Sir - In reply to Gillian Whitty (Oxford Mail, August 3), my point, which she fails to understand, is "animals or people first".
The endless letters in your newspaper put animals before people. For example, the anti-vivisectionists, who are the same individuals who are anti-hunting, should realise that if hunting stopped, it would not save the life of a single fox.
There are other means of control more traumatic than hunting, but it would cost millions to police it - money which could have gone to the NHS, schools and into pensions.
No, Miss Whitty, animals do not have rights. If rats, rabbits and other vermin were not controlled and were allowed to breed unrestricted, millions more people would starve throughout the world.
If she keeps pets, does she not give them medication to control worms, powder them to kill fleas and lice, or use an aerosol to kill flies? Have these vermin not got the right to live?
Lynn Fawcett
Blacknall Road
Abingdon
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article