Debating the justification for the banning of fox hunting on the grounds of economy or degree of cruelty are two red herrings in a bottomless sea of loopholes the Country Alliance love to swim in.
The economic value of fox hunting,although small,is beyond dispute,and will continue in rude health unless it is possible to prove it's activities cause pain to wild animals,and there's the rub.
It is difficult, if not impossible, to measure the degree of pain an animal experiences when it is being hunted to a violent death,and that's why the country alliance have been able to continue the controversy in the fox hunting debate to their advantage.
Hunters could argue their method of dispatching a fox is no more cruel than dispatching cattle in the abattoir,which,by-the-way, practices the most human method of killing.Now let's imagine an abattoir was to introduce a sporting element into the slaughtering process,then that abattoir would be closed down, and that is the point, it's just plain wrong to kill an animal for fun and nothing to do with the degree of pain.
The only way we can judge fox hunting is on PRINCIPLE.A sport can only be principled or unprincipled.It can't be a little bit principled or a little bit unprincipled, which makes the case against fox hunting very simple because, by any measure,it is unprincipled,AND NOTHING IN A COMPASSIONATE SOCIETY WILL MAKE IT ANYTHING ELSE
UNTIL DAVID CAMERON UNDERSTANDS A BLOOD SPORT IS QUITE SIMPLY UNPRINCIPLED THEN HE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO PERSUADE THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS THAT HE IS A COMPASSIONATE MAN.