Simon Foxall (Letters 24/07) needs to be reminded of the realities of the countryside.
The British countryside is largely manmade, having been shaped and formed over centuries by farming and sporting practices. This beautiful countryside that we are lucky enough to enjoy hasn't just miraculously 'appeared'.
We humans (i.e. not 'privileged animals') have created this countryside. We therefore have a duty to manage the wildlife within it and ensure that a sensible balance is maintained between nature conservation and the need to control certain species. We must encourage bio-diversity by not allowing any species to become too dominant.
Everyone involved in the hunting debate including Government, land management and farming organisations and even the League Against Cruel Sports agrees that fox populations need to be managed and controlled.
Therefore, the question is not 'if' they need managing but 'how' and I believe it should be up to the individual farmer or land manager to decide which method to choose, not up to Government.
There are currently 4 legal methods of fox control - shooting, trapping, snaring and hunting, each with its own specific benefits and being suitable for a particular situation. It's simply not a case of 'one size fits all'.
A ban on hunting would not improve animal welfare or save the life of a single fox - 2 out of 3 rural vets oppose a ban on welfare grounds alone.
Whatever your views on hunting, the arguments are complex and should be put forward only by those in possession of the facts.
Peter Hewitt, Ledbury, Herefordshire.
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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