Being selective (From Bucks Free Press)

Being selective

11:05am Wednesday 21st September 2005 in Your Letters

WITH reference to the letter from Michael Wilson referring to Bea Bradley (letter, September 2) may I respectfully suggest he has been selective in his quoting of the Burns Report re: Hunting.

He suggests that that the writer continues to ignore the critically important conclusions of the Burns Inquiry. If he were to read the entire report, he will learn that "hunting with dogs severely compromises the welfare of the quarry species."

It goes on to report that "thus the animals suffers. Some alternative methods of killing are more humane. Hence, the suffering caused by hunting is unnecessary and we believe that this provides a valid reason for a ban."

He further goes on to state that foxes are regarded as pests. The fox is generally not a pest to farmers. Burns found that lamb predation by foxes was extremely rare. And if foxes are "vermin" why do hunts manage woodland so that foxes have an ideal habitat for breeding?

May I suggest he grapples with the entire Burns Report, and then he will be able to take, as he puts it, a fair and rational view of the matter. He will then have the facts and not just choose to be selective.

MJ Barnicle (address supplied)