I WRITE in reply to the letter from John Phelps (You Say, June 17) on the subject of the Burns enquiry into hunting.

As Mrs M J Large was not prepared to debate in a rational manner any evidence I have offered regarding hunting and country sports it seemed only reasonable that she should accept the independent findings of the Burns report into hunting.

Judging by their correspondence in the Evening News, it is obvious they both refuse to accept the findings of Burns and his clear view that hunting was not cruel.

Mr Phelps claims that ''most people, including MPs, object to hunting for sport on moral and ethical grounds''. He has no factual basis to substantiate this claim and although moral and ethical beliefs in there many and varied forms are important to the individual, surely animal welfare comes ahead of them.

As neither Mr Phelps or Mrs Large will accept Burns, then perhaps they will listen to Miles Cooper who, until recently, was an investigator for the League Against Cruel Sports, the International Fund for Animal Welfare and had a role in the Hunt Saboteurs Association.

After 13 years fighting for a ban, Mr Cooper came to the inevitable conclusion that to ban hunting with dogs would cause a great deal of cruelty to the fox. This change-of-heart by Mr Cooper was not made on a whim but after much soul-searching and completing a detailed study on how the ban would take affect in Scotland.

Mr Cooper is now one of a growing number of once dedicated anti-hunting people who, after seeing everything involved in hunting, have cast aside prejudice.

He understands that a hunt ban brings no benefits to animals.

JON BURGESS,

Malvern.