JOHN Robins can rest easy in his concerns over the response to Hunting Act infringements (Debate, 18 December).
Any such infringements now come under “wildlife crime” which is spared no expense in enforcement as being politically correct it allows the police to be seen in a good light with their political masters while trying to justify the generous resources allocated to such alleged offences. Having complained in the past of an unsympathetic response, the animal charities/business now have dedicated procurator fiscals and wildlife crime officers in every force as well as numerous wildlife protection laws and sympathetic media.
As Robins claims wildlife protection is not properly resourced perhaps he could tell us the ratio of search warrants, police call-outs, court cases and manpower involved in relation to successful prosecutions? By way of example, the expense involved could be compared to the response and resources applied to other crimes like the recent death of a drug addict’s child.
Is Robins preparing the ground for the latest aspiration of the SSPCA to be granted prosecuting powers in relation to wildlife crime? Given the zeal of some of its inspectors, this would be akin to putting the Ku Klux Klan in charge of race relations.
Thomas Parker, Castlemilk, Glasgow