That is simply wrong. If your reporter had been able to stay for even three of the five speakers, maybe an accurate report and fair editorial would have resulted. As it was, he was there for just 20 minutes and heard just one speaker.

The forum was conceived of and organised by one person and paid for by just a couple. It was not meant to be, nor could it have been, an opportunity for the hunting fraternity to put its various cases.

It was to inform parents of information obtained, firsthand, from the police force, the Firearms Registry, the Game Licensing Unit, the Forestry Corporation, National Parks, the RSPCA, etc, and to let them hear from experts in the fields of animal care and child development.

The speakers expressed support for target shooting and the need for properly conducted culling by government authorities.

Because of venue-hiring costs, the forum time was limited to two hours, with three hours for set up and take down.

Everyone was welcome to attend and join in, including the hunters.

They came, and expressed their views quite forcefully; yet applauded one of the presentations as being balanced.

Your reporter missed that presentation.

An open forum of the kind you have suggested, possibly in the nature of a debate, is the responsibility of our council, not self-funded individuals.

Peter Cormick

Deua River Valley