MEMBERS of hunts throughout Britain will no doubt see the government's decision to set up an inquiry into the impact of a ban on hunting with dogs as valuable breathing space. It means that the prospects of outlawing hunting before the next general election are slim.

But the government, which faces something of a dilemma over the issue, has probably got it right.

It stands to lose a substantial section of voters in rural areas if hunting with dogs were banned.

At the same time the absence of a ban would not exactly wreck Labour's share of the vote in urban areas, even though most town and city dwellers see hunting as a blood thirsty flashback to the days when the country squire's word was law.

The pro-hunting lobby argues that a ban will lead to wide spread unemployment in rural areas, as many as 16,000 - and that is why it is right that the government should set up an inquiry.

But it must be a realistic inquiry and not one that accepts some of the wild claims that have been made in recent years.

Some would have us believe that thousands of blacksmiths, tack shop owners, stable employees and manufacturers of horse and dog food would be thrown on the dole overnight.

But most people who follow the hunt do so because they love cross country riding. Are they going to stop because there is no longer a terrified, breathless animal a couple of fields ahead of them.

We think not.

If they have to have something to chase, what is wrong with drag hunting?

It has a following of thousands in some parts of the country, including the Lake District.

And it is a country pastime involving hounds, which the "tally-ho" brigade tells will have to be put down by the pack if the ban is instituted.

People who see hunting as a cruel, pointless exercise claim that the number of jobs lost would be around 1,000 at most.

The correct figure is probably somewhere between the two estimates and that is why an independent inquiry is essential.

But the fact remains that the vast majority of people in this country are opposed to hunting with dogs.

The pro-hunting lobby is led by a vociferous, well-heeled clique who are more than happy to spend large sums of money on their campaign. And many of those people who tramp for miles to make hunt demonstrations look so effective are probably there on the orders of their rural bosses.

The leaders of two hunts recently stated that there was no cruelty involved in hunting with dogs.

How do they support that argument when a terrified animal is chased for miles and then ripped to pieces by dozens of hounds?

That is about as cruel as you can get.

If the fox population is to be controlled - and we accept they can cause enormous damage - it can be done in a more humane manner.

Oscar Wilde got it right back in 1893 when he wrote: "The English country gentleman galloping after a fox - the unspeakable in full pursuit of the uneatable."

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.