Mass hysteria seems to have set in after an alleged attack by a fox on on two babies in East London.

There are already calls for culls on urban foxes, because of this extremely rare occurrence, but as far as I’m aware the last time an incident happened like this was in 2002.

In 2002 we were of course in the throws of persuading the government to ignore the protests of fox hunters and pass a bill banning hunting. Now, in 2010, we are anticipating the new government once again allowing this cruel and barbarous ‘sport’.

One urban wildlife expert John Bryant is on record as saying that during his 40 years of dealing with foxes, he has previously only heard two claims that foxes have attacked humans; one turned out to be a German shepherd dog and the other a cat.

But if we actually believe foxes have attacked children twice in eight years does this really justify the destruction of thousands of foxes?

If it does, what action should we take against pet dogs which probably bite or attack children on a daily basis?

It just isn’t logical and I have to admit that I’m suspicious about the timing.

A cull on foxes in any case would be a complete waste of time. They are self-regulating as far as their population goes and are dependent on two things – the amount of food and the territory available.

Excess population results in only the dominant vixen breeding, but alternatively in a shortage, the fox has the ability to quadruple production of cubs.

I would just like to add that David Cameron is on record in saying the the fox hunting ban is useless because it’s too hard to police.

I presume, the massive protests which will occur if the ban is lifted will also be too hard to police since it will undoubtedly need more police time.

R Lee

Burford Road