Readers' letters - August 19

Too many humans and not enough elephants?

Thursday, 24th August 2017, 6:47 pm
Updated Monday, 11th September 2017, 12:46 pm

I agree with RD’s views about human overpopulation (WP Letters, August 18). In particular, I am concerned about the impact we are having on wildlife habitat.

We encroach and destroy other animals’ habitats on a regular basis, whether it is for housing, food, palm oil, energy, roads, or some other reason. And so I come to an unpalatable, unmentionable truth. If there were fewer of us, if there was less consumption, the planet would be in a healthier state.

If we carry on increasing the population – and therefore our desire for money, ivory, energy, palm oil, roads, cars and so on – we will have to say goodbye to many of our iconic species, elephants, rhinos and many more.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

We are all interconnected with the natural world and should care about it.

Even if this means we have to start compromising. Voluntarily having a small(ish) family of one, two or three children would surely be more sensible than having six, seven and more – one North West family even has 20 children! And if we think it is a human right to have as many children as we wish, surely we should stop consuming so much instead?

In this day and age, religion shouldn’t have an impact on family size (many Catholics ignore teaching on contraception). But even if it does, my question would be, do you think God is happy humans are wrecking the planet he created? Wouldn’t he want us to be think more about the other creatures we share our planet with?

And for those who couldn’t care less about wildlife, do you really think human overpopulation and overconsumption will have no consequences for our species?

Molly Clare

via email

We want a safe town centre

Re: Crack down on drunken crime (WP Letters, August 17).

It is an absolute priority for us and our partners to reduce the level of anti-social behaviour and disorder in our communities.

We want to have safe, vibrant and prosperous town centres and we know that is what our residents and businesses want too.

Our Cumulative Impact Policy was introduced as a result of the fact that there were high levels of alcohol-related crime and disorder and anti-social behaviour in Wigan town centre.

Although we are yet to see these levels fall, the policy will remain in place.

As a result of our concerns, licensing officers have objected to new applications where the application would have increased alcohol availability, potentially adding to the existing problems.

The policy encourages applications from restaurants and more family- focused premises who are likely to be granted a licence.

We are proud that we have implemented a policy that attempts to address the issues and, although we know it will take time to influence the diversity of the night time offering, we remain committed to the policy and want to see it having a positive impact on our town centres.

Our licensing team work with Greater Manchester Police to support business owners to address issues and regularly carry out late night inspections of pubs and clubs.

We will take enforcement action where all other informal approaches have failed.

Residents are welcome to email the licensing team at [email protected] and we will provide the information on the public register.

Karl Battersby

Director for economy and environment at Wigan Council

Fine speeding drivers more

It should be recognised that excess speed is not healthy. It makes walking and cycling to school an unpleasant experience, and creates unhealthy children. At the upper end of the scale, it contributes to climate change. Accordingly, speeding drivers should be fined more to support better pay for doctors and nurses, and for flood damage!

Allan Ramsay