Sir, – I have reluctantly agreed my shooting rate valuation.

I have never shot game in my life and at the age of 70, I do not intend to start now – but clause 7.4.1 states that where an occupier chooses not to shoot, this is a voluntary restriction and an entry should still be made in the valuation role.

In other words, as I have the right to do something I have to pay for that right, even though I do not use it.

We have the right to do numerous things – drive a car on a road, buy something in a shop, go to the cinema, the list is endless – yet we would not expect to pay for those rights unless we exercised them. I can’t think of any instance where a person is compelled to pay for something they do not do, or want.

I would argue the basic principle is flawed, unfair and probably against my human rights.

Also my land has 23 homes scattered through the centre of my property and 15 on the periphery. Some of these have horse paddocks. There are two public roads and two public footpaths crossing the land and the land is situated on the edge of a town with numerous walkers, many with dogs and horse riders making it totally unsuitable for game shooting, yet the assessor informs me that he can only offer a 30% discount.

The assessor told me I have every right to shoot anywhere on my land. Does this mean that he or ScotGov will take responsibility for upsetting my neighbours and any injury caused.

This regulation urgently needs looking at again as it is neither fair or sensible!

Stephen Withers

Upper Hundalee Farm,