CLAIRE METCALFE considers the pros and cons of the controversial act to outlaw hunting with dogs, as the activity appears to grow in popularity.

HUNTING is more popular than ever - or so we are told. Even if that's not quite the reality, here in Ryedale it is the general perception.

One hundred riders and more than 600 supporters turned out for the Middleton Hunt's Boxing Day meet in Malton Market Place, a similar number to previous years.

And there was a bumper turn-out for the traditional New Year's Day hunt at Thornton-le-Dale, when about 350 people turned out for the Derwent meet.

About 40 riders and more than 30 hounds took part compared to last year, when about 30 riders set off. It has met on New Year's Day at The Hall, Thornton-le-Dale, every year since it was founded in 1808, and this year was no exception - despite the Hunting Act which prevents hunting with hounds, and which many thought might spell the end of the tradition.

But one thing's for sure, the Act to ban hunting with dogs has certainly not lessened the enthusiasm of members and supporters, and their mood is buoyant after a very special Christmas present.

A poll run on BBC Radio 4's Today programme revealed that it was the law most voters would like to repeal, winning by a whopping 53 per cent margin over the other nominated laws.

The Government and antihunt campaigners have put this result down to a hijack by the Countryside Alliance, but the hunting lobby says the result is simply a show of 'people power', and that, more than anything, gives the feeling of renewed popularity.

"The Hunting Act might not be the most important piece of legislation on the statute books, but it is the most ridiculous, " said Simon Hart, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance.

"This Government is not going to admit the gross error of allowing the Hunting Act to become law by legislating for its removal, but winning this vote will add to the growing momentum for a future parliament to scrap it." He said that the alliance had, of course, been encouraging people to vote, but that suggestions of vote rigging were "nothing but sour grapes".

Another boost is the fact that David Cameron has pledged to give MPs a free vote on repealing the Hunting Act, should the Conservatives win power at the next election.

On the other side of the coin, the League Against Cruel Sports has recruited two of the UK's most distinguished QCs to advise its newly-created Prosecution Unit.

Launched on Boxing Day, the unit aims to use both civil and criminal law to control behaviour by hunters which is considered anti-social.

Douglas Batchelor, the league's chief executive, said it will also advise on the use of the law against hunt members who trespass on private land, lose control of their hounds resulting in attacks on domestic pets and other animals, and who block country lanes with 4x4 vehicles.

He added: "We hear every week of hunts behaving in a profoundly anti-social way.

They allow their hounds to rip apart a family's pet cat or rabbit and then think all they need to do is say "sorry''.

"We have been advised that scores of hunts are prime candidates for anti-social behaviour orders and our unit will be actively assisting the victims of such behaviour to take appropriate legal action. Asbos are not just for hoodies as many hunts are about to find out."

So what is the reality here on the ground in Ryedale? We asked a leading huntsman and an anti-hunting campaigner their thoughts.

FOR

Tim Easby, huntsman and master of the Middleton Hunt.

Boxing Day was a good turn out and we're getting similar numbers - sometimes more than 100 - at weekends. I think people are just really warming to the cause. If you try to ban anything and suppress it then people come out in support of it. I don't think people are necessarily pro-hunting, they are just fed up with being told what to do. If you look at the whole basis for the hunting ban it is nothing to do with hunting.

One minister even admitted that it was not about animal welfare but about class warfare. It beggars belief when they are meant to govern the country and they admit that the whole thing is based on prejudice. People are just saying enough is enough.

As far as the legislation is concerned, I don't think they know what they want it to do.

If they thought that they would break the infrastructure of hunting, and that people would stop going out into the countryside on horses enjoying themselves then it has had the reverse effect. People are more and more positive and determined to make sure that doesn't happen.

Now that the act has come in, we have to do things slightly differently. But we can quite legally go on hunt exercises, we can use two hounds to flush out, we can hunt rabbits and rats and we can use a single terrier below ground. We don't use a bird of prey, although some do.

But the law is unworkable.

Putting it in context, how breaking it is on a level with setting off a firework after midnight or fly-tipping.

But we want this act to be repealed so that we can hunt properly so that the fox population is back in the hunt's control. The fox's welfare is in a much worse state now as they are controlled by a wide range of peole in many horrible ways.

When it was in control of the hunt, the fox population was healthier because that way of controlling it was much closer to nature. It wiped out the weak, old and infirm foxes.

I voted in the Today Programme poll, and I am sure many other members of the Middleton had done the same.

It was a good result and we generally feel very upbeat.

Although this should not be a political issue, I think the best chance of getting the act repealed is to vote in a Conservative Government.

AGAINST

Eric Beechey, Yorkshire representative of the League Against Cruel Sports.

I think the support for the ban is still there. We're disappointed with the results or lack of results so far, and broadly speaking we feel that the police have their priorities and animal welfare seems not to be one of them. The cases going on in the south of England will set a precedent and police are going to have to take note and take them on board, instead of allowing them to slip away as they are at the moment.

If hunts aren't sticking to the letter of the law then anti-social behaviour orders could be used against them, but if they are not complying with the law then they should be prosecuted anyway, the law is quite clear in stated it is not allowed to hunt animals with hounds. They should be brought to book and fined or given a prison sentence.

At the moment it is a "grey area" because there have not yet been any prosecutions.

The law hasn't been tested. Once the test cases start to bite the law becomes clearer and the police will have to act.

I'm pleased in many ways that hunting is more popular now and I'm sure the additional people turning up who didn't before the Hunting Act came in wouldn't stoop to that sort of behaviour.

I've got nothing against hunts going out as long as they conform to the law.

As far as the Radio 4 Today programme poll goes, The Countryside Alliance encouraged people to vote for it and as far as we're concerned it's a trumped up result.