Letter: Foxy arguments
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.Sir: The arguments put forward by those who support fox hunting get sillier by the day (Letters, 7 November). First they argued that hunting was necessary to control fox numbers, then they claimed it was critical to the rural economy and that it had the support of most country people. Now that these claims have been disproved we are told that the real purpose of hunting is to provide a vulpine-friendly euthanasia service to relieve the suffering of elderly foxes in distress!
Hunting does not control fox numbers, it merely accelerates the turnover of the fox population - both the death and birth rates are increased, and most foxes are killed when barely mature. Thus hunting greatly increases fox suffering not only because the method of killing is cruel in the extreme, but also because the death rate is unnaturally high.
TERRY SESSFORD
Wincanton, Somerset
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments