AN ANTI-hunt campaigner has slammed the National Trust as “undemocratic” and is considering giving up her membership.

It follows the Broadgreen-based charity’s annual general meeting, where a motion to ban trail hunting and the exercising of hunting hounds on trust land was narrowly defeated.

The motion was stopped by a margin of less than one per cent, with 30,985 votes against the motion compared to 30,686 in favour.

The anti-hunt campaigners won the majority of “specified” votes – where trust members actively voted either for or against the motion.

However, they had 1,400 fewer “discretionary” votes. These are ballots where trust members can direct a proxy to vote how they see fit. This proxy can be a named individual or the National Trust AGM’s chairman.

Ahead of the vote, the National Trust announced stricter licensing conditions for trail hunts and an end to using animal-based scents in the trails, which have been accused of causing the accidental killing of foxes by hounds.

Helen Beynon, whose hunt ban motion was frustrated, criticised the voting method. “I don’t think the process is entirely democratic,” she said.

Former teacher Helen hinted that the charity’s board of trustees had used discretionary votes to block the motion: “They should be ashamed that they haven’t let members decide.”

She complained that campaigners were not given the chance to respond to trustees’ recommendation to members to vote against the motion, made in a voting pack sent to trust members before the AGM.

“The vote was decided before we could explain the National Trust couldn't work [the stricter licensing conditions],” she said.

She said she was now “thinking carefully” about giving up her trust membership. The Leicestershire woman has been a member of the trust for around seven years, she said.

Helen said that the fight to ban trail hunting would be taken to Westminster. She said: “I think the law will be looked at very soon."

Responding to the accusation that National Trust trustees had used discretionary votes to block the hunting motion, a spokesman said: ‘The board of trustees made their views on this issue very clear in their response to the motion before the meeting so members giving their vote to the chair will have understood it was supportive of the trust’s position.”

Yesterday, the trust said: “The conservation charity has been carefully listening to both sides of a highly polarised and passionate debate for years.

“We are pleased members have had the opportunity to debate this issue and have voted to support the Trustees’ position.”