"Country Matters", Biased and offensive? Options

[Biker1]

I see in last weeks NWN that Andrew Davis is once again concentrating on the persecution of wild animals.
He talks of a "country fair" which was held at Benheim (about 40 miles from Newbury) the likes of which, from his description, seem to concentrate mainly on killing wildlife.
His enthusiasm for the gassing of badgers he finds hard to contain as he does that for "controlling" deer.

I am a lover of the countryside but I do not feel the need to blast away at wildlife to do so.

There is no counter argument to his column as the NWN would probably not allow this although there is a "nature notes" column on the same page which seems to concentrate on the more constructive side of enjoying the countryside.
If the NWN is willing I would be more than happy to provide an alternative "country matters" column with a counter viewpoint.
I find his 1/2 page column totally biased concentrating on bloodsports rather than that of country matters in general.
I particularly object to his term of "bunny huggers" for those who do not share his bloodthirsty views. In my opinion most offensive.
Any thoughts?
Do many of you read it? (Page 34 if you haven't.)