HUNT supporters were today preparing a legal challenge to the ban on hunting which they claim will put more than 250 people out of work across Hampshire.
Bloodsport enthusiasts say at least that number, including 40 in the New Forest, could be thrown out of work when hunting becomes illegal.
The Countryside Alliance is questioning the legitimacy of the Parliament Act which was used yesterday to push through the law.
A judicial review is to be launched today at the High Court to overturn the ban which comes into force in February.
They claim the Parliament Act passed in 1949, which replaced a previous Parliament Act of 1911, is illegitimate.
A spokesman for the Countryside Alliance said a letter had last week been sent to the Attorney General threatening to make the challenge.
He said the first hearing in the High Court was expected to be held in the new year.
The spokesman also said that the new Hunting Act did not comply with a number of aspects of the Human Rights Act as it did not compensate people who had entered into contracts who would lose out as a result of the ban.
Among those who face losing their jobs are huntsman Paul Woodhouse and two other employees of the New Forest Hounds (NFH), who also stand to lose their homes at the kennels near Cadnam.
In a statement the NFH said: "Pressure for a ban was based on the outdated prejudices of a majority of backbench Labour MPs, who have shown no interest in facts or evidence.
"They were hell-bent on banning something enjoyed by a law-abiding rural minority that they disliked.
"The government itself originally supported a licensing system, as do the majority of the electorate.
"Furthermore the most senior figures in the Labour Party regard a ban and the use of the Parliament Act as undemocratic, unenforceable and illegal."
The statement said the ban raised a number of difficult issues that the hunt would attempt to manage in the best way possible.
"These include the future of the three full-time staff who stand to lose their livelihood, way of life and homes provided by the hunt," it said.
"The livelihoods of many other people will be affected, including farriers, feed merchants, agricultural contractors and vets."
Hunt supporters are pinning their hopes on the Countryside Alliance, which is planning to take the issue to the European Court of Human Rights if all other efforts fail to overturn the ban.
"In the meantime the New Forest Hounds will continue to hunt for as long as possible," added the NFH statement.
Ken James, chairman of the New Forest Animal Protection Group, said: "I'm very pleased at the decision to ban hunting with hounds, having campaigned against it for 20 years. Animals kill but they kill to eat, whereas people involved in hunting kill for fun.
"It's got nothing to do with control. The Forestry Commission shoots about 900 deer in the New Forest every year whereas the most the former buckhunt ever killed was 20 a year - and the average was seven.
"I feel very sorry for people who will lose their jobs, but thousands of steelworkers and miners have had to find alternative employment."
Mr James said he had always opposed the so-called Middle Way, which would have allowed some hunts to continue under licence.
"You can't licence cruelty. If something is cruel it should be stopped," he said.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article