Sir, - Coun Stuart Parsons has yet again engaged soundbite mode before putting his brain into gear (D&S letters, Mar 5).

How could the exciting £550,000 project for new dual-use facilities at Richmond School, the catalyst of which is the £150,000 given to the school by Richmondshire District Council - the very money Coun Parsons wanted to dip into to keep open the Richmond Sports Centre - be up and running in just six months. It seems to be his logic and his common sense that has gone out of the window.

Especially as it was made crystal clear at the council meeting and in the project documentation that building works would not commence until September and the new facility would not open until September 2005. So the cost of keeping the Richmond Sports Centre open over this period is not the £15,000 he is suggesting but at least £66,000 - the equivalent of about 3pc on council tax.

Coun Parsons describes the decision to close the Sports Centre as "immoral".

The reasons for the decision include the availability of community-run new sports facilities within three to six of Richmond with appropriate time slots available to accommodate displaced user groups from the sports centre.

There are also the new facilities coming on stream very shortly at Richmond School. At Catterick Garrison a superb £11m regional provision will be delivered soon in partnership with the district council, and ongoing negotiations with St Francis Xavier School to provide a new dual use facility with daytime community access. This will require a considerable financial contribution from the council.

And finally the decision provided a council tax saving for all ratepayers in Richmondshire at a time when the message was coming across loud and clear from all quarters that any increase in tax would need to be very minimal.

Remember that the majority of these taxpayers have unstintingly given up some of their hard-earned cash over many years towards subsidising the Richmond Sports Centre which, because of distance from the facility, they have never had an opportunity of using.

What, may I ask is "immoral" in all this?

Coun JOHN BLACKIE

Leader, Richmondshire District Council,

Swale House,

Richmond.

Think again

Sir, - The closure of Richmond Sports Centre is a sad reflection on the attitude of local councillors but more worryingly represents the power they wield at local level.

This is a justifiable concern, as Stuart Parsons so eloquently stated (D&S letters, Mar 5). It is used by a great variety of sports enthusiasts, which is surely reason enough to keep it open.

Decisions at committees are taken by elected councillors, some or most of whom, have probably never used this centre and so cannot appreciate the true implication of their decision to close it.

Surely within the boundary of Richmond there are other sites for low-cost housing? Or is it that councillors saw a quick buck could be made by selling the centre off under the politically acceptable label of "low-cost housing"?

The closure will mean the loss of the only day-time public dry sport facility in Richmond. The users have been told to take themselves off to Brompton or Colburn but presumably the residents of those places will get first choice of bookings.

In this age of increasing obesity and associated health problems, a concerned and forward-thinking council would be looking at ways of extending the sports facilities within Richmond. After all, where will the people from the low-cost housing go for their sports activities? Will they be able to afford the bus fares and fees of out-of-town centres?

I work in the sports industry and the benefits of participating in sport for young and old in regular activity are boundless. Not only is regular activity extremely beneficial for a healthy body, but it also improves the mental, social and skill-learning processes that go on as well.

A wise course would be for the councillors to think again - unless those making the decisions are so impervious to reasoned argument that one then has to ask, are they fit to be in power?

JEAN ROBERTSON

Westfields,

Richmond.

Bellicose

Sir, - H Bond has missed the point of my letter (D&S Mar 5).

The "rural tranquility" and "peaceful existence" expected of the countryside are not to be had round here as H Bond accurately noted from my letter but, rather than being concerned, he thinks its all a big joke.

My point is why should the RAF decimate the peace of the countryside and get away with it? Why should Tornados and Chinooks be acceptable in a rural environment but cockerels be considered a "disadvantage".

To put it bluntly why is the countryside bellicose rather than bucolic?

As a townie unused to country ways I would like this explained to me but H Bond can't tell me!

Still, I should feel myself lucky not to be living near Market Weighton. A USAF fighter jet from RAF Lakenheath accidentally dropped a dummy bomb during a training exercise recently which made an 18-inch crater in the concrete of a yard.

What would H Bond think if it had been flying over his house at the time? That would have wiped the smile from his face.

LYNN JOHNSON

Skipton on Swale,

Thirsk.

Aircraft hanger

Sir, - As Lynn Johnson has discovered (D&S, Feb 27), complaints about aircraft noise bounce off the military and scarcely bother locals.

This will presumably continue to be the case until people looking for countryside R&R tumble to the fact that they will be visiting the country's biggest open-plan aircraft hangar and Dales tourism takes a dive accordingly.

JAMES LEIGH

Thornton Watlass,

Ripon