The most prominent beneficiary of the ban on hunting - though he is unlikely to recognise the fact - is Prince William.

If the succession to the throne follows the expected pattern, the No 2 heir is unlikely to become king before the third or perhaps even the fourth decade of this new century. His reign will stretch well beyond the century's mid point.

Even by the time William ascends the throne, a hunting monarch would be a pronounced anachronism. One who chooses to hunt in the second half of the century would put himself preposterously out of touch with his subjects. If the royal family wants to alienate itself even more from each succeeding generation it can do little better than keep the heirs to the throne eagerly following hounds.

But what of today? Hunt supporters are jubilant because a poll by ICM suggests that 70 per cent of the public believe the police should not enforce the ban. The wording of the question put to the sample is interesting.

It reads: "Do you think police resources should be used to enforce a ban or should the police concentrate on fighting other crimes." "Other crimes", of course, could be cycling on the pavement or urinating in public (which I recently saw a man do in daylight in a Stockton street). But perhaps what will instantly spring to most minds are murders, rapes and burglaries.

Anyway, another poll, carried out for the (paranoically) pro-hunting Daily Telegraph by YouGov, offered options in answer to the question: "Given that detecting crime and arresting criminals is the job of the police, which of these statements comes closest to your own view". The most support, 44 per cent, was for the view that if people continued to hunt "the police should immediately arrest and charge them in the usual way". A further 19 per cent thought that this should be done after an initial softly-softly approach. Only 27 per cent thought the police should "devote their scarce time and resources to dealing with more serious crime".

Of course, one can argue from polls till the last hound comes home. But the results of more than one poll suggest that the Countryside Alliance's claim that 59 per cent of people wish hunting to continue is way off beam. The YouGov poll found that 60 per cent, including 31 per cent of Tory voters, believe foxhunting should be a criminal offence.

The attitude of the young is crucial. As far as I know, no poll has tested it. But I would be amazed if the vast majority of young people is not opposed to hunting. As one of the memorable TV programmes about life at Chatsworth showed, the Duchess of Devonshire felt obliged to visit the local primary school, in the heart of feudal hunting country, to counter what she saw as a sentimental view of Mr Fox.

The plain truth is that, at this point in history, time has exactly caught up with hunting. In another generation or two it will have far outstripped it. Which is why hunting has to go. And why its disappearance will be a favour to Prince William.