GILES Bradshaw often writes to the Echo purporting to express concern that the Hunting Act is not well drafted from an animal welfare perspective: Deer culling is best carried out by hunts, March 16.

However, animal welfare was not one of the reasons he gave when he challenged, in the European Court of Human Rights, the legality of the Hunting Act 2004 (England and Wales). He and his friends attempted to argue that the Act was incompatible with their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

In December last year the European Court of Human Rights rejected all their arguments, saying: "The bans had been designed to eliminate the hunting and killing of animals for sport in a manner causing suffering and being morally objectionable.

"The bans had been introduced after extensive debate by the democratically elected representatives of the State on the social and ethical issued raised by that type of hunting."

Most readers of the Echo will be happy to readily accept the decision of the European Court of Human Rights — too bad if Mr Bradshaw has other views.

John Phelps

Argyll Road, Exeter