Letter: Staghunters at bay
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Staghunters at bay
Sir: The chairmen of the staghound hunts (letter, 1 October) argue that the recent work done by Roger Harris demonstrates that the Bateson study is no longer a sound basis for banning deer hunting on National Trust land.
As I understand it, the Harris study purports to show not that hunting produces no stress on the animals, but that the degree of stress was not as great as had been claimed by the Bateson study. It was said that the stress produced could be found in other activities such as football and horse-racing.
The stress imposed on footballers is consented to. The stress imposed on racehorses might just squeeze under the moral wire because racing is not intended to result in the death of an animal, and running with other horses could be described as natural for the horse.
It is true that some animals in the wild are hunted and killed by packs of dogs, but this is a natural event motivated by the need to eat. The hunting which is at issue here is organised and indulged in not for reasons of hunger, but purely for the thrill of the chase
The hunt chairs urge us to believe that their hunting is motivated by a concern for the "welfare of the West Country's unique deer herds". If that welfare depends on a periodic culling of the herd, shooting by expert marksmen, bringing death swiftly and painlessly to those animals selected, is the only morally defensible alternative.
STANLEY TYRER
Bury, Lancashire
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments