Future of thar

Press, 9 November 1984, Page 12

Future of thar

Sir,—Apocryphal yarns about thar benefiting catchments are nonsense. Merely because some men enjoy killing this introduced goat does not render it less of a disaster to pur alpine vegetation. Given the will, thar can be eliminated, at less expense, in the long run, than the cost of control for ever. John Hois claims that “a mountain without wildlife (read ‘thar 1 ) is a dead mountain.” What of our native wildlife, the habitat of which thar are destroying? My pursuits are healthy, outdoors ones — this is why I dislike thar destroying the country I find peace in. Mr Veronese’s complaint of “distortion” is the usual cry of those whose contradictions are pointed out to them. I happily accept the label “anti-thar.” Recreational hunters have not controlled thar, and commercial exploiters put money before ecological common sense. When will some people learn the lesson of the deer and rabbit? Fur and impressive heads do not give pests the right to be here. — Yours, etc.,

D. J. ROUND. November 7, 1984.

Sir,—The recent debate on thar was tainted by emotions and sometimes short on facts, nevertheless useful. Both factions will be interested to know that plans are under way to call for public submissions on the future management of thar. I therefore suggest to all to keep your powder dry, as I am sure the last shot on thar has not been fired. — Yours, etc., KARL SCHASCHING. November 8, 1984.

[This correspondence is now closed.—Editor]