BREEDERS of the iconic Exmoor pony are at loggerheads over a move to kick two of them out of the organisation dedicated to safeguarding the future of the ancient breed. West Somerset farming couple Dawn and Nick Westcott claim they are being "persecuted, intimidated and publicly humiliated" by the Exmoor Pony Society. A resolution calling for the society's committee to revoke the Westcotts' membership will be considered at its annual meeting in May. The resolution has been signed by ten, as yet publicly unnamed, members and cites "constant complaints against the EPS, its rules, officers, judges, inspectors and a number of ordinary members, in addition to the time expended by its committee and officers in dealing with these complaints" as the reason for the resolution. But Mrs Westcott said she and her husband had not been given the details of the allegations against them or the opportunity to put their side. The couple, who own Holtball Exmoor Pony Stud and founded the Exmoor Pony Club, have been at the forefront of an initiative to prevent the slaughter of moorland foals through the newly established Moorland Exmoor Foal Project. They have publicly blamed "red tape" with the registration and inspection system for Exmoor ponies - which is carried out by the EPS - including DNA verification, testing, inspections, micro-chipping and passporting, for making it difficult and expensive for moorland herd breeders to sell their young stock. Their project has so far taken 19 foals off the moor - ten of which were uninspected and nine of which were later proved to have been sired by the legendary stallion Moorland Kingfisher - and given them the chance to find homes. But Mrs Westcott said it was upsetting that the society had compromised not only her and her husband's integrity but also their stud, club and moorland foal project by issuing the resolution to the entire EPS membership without prior consultation or giving them the right to reply. She said some members had expressed concerns that they were expected to vote on the issue without any understanding of the situation, or knowing who the proposers were. "This is not democracy and it means that every member of the EPS runs the risk of being targeted and intimidated in this way by any group of ten members if they raise concerns," she said. "Alongside continuing discussions about hot branding, foal inspections and embracing important moorland genetics, we have complained to the EPS about a sustained campaign of unpleasant, personally directed comments on the internet and at events by a particular group of people and we would like to know if any of these people are behind this resolution." Mrs Westcott said that although the couple's membership would not be revoked at the annual meeting, members were still being asked to vote on the proposal. "So whichever way you look at it, the damage has been done, with a negative effect on our reputations as well as the stress of being put through such an ordeal." Mrs Westcott said the EPS had refused to respond to requests for information or to discuss the matter. "The resulting negative publicity this has generated for all parties concerned is regrettable and has made it unpleasant to be involved in Exmoor Ponies, which is a very great shame," she said. "We cannot understand why the society is behaving in this way. "Exmoor Ponies are an endangered breed and the high slaughter levels can be reduced with better management, communication, promotion and socialisation of foals. "Supporting this is surely where the efforts of the society need to be directed - not in discriminating against and upsetting people who are trying to help the ponies." EPS secretary Sue McGeever told the Free Press the organisation had no comment to make at this stage. It is understood the Westcotts will be given 'a right of reply' if the resolution is passed and the committee investigates the revocation proposal.

Editor's Note:

We welcome comments on the contents of reports which appear on this website.

However, those relating to this particular report were no longer making a constructive contribution to the issue involved, and we are therefore not accepting any further comments and have removed those previously submitted.