I FULLY agree with Mr Ken Clark's letter ('No justification for hunting cruelty, Mr Jones', Mailbox, September 29) - his view is, I am sure, that of the majority, who abhor even the thought of this vile, barbaric pursuit.

The question of what will happen to the hounds is designed, of course, to pull at heartstrings. I am told that having lived their whole lives in kennels, with the pack where they have learned to rip foxes to pieces, that they would, understandably, not make domestic pets.

If places can not be found for them surely those who have used them for their own twisted pleasure have a moral duty to continue to look after them? I suspect, though, these people do not understand this concept.

The other issue that is always raised is the question of jobs. Of course jobs will be lost. Jobs were lost when other socially unacceptable occupations were abolished, like slavery, child labour, back street abortion etc.

I am sure all the people involved in these unethical pastimes complained about their loss of jobs, it did not make any of the above less immoral. Most people these days lose their job at least once in their life, including myself. My advice is go to the jobcentre, as the rest of us have to do, and get a worthy and respectable career.

Another point I would like to raise is that of the "59 per cent don't want hunting ban" claim on the pro hunting posters. Fifty-nine per cent of what? No-one ever asked me or anyone I know. Where did this figure come from? Maybe they asked some hunting horses if they wanted a ban and some said: "Neigh". I think we can all be sure that they did not ask any foxes.

F. Harrison, West Kirby

(address supplied)