SIR – It’s pointless debating with Jon Burgess.

I mentioned no class war so why does he (Worcester News, February 22)? I’m not confused about the Worcester News’ coverage (as explained) so why does he keep going on about it?

Mr Burgess continues to dish out facts, percentages and information from other sources.

The only reason why I got into this debate was to act as a voice for the hunted animal. What gives us the right to determine whether an animal is a pest?

We farm the land and pave over it. We keep livestock in an enclosed space and expect predators not to take easy pickings.

There should be a total ban on hunting. The Hunting Act has too many loopholes and will continue to compromise the welfare of the animal being hunted.

Flushing a quarry can only happen with two hounds and someone competent must shoot it for instant death.

Anyone competent enough?

No? Thought not… Jon Burgess was correct in saying the law is flawed – all the more reason for a total ban. The loopholes are deliberately set up for the hunted animal to still be killed in the form of pest control and human pleasure.