DEAR SIR, Last week’s story by Aidan Brennan on P3 (Calf slaughter to be banned from 2024) in relation to banning calf slaughter from 2024 is a step in the wrong direction.

Why would you force a farmer to rear a calf that is going to lose them money, and when potentially there would be no buyer for such an animal at the end of its life?

There are many times a farmer must make a decision to cull a calf, and not being allowed to do so could result in serious mental health issues for farmers forced to rear such a calf if culling isn’t an option.

You are also damaging the environment by having such a calf live a full life. If we are serious about supplying quality food to the consumer, then calf slaughter must be allowed.

This would also reduce environmental damage - isn’t this what the consumer wants?

You mentioned milk processors and Bord Bia in your article on page 3 last week, but surely these are the people who should be fully connected to what is needed for farmers and the consumers. Instead, they seem to be fully disconnected from what is really needed at farm level.

The number of calves that will need to be culled won’t be substantial, but by biting this bullet we will be able to deliver a higher quality product to our consumer while also protecting the environment from unnecessary damage.

As farmers, we work seven days a week, like no other sector all year around and are supplying quality food every day to the consumer, rich in nutrition for their bodies in an environmentally friendly way, but the disconnect shown by those mentioned in your article is staggering.

I would strongly argue that we need a vigorous dairy calf cull scheme to protect our environment and let the suckler cow alone as she produces a top quality product for the consumer.

Can any of the aforementioned in your article please tell me or your readers what a no-cull policy is going to do for our very proud boast of producing quality food and protecting our environment?