In response to Mr Henley's letter. I am only too sadly aware that there is a breed of shopper who puts cheapness before everything, and to try to appeal to them on the grounds of giving meat animals and poultry better living conditions at the cost of a few extra pence is a total waste of time and effort.

It is upon this type of penny-pinching customer that concerns like Tesco have built their empires. Put up the cost of booze, fags and holidays abroad and the extra is paid with hardly a murmur, but actually expect them to fund better animal welfare - what next?

The fact that small farmers have been driven out of business, even to suicide, doesn't worry them in the least. Tesco and their ilk don't need to make their millions by paying farmers a pittance. There are thousands of commodities that do not involve living creatures in any way - tinned food, cakes, biscuits, soft drinks and, of course, non-food items such as clothes, on which they could cut prices and still appeal to the cheapness-worshipping public, while charging just a fraction more when living creatures are involved.

With the obscene profits made by some supermarkets they could easily spare a few extra pence, that would mean the difference between farmers being able to make a decent living while ensuring that their animals did not suffer, and avoid the downward spiral towards bankruptcy and perhaps death.

I like to think that there are a growing number of customers with consciences and hearts, who support farmers and shop with animal welfare in mind. But there is still a hard core of shoppers to whom suffering for anyone other than themselves, animals or humans, matters not a jot.

Heather Causnett Escrick Park Gardens, Escrick, York.