One example came from a Launceston magistrate who described the work methods of a now-defunct electrical business as "agricultural at best" when handing down a sentence for breaches of workplace safety laws. The other article, regarding a neglected elderly man in a care facility, quoted his daughter as saying, "they were treating my dad like an animal to be slaughtered."

These are just two examples in which a poor choice of language is used unwittingly to degrade the valuable work of farmers and the agricultural industry.

I strongly believe that there needs to be some responsibility around what is being said to the media and what the media regard as fair to publish because such statements are condescending and are in no way a true reflection of the hard-working and dedicated farming families who provided us with our daily food and fibre.

It may just be a flippant remark to make a point, but as a third-generation farmer, I feel saddened that this is the perception of farmers to some in the community, and it would be remiss of me to let it go unchallenged.

Australian farmers are some of the proudest, most conscientious and committed people to be safe and sustainable agricultural practices, and it is unfortunate that some people do not respect this by choosing their words unwisely.

SARA Strong (The Examiner, March 4) makes some personal and relevant observations about habitat loss and environmental degradation when commenting on the clear felling of old-growth forests in her neck of the woods - Lilydale.

But, under the stewardship of our current state government, and with the input of Sustainable Timber Tasmania, this practice continues in the forests of the west coast - a complex, interrelated and interdependent series of ecosystems, removed for mainly wood chip production and replaced by a monoculture of eucalyptus.

Yes, STT is correct in stating that for every tree removed, a new tree is planted, but this is a smoke and mirrors argument.

A forest of multiple species of trees, birds, animals, insects and associated microorganisms hardly equates to a plantation of Eucalyptus nitens.

STT, get rid of the smoke and clean your mirrors, and be truthful with Tasmanians.

WITH the annual cost of keeping one prisoner at well over $100,000 per year, planning a new prison is just a way of sentencing the community each time sentences are handed down and baking millions in costs into the future. Why not explore other options that aren't going to cripple our communities with such high costs? After all, we also have to cop the losses crime creates as well as a high priced judicial system.

Michael Bolan, Taranna.