THE repeal of the controversial hunting ban "cannot come soon enough" after charges brought against three members of a stag hunt were dropped, the Countryside Alliance has claimed.

In 2006, three men from the Devon and Somerset Staghounds were charged with breaching the Hunting Act, which came into force a year earlier.

Maurice Scott, joint huntmaster, huntsman Donald Summersgill and Peter Heard, a whipper-in, pleaded not guilty on the grounds their hunting was "exempt" and therefore legal.

After a High Court ruling earlier this year over what constitutes hunting, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has now admitted there is "no longer a realistic prospect of a conviction".

Mr Scott said the decision was "a huge relief... for hunting as a whole" and the Countryside Alliance claimed it was evidence the hunting ban had "failed" and was now bringing "confusion, cost and conflict".

The move draws a line under a bitter four-year legal struggle, one which found Mr Scott spending a night locked in a urine-soaked cell.

A respected and leading member of the rural community all his life, Mr Scott, in his 60s, told a friend at the time of his arrest: "I was so ashamed. My father would have rolled in his grave."

But the dropped case has raised serious question marks over whether the Act, which sets out a range of circumstances in which hunting is still permitted subject to strict conditions, is fit for purpose. Only five successful prosecutions of hunts have been brought under the Hunting Act and four of those were private prosecutions.

Mr Scott said: "This is a huge relief, not just for myself and the others facing charges, but for hunting as a whole.

"We were always convinced that what we were doing was legal and, while we all hope that the Hunting Act does not last much longer, the Devon and Somerset Staghounds will be able to continue some form of hunting and deer management until it is repealed."

Simon Hart, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, pointed to the fact the CPS had now dropped two high-profile Hunting Act cases after the High Court ruling.

He said: "The decision to drop this case suggests prosecutions under the Hunting Act will now be even rarer.

"It could not now be more obvious that this Act has failed and all it now promotes is confusion, cost and conflict.

"There are no reasonable arguments left for retaining the Hunting Act, and its repeal cannot come soon enough."

The alleged breaches of the Act are said to have taken place at Higher Broford, near Dulverton on Exmoor, on April 25, 2006.

The Devon and Somerset Staghounds argued it had used two dogs to hunt red deer for "research and observation", including the testing of deer for diseases, which is specified as an exemption within the Act.

The case against the three men was referred to the High Court to settle points of law before their trial was set to continue at Taunton Deane Magistrates Court.

The court was asked to decide what actually constituted hunting and how the law on exemptions from the ban should be applied.

On February 4, the High Court judged the use of dogs to search for an animal in order to stalk or flush it out did not contravene the Act. The High Court added it was for the prosecution to prove a hunt was carrying out hunting that was not exempt, rather than for the defendants to prove that they were exempt.

A spokesman for the CPS indicated the shift in the burden of proof was the key reason for dropping the case, saying: "We have decided that there is now insufficient evidence to prove that the defendants' actions fell outside the exemptions stated in the Hunting Act, so there is no longer a realistic prospect of a conviction.

"We have therefore discontinued the case against Messrs Heard, Scott and Summersgill."

The CPS had already decided not to appeal against a test case ruling on the conviction of Westcountry huntsman Tony Wright after the High Court ruling.

Mr Wright, of Simonsbath, Exmoor, won his appeal against conviction before Exeter Crown Court in November 2007, after the court found the prosecution had failed to prove his hunting activity was not exempt from the ban.

Earlier this month, the CPS said it would not take the case to the House of Lords.

At the time, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, said the CPS would review cases going through the system which had been waiting on the High Court judgment, including the Devon and Somerset Staghounds.

But he added that it would continue to prosecute under the Act: "The fact that the CPS has decided not to take this to the House of Lords does not mean that there will be no more prosecutions under the Hunting Act."

A spokesman for the International Fund for Animal Welfare, which provided evidence against the huntsmen, said: "We are surprised and disappointed by the decision. We thought the evidence was strong. We will be looking very carefully at the CPS's reasons for dropping the case."

The League Against Cruel Sports said: "We trust that the CPS will treat each case on its merits. The decision does not spell the end of the Hunting Act and any prosecutions under it."