HUNTING

WHEN the Government should be concerned with the devastated state of the rural economy after foot-and-mouth, it seeks instead to destroy a part of rural life that brings money and jobs to the countryside by banning fox hunting.

While the House of Lords voted overwhelmingly for a compromise solution, the House of Commons voted overwhelmingly for abolition. Those that suggest that the House of Lords is bound to support the landed gentry's "interests" are badly mis-informed, since there are only 80 or so hereditary Peers and some 200 or so Labour life peers.

What is relevant to rural small businesses is that Alun Michael MP, the Rural Affairs Minister, rather than spend the next six months organising financial aid to revitalise the rural economy, will be writing yet another Bill to abolish hunting with dogs and take more money and jobs out of the rural economy. - Peter Troy, Darlington Branch Chairman, Federation of Small Businesses, Maunby, North Yorkshire.

THE letters (HAS, Mar 22) said: "There are many important things the Government should be concentrating on."

Yes, there are more important things but, while researching the First World War through old copies of The Northern Echo, I noticed that life had to carry on as normal as possible.

If we could manage to fight that war and still pass other Acts of Parliament, surely we can still find time now. There will always be "something more important" to the pro-foxhunters.

Why should it add to the workload of police any more than any other act making things illegal? Jobs and money generated by hunting cannot be justified by keeping cruel sports - or should we reintroduce cock fighting and bear baiting to increase employment?

We live in a democracy. The majority of people want a ban on hunting. The majority of elected Members of Parliament want a ban. Where is the problem? - Barry Wood, Edmondsley.

SO where were all these animal-loving Labour backbenchers last year? The majority of cattle and sheep need not have died during the foot-and-mouth outbreak. Could they not find Tow Law?

Eighteen thousand foxes are killed on roads, 800 by the hunts. Now we know why Labour wants to bring the motorist down. - Jim Tague, Bishop Auckland.

THE pro-hunting lobby had better not ask D Punchard (HAS, Mar 22) to debate the issue for them as he will let the side down. By his own admission, he never saw a fox caught - how can this be an effective way of managing vermin if you never catch them and to admit that chasing the fox is entertainment, beggars belief. It is the thrill of the ride and not chasing an animal to near exhaustion that is the entertainment.

Yes, snaring is unacceptable, as is poisoning, but to subject any animal to this sport is downright premeditated cruelty and all in the name of entertainment. - Fiona Rolfe, Willington.

FOX hunting is more than just a way of ridding the countryside of a pesky fox. The would-be green wellies want the choice of looking ridiculous in country squire red and quaffing atop a gee-gee, looking down on the below-stairs serfs who stubbornly refuse to doff their hats and acknowledge their lowly place in society. In other words, it is all about status. On balance, the Government's third way is about right. - F Atkinson, Shincliffe.

THE leader writer (Echo, Mar 19) is as usual sitting on the fence and makes trivialities the crux of his argument.

The argument regarding an individual dog chasing a cat or rabbit or fox for that matter, is a matter of intent and irrelevant. The argument for our boys in blue roaming the countryside is a simplification. Jobs may be lost if hunting is banned - why not employ people to supervise the ban with the full authority of the law?

If the so-called moderate countryside leaders have any decency, they would call it a day and look for more useful ways of leading their lives.

If the hunting issue had been handled correctly in the first place there would be no need for the irrelevant excuse that there are more pressing issues.

As for animal welfare, one can hope it is only the start of our responsibility towards the way we treat animals and our environment.

The Commons is the representative, legislative elected body of the people who have made an emphatic decision, So it is time for the Government to deliver. - John Young, Crook.

THE Tories say the Government should get on with more important business. Well, fox hunting is very important to a very large majority of people in this country who want it stopped.

They predict big job losses - what about the thousands of miners and steel workers who lost their jobs under the Tories?

They say a way of life will be lost. That way of life is watching 20 or so hounds tearing one little fox to pieces - sad people.

As for the House of Lords - they should have no say in the matter as they are not the elected parliament. - John and Evelyn Thompson, Crook.

I BELIEVE that most of the anti-hunt feeling is engendered not by concern for the fox, but by social spite and class hatred.

A few people are concerned for the fox, but when the Government ordered the slaughter of nine million healthy cattle and sheep, only a few outsiders protested.

The animal rights people were silent. Evidently only foxes have rights. When you land a fish, it suffocates painfully. Shall we ban angling, Tony? No. The working class goes fishing.

If you want to witness fear in animals, go to your nearest abattoir. Animals can smell death. Steeplechasing owes a lot to the hunting field. But working men bet.

Hunting is part of country life. To ban it is to give way to class hatred. If people were honest they would admit it. - Jim Ross, Rowlands Gill, Tyne and Wear.