing government targets to notice

Now, that's a little unfair - I'm not sure I'd expect "BOF" (the professional staff? the Directors?) to be actively monitoring the internal politics of the National Trust . Has anybody tried emailing Mike Hamilton to let him know about it?

[RJ]

I think that orienteering fits in with all other 'activities' that take place on NT 'land'. The general NT policy is (would appear to be?) that everyone has the right to enjoy NT assets, and to use them for their activities. I don't think the NT would resist a request from an organisation for an activity so long as there was minimal detriment to the NT asset, or if some other government organisation (eg Natural England) resisted the activity taking place at that time and extent. Usual thing with ground nesting birds etc etc etc.

The agreement between Orienteering (maybe even at a national level, eg BOF) and the NT which was discussed in detail in Cumbria some ten years ago(?) focussed on charges for the activity. The NT have not pursued this further than a gentle discussion. I think they have been quite happy for orienteering to make donations, eg Fix the Fells, in Cumbria, which WCOC have supported.

Our local NT officials see the orienteering as being fairly benign. Whether visitors to the various forests and fells on a Sunday morning have the same opinion as they 'fight' to share the footpaths is another story.

[Spookster]

Has anybody tried emailing Mike Hamilton to let him know about it?

And even if they have, what are they expecting him to say to the NT?! The trustees have already stated they are against the proposal.

And anyway, what's the big deal. Having orienteering events advertised on the NT website at least 2 weeks in advance sounds like free publicity to me...

The NT is very positive about orienteering on it's land - it says so here.

[Scott]

Has anybody tried emailing Mike Hamilton to let him know about it?

And even if they have, what are they expecting him to say to the NT?!

Well, if this motion were to be problematic for orienteering, there could be a news item on the BOF website alerting orienteers who are NT members (there must be quite a few) to the impact it would have if it passed, or maybe even suggesting that they might like to vote against it. I reckon that'd be perfectly reasonable under MofA 3.10. But personally I'm still not convinced that there's any intention for the motion to be applied to anything other than hunting (although the wording is vague).

[Mrs H]

I don't think I'm being unfair at all - I would expect someone at BOF central to cast an eye over the proposals for the AGM of one of our major landowners to alert members of anything potential contentious - and as the proposal states "exact routes" I think this qualifies. I would also have expected a better dialogue between the two bodies especially as a good relationship appears to exist. I'm not suggesting that BOF could do anything directly with the NT although they could lobby the board on our behalf if they had such a good dialogue that they knew this item was coming up (perhaps they already have as the board is recommending it for refusal - but if that's the case they've failed on the transparency line) but I would expect the news page to contain an item alerting NT members about the proposal. I would say that was an entirely reasonable expectation from people who are being paid to look after our interests. The fact that the proposal is likely to fail is actually not here or there.

[Scott]

Fair enough. But given that BOF don't seem to have noticed, have you now emailed someone to alert them? (I would do it myself, but I suspect Mike H is a little fed up with getting emails from me at the moment.)

The fact that the proposal is likely to fail

I'm not sure I'd say that: National Trust votes on hunting issues - when LACS gets involved on one side and the CA/FONT on the other - have a history of being pretty close-run, regardless of which side the Trustees take...

[alcumbria]

As other people have mentioned I think this motion is aimed at specifically Trail hunting.
To clarify the issue there are two methods of "trail Hunting" one is for a foxhound pack to follow an artificial animal scent and it is possible for the hounds to inadvertently follow the scent of a "proper animal".
The other trail hunting is where the hounds follow an aniseed mixture and race over the course this is a Traditional north of England but predominantly Cumbrian sport.
My involvement is in laying the aniseed trail for the dogs to follow and I have been for over 25 years.
The sport is well organised and meetings take place nearly every day from March to October with the hounds running up to 10 miles per event. They rarely get wrong and follow the aniseed scent within a metre either side, crossing fences walls and gates at speed and they are true joy to watch in full flow.
It is a betting sport and is licenced with prizes for the first 6 and league tables etc for the winners.
There are also tens of thousands of pounds raised every year for local cumbrian charities.
Permission is always sort from all the farmers(NT) for the events and it looks like another layer of bureaucracy/hurdles to have to follow in having to post the events on the websites but has someone else mentioned it would also be an advertisement.

What would be an issue would be how exactly would the course need to be displayed on the website as I could draw my routes precisely on an ordnance survey map but copyrights etc would probably prevent this.
For more info on the sport visit http://www.houndtrailing.org.uk/
This is a traditional Cumbrian sport that would die away if it was not allowed to run on National trust land and reading the trustees responses they probably recognise this as the motion specifically mentions non animal based scents.