With a little kelp

It is good to read that David Attenborough is urging politicians to protect vital kelp beds, and a Scotsman editorial reminding us that “Scotland can be even more beautiful”(25 October).

In 1996 Sir David was lead signatory of an open letter, also signed by Chris Packham and the late Sir Edward Peck amongst others, to the then Secretary of State for Scotland Michael Forsyth opposing illthought-through plans for the Cairngorm funicular railway.

Sir David’s 1996 letter warned that the economic viability of the funicular railway project had “been widely and authoritatively questioned”, that “the financial support sought” for it represented “poor value for money to the taxpayer” and that “more economically viable development options” were available.

Subsequent events, including a critical Audit Scotland report and the current indefinite closure of the railway following safety concerns, indicate Sir David’s misgivings were sound. His present wellfounded call to protect kelp deserves to be heeded.

GUS JONES

Nethybridge, Inverness-shire

It is hardly surprising that the response to the “Consultation” on beaver policy should have been overwhelmingly positive as no effort seems to have been made to advertise it and the public at large were totally unaware of this opportunity to express their views. No doubt the urban-based pressure groups were informed and mobilised.

The release of beavers on the Isla and Earn has made the “award-winning trial in Argyll” completely irrelevant and without protected species status the handful of escapees would seem to have multiplied a hundred-fold, demonstrating that there is no need for statutory protection. Such trials are in any

case a farce as a detrimental environmental result from a successful reintroduction cannot be reversed. The grey squirrel and mink are typical examples. In spite of requests for clarification of the rights to demolish blockages of the “pow drainage system” on which the survival of the Carse of Gowrie has depended for the last 500 years no assurances seem to be forthcoming. Without authority to take immediate action without the inevitable delay involved

in administrative approval, homes and agriculture are at severe risk.

GEORGE & ESTELLE WARD

Kinpowie Ballindean, Perthshire

Every time someone exposes cruelty to sheep in the wool trade, industry apologists claim to be “shocked” and “stunned”. But how can they be, when each new investigation reveals the same horrific abuse? PETA’S new expose of Scottish sheep farms (“Horbelieve

rific footage emerges claiming to show Scottish shearers ‘punching sheep in the face’,”, 17 October) shows that workers violently punched sheep in the face, slammed their heads into the floor, and beat and kicked them. In August, PETA released video footage documenting that shearers in England stamped on sheep, squeezed their throats, kicked them in the stomach, and jabbed them in the head with clippers.

In Australia, violent attacks left terrified sheep bleeding from their eyes, noses, and mouths. In the US, a shearer repeatedly twisted and bent a sheep’s neck, breaking it. In Argentina, some lambs were still alive and kicking when workers started to skin them.

Shocked? I think wool industry officials really mean they’re shocked that they keep getting caught. Since the wool industry clearly isn’t going to do the right thing and address pervasive cruelty to vulnerable sheep, the rest of us should take action. When shopping, it’s easy enough to read the labels, leave wool garments on the shelf and choose animal-friendly vegan options instead.

JENNIFER WHITE

Dean Terrace, Edinburgh