The House of Lords has backed the "middle way" compromise on licensed hunting.

Peers voted in favour of licensed hunts by 366 to 59, after rejecting an outright ban by 331 votes to 74.

Forum Response: Countryside Alliance

Richard Burge, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, told ePolitix.com: "This vote gives a clear, responsible lead to MPs and provides a firm basis for the government to search for a just solution.

"The civilised and thoughtful proceedings in the upper house this afternoon put to shame yesterday's shabby affair in the Commons, which saw many pro-ban MPs merely indulging in puerile grandstanding and abandoning all pretence to fairness and fact.

"The vote in the Lords shows that these MPs are trying to bully through a measure which has neither overall parliamentary nor public majority support - it is clearer than ever that there is no mandate for a ban.

"For its part, the Alliance will consider favorably any proposed solution which sincerely aims to reconcile the priorities of animal welfare and civil liberties. The peers have clearly signaled by their vote tonight that they believe a ban would be in the interests of neither."

Forum Response: RSPCA

John Rolls, director of communications at the RSPCA, told ePolitix.com: "This was not a vote in favour of compromise, this was a vote in favour of hunting with added bureaucracy.

"MPs voted overwhelmingly for a ban on hunting with dogs. The Upper Chamber has once more ignored the view of their elected colleagues. There are only two choices in this debate, to end this cruelty in the name of sport or to allow it to continue. By voting for the middle way, the House of Lords has come down in favour of licensing cruelty.

"MPs clearly recognise that there can be no compromise as far as hunting with dogs is concerned. You cannot licence cruelty. The government must now see the matter through to its natural conclusion - a ban on hunting with dogs. The quickest way to do that is to reintroduce the Hunting Bill using the Parliament Act."