According to SWT we have a 'selective memory'. This is in effect one of their less extreme ways of telling others that those who oppose their policy cannot be relied upon. It should not be inevitable that the messenger gets smeared when the message is so unpalatable. We have a fair amount of evidence that SWT has been at some pains to discredit those who disagreed with them.
We're all prone to misremember facts and events. But when people accuse others of selective memory they are usually hoping that the counter accusations that fly around will spread confusion amongst third parties who will then despair of getting at the truth. The use of this ploy has been just one of the reasons that the Blacka saga has caused bitterness. Another is the retrospective corruption of events.
This quote is from the recent letter from SWT's Chief Executive.
The cattle grazing and fencing issue has been discussed many, many times at great length and currently I do not believe that this is the right time to re-visit the issue.
We heard this being said almost word for word last year, and the year before. In fact the first time it was said was in 2003 three years before the cattle appeared. After trying to get the plan to be scrutinised at RAG meeting eventually an agenda item was programmed between other items deemed of crucial importance. Very soon the call was parroted - "We've already decided this. Move on to the next item." SWT have been prepared to give a presentation (in 2005) about the policy but decidedly reluctant to respond to points raised. In various papers they produced they stated or implied that a kind of agreement had been reached. They seemed incapable of being straightforward about it. It was almost as if there was something they were nervous about or a serious fraud they wanted to hide.
Before the Icarus consultation of 2006 SWT got together all the conservationists from the Council, from PDNPA and English Nature (as it was then) etc., and discussed with them how they could fix the meetings so they would not have to discuss fencing and grazing even though this had been the main idea for the consultation being proposed. They said that the 'independent' facilitator would be instructed only to follow SWT's agenda. Unfortunately for them they were foolish enough to put it in the minutes of their exclusive meeting and this was later revealed to Friends of BM when a Freedom of Information request was put in.
Even when we have managed to raise the issue with SWT staff they have been careful not to respond to questions. The decision had been taken and that was that. So much for consultation.
Stags on both sides of the barbed wire