AUTUMN in the countryside means two controversial activities are in full swing.

Of course I mean hunting and the shooting of game.

Fox hunting is the most controversial but the large shoots of today are causing many questions to be asked.

Discussion about these blood sports becomes emotional and therefore irrational with common sense being in short supply.

This column does not offer complete answers but is an attempt to bring reason to bear on a subject that vexes so many of us.

I have some experience of both activities.

When the hunt was meeting close by I would help my father.

Late in the evening we would go forth into the Cotswold night, whatever the weather.

I carried a hurricane lamp, dad a spade.

We were going earth stopping.

If we were successful, the fox had no refuge when the hounds came calling the next day.

Despite such activities, the hunt killed few foxes.

The argument that hunting keeps the fox population down is nonsense!

Motorists do a much better job!

A much better argument is that fox hunting helps the local economy, as the maintenance of horses is an expensive business.

The current law concerning hunting is well meant but it is a muddle.

A tighter law with the same aim may be the answer.

People can still follow hounds but with no savage kill resulting.

Foxhunting as we knew it must never be legalised.

One aspect of modern shooting is obscene.

Vast numbers of pheasants are reared and released into the wild.

When beaters drive them towards the guns, they fly low and slaughter results.

On some shoots more than a 1,000 birds can be shot.

This is not sport.

It is totally different to shooting a wild bird flying high over a Cotswold valley.

As a lad I would walk miles spreading grain to entice birds onto the estate for the Boxing Day shoot and as a beater drive them towards the guns.

Most would fly to safety.

This type of shooting can remain but rearing of birds has no place whatever in our countryside.