UK ban on fox-hunting

Madam, - Social arguments against hunting - red coats, filthy landlords, and so on - are irrelevant

Madam, - Social arguments against hunting - red coats, filthy landlords, and so on - are irrelevant. The real arguments are about cruelty.

There are too many foxes, because man has screwed up nature, so they have to be culled. There are four ways of doing this.

First, shoot them. This can only be done with a high-powered rifle. Shotguns and .22 rifles are useless; they merely wound the fox, sometimes blowing off a leg, and the animal dies from starvation and probably gangrene over a few weeks.

Second, poison them. Strychnine is the standard and horrible poison used - a death of searing pain as the strychnine literally eats the animal's innards away.

READ MORE

Third, the snare. This is probably the cruellest method of all. The animal takes days to die, usually of thirst and starvation, if it has not managed to eat off its own leg. Gangrene usually sets in and the animal dies covered in maggots and pus - one of the most horrendous sights for anyone with any feelings whatsoever.

Fourth, kill them with a pack of hounds, usually by having the neck broken. No fox escapes wounded, ever. No gangrene, no endless agony; instantaneous death.

These are the real points of discussion and there does not seem to be a sensible alternative to the pack of hounds, from the point of view of actual cruelty. Take your pick! - Yours, etc.,

JOHNNY COUCHMAN, Johnstown House, Carlow.