MANY professional naturalists have no doubt that certain predators do indeed need to be controlled (Echo, Aug 5).

The RSPB, for example, shoots foxes and traps crows, mink and rats on some nature reserves to protect ground nesting birds.

Many wildlife trusts do the same (and most, including Durham Wildlife Trust, also cull deer). The Government's own nature conservation body, English Nature, recently revealed how it was culling foxes, crows and magpies at Holkham National Nature Reserve in the cause of better biodiversity.

As for snares, I am not very fond of them, but I accept that they can be relatively humane if used correctly. For example, a few years ago the League Against Cruel Sports commissioned research into fox behaviour that entailed catching and releasing foxes unharmed. Ironically, the foxes were caught in free running snares equipped with "stops" - just like the ones used by responsible gamekeepers.

In a recent letter to a newspaper, former League official John Bryant desperately tried to defend the League's use of snares; I wonder why no current official was prepared to comment?

As for the RSPCA, I wonder why they don't campaign against the use of poison on rats? - A M Mitchell, Northumberland.

FOOT-AND-MOUTH

CRITICS of Harry Mead (Echo, Aug 7) urge him to look at reality instead of persecuting farmers and the NFU.

The Anderson Inquiry recommended keeping the 20-day standstill rule but agreed that a balance between industry interests and disease control had to be found.

How does Harry Mead equate his unequivocal backing for the advice of the chief vet and chief scientist, whose role in the foot-and-mouth outbreak was found wanting, while no mention is made of Brigadier Birtwhistle's conclusion that "the Government displayed a startling lack of incompetence last year"?

The Royal Society Report says that if national movement had been banned a few days earlier then the spread of disease could have been 33 per cent to 50 per cent less.

How could farmers accept the crippling 20-day rule, when matters potentially as dangerous are ignored by our farmer bashing rulers. - J Heslop, Gainford.

PARTY FUNDING

I AM very pleased that the Echo has come out in favour of state-funding of political parties (Echo, Aug 8). As an independent campaigning paper, it is a very important influence. Changing the public perception of 'sleaze' touching all politicians is vital for our democracy. However, state-funding can only be a part of the solution to the crisis of confidence. - Stuart Hill, Darlington.

BIG BROTHER

ONE wonders if the population could be divided into two groups: those that appreciate that Big Brother was a creation from Orwell's classic 1984 and others that only know the phenomenon as a production of Channel 4.

The latter group could be described perhaps as the unthinking watching the unthinkable. - Peter Troy, Thirsk.

RAIL MUSEUM

THERE should be concerns over the proposed rail museum in Shildon.

Recent disclosures suggest that rate payers in Swindon are having to subsidise the town's rail museum to the tune of £450,000, equalling £5 for every visitor in 2001 and 2002.

The original cost was £11m, £8m of which came from the National Lottery. But this figure rose to £13m and, due to fewer than expected visitor numbers, the ratepayers locally had to fork out extra in subsidy. If a town like Swindon can find itself in dire straits, does this not ring alarm bells in Sedgefield Borough?

Shildon is already one of the highest rated towns in England. Can we afford to be lumbered with a potential nightmare for the ratepayers? Desirous as the project may seem, the thought of once again having to foot the bill is not as desirous.

More thought must be given to this venture, before commitment to ever-rising community tax is off-loaded onto the rate payers.

I know the local Labour councillors will say it won't happen here but I'm very sceptical. - F Edwards, Shildon.

THE COMMONWEALTH

MOST empires end when the defeated countries who form it rise in rebellion and evict their conquerors.

Strangely the largest empire known (which was the British) did not end that way. The countries forming it were given independence by Britain and most democratically decided to stay in what became a Commonwealth.

The Commonwealth Games in Manchester seem to indicate that the countries involved will want to remain (only Southern Ireland has left and not returned).

If all these countries, who have a common language of English besides their own, are to remain why not have a common National Anthem based on the Commonwealth of Nations? - E Reynolds, Wheatley Hill.