HUNTSMEN say the proposals to ban foxhunting in Worcestershire could lead to more cruel methods of control.

Bob Brierley, of the Worcestershire Hunt, also accused the Government of trying to bring in a law that would be unenforcable and create mass unemployment in the countryside.

"It will be a massive loss for the countryside," said Mr Brierley.

"Hunt staff will lose jobs, their homes and a way of life.

"The biggest loser will be the fox. The Government has said that foxes are vermin and must be controlled.

"We've always said from day one that hunting with hounds is less cruel than other ways.

"The Burns Report said the same."

He said the alternative ways of killing foxes include snares, which strangle the fox, shooting and gassing.

The Government announced yesterday that it would carry out a six-month consultation before introducing laws to ban lowland hunting with dogs in Worcestershire and Herefordshire.

But hunting foxes with dogs on foot could still be allowed in upland areas, such as Cumbria.

"The Government is saying it's not immoral to kill a fox on foot but it is on a horse," Mr Brierley said.

"That's double standards.

"How can the Government ban hunting? How can it be policed?

"A law that can't be policed is a bad law and there are those that will not stop hunting."

Peter Luff, Conservative MP for Mid-Worcestershire, who supports the idea of licensing hunts, said the Government must use the Burns Report, which looked into the future of hunting.

It said that none of the legal methods of fox control was "without difficulty from an animal welfare perspective".

"We know that in Worcestershire hunting is not about vermin control, except occasionally when they'll deal with a particular fox," said Mr Luff.

"On the whole, it's a conservation mechanism - it's management of the fox population.

"There are faster and more economically efficient methods of killing foxes, but they are more cruel.

"I still believe that licensed hunting can be controlled. It's the best way forward."