Eaglewing/Frank L: I think I've followed most of these letters fairly closely.

I am not sure that the evidence supports this claim.

And I made the obvious comment: that lots of people support this legislation, and claim it is on moral grounds.

Not sure that it is question of lots of people supporting this legislation. Lots of people do not think that chasing,terrifying. exhausting and finally killing foxes by tearing them apart with dogs - for the sporting pleasure of a few participants - is acceptable practice. That a law had to be passed to prevent these few from inflicting this cruelty is thought by many to be sad.

This legislation says it is bad to hunt foxes, but OK to hunt rabbits and rats.

I am not sure that it does.

I think it is legitimate to ask what is the moral basis for this distinction.

This is a distinction that you make or deduce from this legislation - whilst ignoring that most posters do not make this distinction at all - so ask away.

So far, not one supporter of the bill has had the grace to answer this simple and obvious question. Why dont you?

I don't feel there is no acceptable reason to inflict needless cruelty and obtain sporting pleasure in the killing of any animal. Why do you think that inflicting this cruelty on foxes - IS acceptable?