Sir - There is nothing strange about Sir Peter Luff’s view on foxhunting, as claimed by Sheila Garner (Worcester News, 20th February), but there certainly is something odd about her response and indeed that of many anti-hunting people.

It is so easy to play the emotion card in relation to wildlife management and while we often hear what those opposed to hunting dislike, we rarely hear what they find acceptable. In arguing against the use of scenting hounds, which are non-wounding and hunt in a similar way to wolves generally catching the old, weak sick and injured, is to deny a natural means of control. Mankind uses dogs in so many beneficial ways and it is sheer nonsense to exclude them from wildlife management, which seeks to keep populations healthy and within limits.

Sir Peter has long argued for a wider wild mammals welfare law to replace the Hunting Act. Such a measure would address accusations of genuine cruelty to any wild animal in any circumstances and would rely on sound evidence. It would also make redundant the ridiculous Hunting Act – a law based on prejudice and ignorance.

James Barrington

Animal Welfare Consultant , London