With Bath retaining a Liberal Democrat MP in Don Foster we must hope he will continue, along with the great majority of the voting public who share his views, to oppose changes to the Hunting Act.

Indeed, is it not time for the pro-hunt minority to accept that the fox hunting tradition has had its day?

Complex factors were at work in the pattern of voting in the general election, but it is clear that voters want economic and administrative change for the better.

The coalition Government must concentrate on this and the Hunting Act seems unlikely to be a priority in the immediate future.

At a more fundamental level, the claims made in defence of a "humane and socially valuable means of pest control" do not stand up to objective analysis.

Dogs cannot instantly kill an animal weighing over 1kg with one bite in the neck, and foxes killed by hounds invariably suffer severe multiple bite and tear injuries in the flanks, chest and abdomen.

Actual records of livestock losses show that foxes make a minimal contribution, and those that do take livestock can be quickly and humanely shot by lampers.

If they are a pest, why use a method of control that makes a minimal impact on the species population?

As for another argument, compared with the appalling national level of unemployment, job losses in hunting are insignificant.

As for the current Hunting Act, 'havoc' incidents – such as the Avon Vale hounds panicking a horse into severely injuring itself in January 2009 and Beaufort hounds colliding with a train on New Year's Eve –- add weight to the case for enforcing the current reasonable law that has produced 137 convictions.

Hopefully, MPs of all parties will be made aware enough of the facts to turn down any attempt at repeal.

KATHERINE WATSON Details supplied