Sir, In all the speculation about how the foot-and-mouth virus might have been transmitted from the facilities at Pirbright to the cattle in Normandy (report, August 6 ), one possible vector seems to have gone unmentioned. Holders of allotments, adjacent to the field where the affected cattle were kept, find they are plagued by wild deer. Not only do the cultivators see deerslots everywhere and find their crops chewed, but they also need to check after each visit that they have not picked up ticks.

All species of deer in Britain, particularly roe and muntjac, are susceptible to the foot-and-mouth virus and excrete it at much the same levels as sheep and cattle (Gibbs et al, The Veterinary Record, Vol 96, Issue 26, 558-63, 1975). Between Pirbright and Normandy, the countryside is heavily wooded and there are plenty of woodland corridors, ideal for deer, between more open fields. Is this aspect of biosecurity being addressed?

KATHARINE NEWMAN, Loughborough, Leics

Sir, There is at least one good thing to have come out of the foot-and-mouth events over this past weekend: the disappearance of government spin and a return to a reliance on straightforward factual information.

From the outset on Friday evening the direct, unambiguous and professional approach of the Chief Veterinary Officer in broadcasts proved why it is best left to knowledgeable experts to impart facts in helpful, reassuring messages to the farming community and the general public.

However damaging and unwelcome the incidence may prove to be, at least the messages about the disease have not been distorted by government interpretation.

NEVILLE TAYLOR, Rochester, Kent

Sir, My wife and I were staying on a mixed farm in Shropshire when the news of the foot-and-mouth outbreak came through. Unsurprisingly, the couple who owned the farm were both dismayed and deeply apprehensive. We all became glued to BBC News 24 for the latest on the outbreak. Every 15 minutes there was an item, and every one consisted of a split screen with one part showing footage from the last outbreak of a dead cow hanging grotesquely from a mechanical digger. There was usually nothing to indicate that these pictures were not current.

This footage was not merely irrelevant, distracting and misleading; it was also immensely distressing, and for no purpose whatsoever except to sensationalise.

DAVID TERRY, Droitwich, Worcs

Sir, If, as it now seems likely, the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease is found to be caused by an escape of the organism from the government laboratories or the vaccine laboratories adjacent to them, I have to question why this activity is carried out in this country. We do not innoculate our own cattle, so why do we allow stocks of a virus to be held for commercial gain when the downside of this virus escaping in the case of the last outbreak exceeded £8.5 billion?

What justification can there be for supporting any activity where there is any risk of the virus escaping, whether it is pure research or the production of vaccines that we are unable to use?

RICHARD WYLD, Effingham, Surrey

Explore Letters

• Feedback