Thomas More's Utopia (1516) described hunting as: "the lowest, the vilest and most abject part of butchery".

Obviously the pro-hunt brigade disagree with this opinion. ("Is fox-hunting set to return?", Mercury, August 26). It is presumptuous and typical of these pompous people to say, "after the Conservatives have won the next election" that the ban on hunting will be overturned.

They argue that hunting eliminated "the old and unhealthy foxes". How were the hounds trained to distinguish the old and unhealthy foxes?

As well as many other abhorrent practices, it wasn't mentioned that young fox cubs were used to train young hounds. In an effort to make us believe they are concerned with animal welfare it was stated that since the ban, "the fox population has suffered, if anything". What greater suffering is there than to be disembowelled by a frenzied pack of dogs encouraged by a group of bloodthirsty humans?

The pro-hunters seem to have their strategy all worked out with their "Hunting Regulatory Authority" proposals to persuade "the general public that hunting will be properly regulated".

No doubt much money will be spent on propaganda to make us believe they are doing us and the foxes a favour by overturning the ban on hunting. A civilised, intelligent general public should reject this archaic barbarism and move on.

Elizabeth Allison, Aylestone.