Bizarre claims on foxhunting

I am writing in response to a bizarre letter that appeared in the April 27 edition of the Kent Messenger by Jeff Phillips, in regard to Michael Bax’s association with Kent Wildlife Trust.

Mr Phillips made the strange and sweeping accusation that anybody who opposes hunting with hounds (illegal under the Hunting Act, 2004), are ‘Vegan militants.’ I am not sure why or where Mr Phillips has got this opinion from, but if he has evidence of any violence taking place, he should report it to the police. Personally, I’m neither a vegan, nor a militant, but I do oppose the hunting of any animal with hounds.

Mr Phillips’ odd letter continued with the claim that no conservationists oppose hunting with hounds.

He should be made aware that almost every conservationist opposes hunting with hounds. In fact, not only did the Hare Preservation Trust condemn Mr Bax in the article he is referring to, Chris Packham, Britain’s foremost conservationist, has also condemned Mr Bax on Twitter, calling on Kent Wildlife Trust to “join the 21st century and employ people who truly wish to preserve wildlife rather than those who ever found joy in killing it.”

Mr Phillips questioned whether critics of Mr Bax are members of Kent Wildlife Trust and why they are bringing disrepute to the charity.

I can confirm that I am a member of the trust and Mr Phillips is free to contact the trust himself if he wishes confirmation.

With regard to bringing disrepute to the charity, we are trying to regain the trust’s respect by condemning Mr Bax. A lifelong hunter is the worst ambassador for a wildlife trust and flies in the face of members’ wishes. We pay our membership fees to provide sanctuaries for wildlife against hunters. Yet the Wildlife Trust is giving people like Mr Bax the strongest positions and powerful influence over policy. Tom Fitton, by email willingness to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike. Dennis Healey said he too would push the nuclear button when he was defence secretary but admitted in a radio interview in 2008 that as prime minister he would not have ordered a nuclear retaliation. I doubt if any Prime Minister with an ounce of humanity would give such an order. But Mr Hudson-Gool thinks that the very existence of nuclear weapons is a deterrent in itself, which can only be effective if a PM is prepared to use them. This view assumes that nuclear weapons will never be used, which is a commonly held belief but one that cannot be proved.

It is a belief that allows its proponents to ignore the