THERE have been several pro-hunting letters of late, including one which gave the impression you had to reside in the countryside to have an opinion about it.

I was brought up in the countryside so perhaps my opinion would count?

I have witnessed the horrors of the hunt, foxes pursued to the point of exhaustion before being ripped apart. I've seen fox earths and badger sets blocked up to prevent the hunted fox from finding refuge. I have witnessed the hunt trespassing onto private land and worrying farm and domestic animals alike.

The hunt serves no useful purpose as shown by a study carried out by the Mammal Society (an independent scientific society), which shows that during the foot and mouth crisis (when hunting was banned), no impact on foxes was seen. Contrary to what delusional hunt supporters believe, the majority of the British public is against fox hunting and many like me are country dwellers.

As for the 500 vets to which Mr Keen refers, equine veterinary practice is big business and many rural practices have a vested interest in the continuation of hunting.

Also in response to Simon Hart's letter I would be interested to know which poll he refers to that found 'less than 20 per cent of the public agrees with a hunting ban.'

Questions can be posed in such a way as to elicit the response that the questioner desires. It wouldn't surprise me to find that the question posed required the respondent to choose between world peace and a ban on hunting.

Here are two facts that your readers may be interested in:

1 MORI found that when posing the simple question 'do you find that hunting with dogs is inhumane?' 74 per cent of re-spondents replied yes.

2 Another interesting fact with which your readers may not be acquainted with is that London's Hammersmith has a larger Countryside Alliance membership than Sussex, Wales or the south west.

J Fone

Bromsgrove