SIR – Jon Burgess appears to be confused about the meaning of conservation (Worcester News, Friday, October 4). He picks and chooses certain parts of animal management (including culling) and uses them as an excuse in order to defend his views.
In effect, he is like a religious extremist who picks parts out of a holy book to justify his killing beliefs.
The conservation movement, also known as “nature conservation”, is a political, environmental and social movement that seeks to protect natural resources, including animal, fungus and plant species as well as their habitat, for the future.
Culling animals does not tie in with this ideology as you can’t ‘protect’ an animal by killing it.
On the other hand, culling that is used to control animal numbers, selective breeding and viral outbreaks all have their own agenda – which is wrong. We should not be playing God.
Not letting my children play where wild animals have defecated is a humane choice as to not kill the said “perpetrators”. Not letting my children play in this area is not advocating others’ use of poison to kill rats either.
Mr Burgess also skirts around my questions as to why he thinks it’s necessary to kill geese because their habits are inconveniencing a recreational game played by man?
If we carry on with this behaviour then we’ll see our beautiful wild animals becoming extinct.
And anyone who suggests that this will not be the case is either arrogant or deluded.
Simon McCullough
Worcester
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 The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel