I read with some amusement the article in The Evening Advertiser concerning MP James Gray's attempt to amend the bill for banning hunting with dogs.

My amusement stemmed from him being upset that his attempt to obtain compensation for those loosing their jobs as a result of the ban, was unceremoniously thrown out.

It was not surprising this happened as other MPs were not conned by the hunting fraternity's propaganda on job losses.

The pro-hunting lobby's (or the Country Side Alliance as it is better known) original tactics of indicating how effective fox hunting was in keeping the fox population down were discredited by the RSPCA's survey of the fox population after the foot and mouth crisis, when hunting was banned for an extended period.

The survey confirmed that during this period the fox population did not mushroom as the hunting brigade had predicted.

Lamping with registered marksmen and humane trapping would be far more effective in controlling the fox population, if required.

This forced them to focus only on their other argument, namely loss of jobs.

They know very well that this is a red herring as a hunting ban will not result in job losses, if drag hunting is adopted.

Stable owners and hands, kennel staff, farriers, feed merchants, saddlers etc will still all be required for drag hunting.

Additionally, and this is where James Gray should be cock a hoop if he is really concerned about rural employment, at least one or possibly a team of people will be employed in running the 'drag' for each hunt.

His comment about this democratic process forcing the "worse prejudices on a decent, law abiding society" was laughable, as most if not all the hunts have vowed to break the law if the bill is passed.

G Shaw

Rodbourne