Sir, T. King and others (Letters, June 16) still fail to understand the ecological linkage between what they believe to be the "superb" wildlife habitat of the Trap Grounds reedbed, and the adjacent Trap Grounds scrubland which is being promoted for development (including the road that they propose).

A number of professional conservationists have predicted that the most notable wildlife of the reedbed (such as wetland birds and mammals) would be lost or would decline should the scrubland area be significantly reduced.

The Environment Agency oppose housing development on ecological grounds.

The scrubland also has wildlife value in its own right. Whether those who favour protection all visit the site is irrelevant: there are sufficient maps, photographs and reports available to make an informed judgment. I doubt T. King has visited all the sites in the world he would like to see protected and were he to visit the Amazon river, I hope he would realise the importance of the surrounding forest.

Perhaps the saying 'think globally, act locally' applies here?

Clive Hambler, Cowley