Posts Tagged ‘Quad bikes’

Here’s a question for you, How many people do you see riding on the quad bike in the picture below?

quad

Here’s another question. Do you think the officer in the police car would have a good enough view to count the number of people on the quad?

Well apparently after a member of the public complained about the lack of action from the officers at the scene and they received this response from Thames Valley Police. Note in particular the highlighted bit in yellow.

image1

Apparently inspector James Davies is unable to see there are 4 people on the quad. Here’s an enlarged version just in case you’re in any doubt. They could have of course asked for the video to be supplied for further evidence of wrong doing if they had any doubts.

zoom

It’s also clear from point 2 of the response that the police are choosing which crimes to police and which to ignore. If there’s a hunt going on all road traffic offences appear to become null and void – good to know that, I’ll pass it on to all sab drivers and let them know they can drive where they like and how they like, and yet why is it sab vehicles always get stopped for checks every time there’s a hunt in progress. Hmmm . . .

These are the details of the quad bike:

quad check

Now the police may well get a different MOT response but I’m still fairly sure that quad isn’t designed for 4 people. Thames Valley Police are there to uphold the law for the benefit of the general public, not for the benefit of a small minority who like to hunt sentient mammals for fun and to be honest had I received that response I’d be pretty insulted.

Fell free to complain.

Well that didn’t take long.

Since the National Trust vote on trail hunting there’s been a lot of interest in what would happen next, and rightly so. I’m not going to comment on the irregularities of the vote itself (that’s for another time) but instead I’m going to look at what’s actually happening in the field.

Before the vote the NT released a set of rules by which all hunts would have to abide by. I covered those in a previous blog entry here (The Pressure Mounts). However it soon became apparent that the so-called Countryside Alliance were pressuring the NT to drop some of these rules. Of course there’s no surprise there, as we all know trail hunting is merely a cover for real hunting and the rules as advertised would effectively curtail that and with the opening meets of the main hunting season taking place over the last couple of weekends all eyes were watching to see what would take place.

4

Reports were soon emerging of hunts using NT land where no licenses had been issued.

Had these hunts been licensed to use the land or were they trespassing? They were certainly not abiding by the rules set out by the NT as there were terrier men present and also quad bikes were being driven along with the hunt, both were to be excluded in the new set of rules. Of course there was no way of knowing what kind of substance was being used as a trail or even if a trail had even been laid (highly unlikely).

1

West Somerset Vale Hunt with terrier man with quad on NT land last weekend (Quantock Hills).

2

Clearly searchinging for live quarry complete with terrier men (Quantock Hills).

The examples above are a clear and blatant violation of the new rules set out by the NT.

What is even more disturbing is now the NT seemed to have caved in to the pressure by the so-called CA by reneging on their promise to publish meet locations in advance. Their original statement is shown below.

“Greater transparency for our members and the public.  We will post on our website the agreed days and locations, in advance, for our members and supporters to view. This will include a primary point of contact for each hunt”.

Now it seems that they will no longer do this.

3

So the NT are claiming that they have been advised by the police not to publish meets and claim this has been done avoid any potential unrest.

Unrest from who?

Clearly if the NT wish to remain open and transparent there has to be the ability to independently monitor any hunt which uses NT land. The NT have already stated they don’t have the resources to do it themselves so therefore the only option is for other groups to do so. Whether these be monitors from LACS, independent or members from local sab groups makes no difference, the only time there is any conflict and violence it comes from the hunting side, both those actively taking part and their supporters. One has to wonder whether the NT did actually consult with the police or they are just using this as a handy excuse. And if they did it would suggest a level of collusion within the police force that they consulted.

Either way the NT are being shown up once again for what they really are, a big land owner who facilitates an illegal activity for the benefit of an influential minority. If the NT don’t take immediate action against the hunts in question we can only assume that all the fine words and statements were in fact complete lies and only there to help swing the vote on trail hunting.

One commentator on social media summed things up perfectly:

“As hunts are not monitored and specific routes wont be published how the hell are you (the NT) or anybody else going to be able to make sure our wildlife is protected from those who wish to slaughter it for the fun of it by calling it an incident? With an independent investigation imminent your charitable status is teetering on the edge of that hole you’re digging”.

I concur.

Keep up the pressure. Contact the NT and let them know your views. Twitter, Facebook, Phone: 03448001895 Email: enquiries@nationaltrust.org.uk

UPDATE: It seems the NT did promise to publish routes etc in the AGM material (thanks to Lou for the image (see below).

promies