Furthermore, HSBC has just recently changed their Business Online Banking procedures, which for whatever reason does not support Apple Macintosh anymore. The Macintosh OS X platform is known to be more resistant to online attacks such as spam, viruses and key-logging programs.

What happened? Why is HSBC not able to provide its customers with contingencies to support Macintosh as it has done in the past. Simply because their Business Banking Online product is not ready, even though it was launched with a multimillion-dollar marketing campaign. Just look at all that costly marketing junk HSBC and other banks are stuffing our mail boxes with.

As an HSBC customer I have, of course, complained to HSBC customer service without much luck. HSBC could only confirm that Macintosh was not yet supported. I have received a $100 cash voucher for ParknShop as temporary compensation. Can anyone tell what the hell that is all about? After the recent frauds, HSBC only managed to inform their customers to be aware of so-called bogus websites and e-mails on their official online banking website. I have not received any official letter by ordinary post from HSBC to inform me of this.

If there are bogus websites, perhaps the HSBC website cannot be trusted either because I am getting very confused nowadays about what to believe.

Jorg Kubisz, Lantau

Q How should the wild boar on Kau Sai Chau be dealt with?

As a zoologist and long-term resident, I was saddened to see the article describing the possible fate of wild boar visiting the Jockey Club golf facility at Kau Sai Chau.

The article describes what appears to be a poorly-formulated and outdated approach to the responsibilities that come as part and parcel of land management of a facility of this type.

The wild boar that are damaging the property should not be anything of a surprise.

Boar have always been rightful 'Hong Kong ID cardholding' residents of the territory and HK farmers can tell of the long battle they have had protecting crops from boar.

In preparation for the development of the course, they should have made adequate plans against potential for pest damage. The boar should not pay the price now for organisational failure in the preparation stages.

I do sympathise to a degree with the problem the Jockey Club faces. As an individual who has first-hand experience both in the wild and in captivity with management of more than one species of wild pig, I know the Jockey Club certainly faces a tough challenge.

The approach being taken appears to revolve around a particularly outdated pest control concept - that of pest eradication rather than management.

Any approach that simply attempts to kill off pests will result in an endless battle. Capture and pest destruction will need to continue for years to come, which means more and more dead boar.

Anyone assessing the risk presented by wild boar to the public should examine the article in the September issue of the BBC wildlife magazine detailing the presence of wild boar in cities in Germany. It may also help to put the risk in perspective.

How many people are injured by wild boar each year and how many by motor vehicles? Which one presents the real risk?

A sustainable approach to the problem through integrated pest management needs to be developed. Some issues mentioned in the article should be addressed.

1. Wild boar in Hong Kong do still have a natural predator, the Burmese python. If a healthy population of the python was present on Kau Sai Chau, they would help cut the population of piglets.

2. Fencing. Written off by the Jockey Club as impossible but I am sure that if this was a private, high-class residential development the impossible perimeter fence would quickly appear. Strategic use of electric fences can be cost effective and successful.

3. One suggested approach to management of the situation that I believe would leave the boar, the Jockey Club and golfers in a winning position would be as follows: Use strategically-placed electric fences to deter boar from known access points. Combine this with the provision of boar-friendly areas where they are allowed to feed on managed turf planted with fruiting native plants.

Take this one step further and protect the no-go areas with a boar deterrent easily accessible to man - domestic dogs, with the dogs making routine security patrols day and night around the areas to be protected.

They would quickly see off invading boar.

The dogs' marking of territory would also assist in warning off boar.

Let's work towards living with our wildlife, not wiping it out.

Paul Crow, Tai Po

Recipe for wild boar worries!

1. Obtain a sufficient quantity of jaguar dung and urine mixed with water. Spray around edge of the golf green.

Effect: The jaguar would be perceived by any right-minded boar as a serious predator and any scent of such a large cat would keep the boar at a distance.

2. Create a feeding station. Dig a small pit at a good distance from the golf green. Take all vegetable leftovers from the club house and place in pit.

Effect: Boar will eat at this location and finding the food to be varied and palatable will hopefully forget about the grubs on the green.

3. Place upright bamboo sticks around the most frequented areas, attach cotton wool soaked in 'white flower oil' on top of the sticks.

Effect: Boar are proud of their sense of smell, which is more sensitive than ours. They do not like the strong scent of the oil and will avoid the area for a period.

4. Introduce pythons to keep the boar young in check. Or spread python dung, like compost, around the most frequented areas.

Effect: Adult boar may not be too afraid of the local Burmese python but their young are tasty morsels for this large serpent. The boar will try to avoid areas where the predator scent is present.

If these solutions are too bizarre, simply erect a solar-powered electric fence.

This can be switched off during daylight hours when charging and turned on when the last caddy leaves the field.

Name and address supplied

Q Is it worth losing 500 trees for a horticultural garden?

In Hong Kong's concrete jungle, building a horticultural garden can provide urbanites a breath of fresh air.

But if doing this requires cutting down 500 and more trees at Stanley, it rather insults our intelligence.

There is much to examine if we are to justify the destruction of natural resources for any human-altered landscape.

The scheme proposed by the Housing Authority is marvellous but one is suspicious of its restriction on its operating life span to 30 years.

Would the plants make way for housing after, or even before, the lease expires? Certainly such an insidious scheme can be likened to a wolf in sheepskin that gets a foot in the door.

Fundamentally, does the Housing Authority, a semi-governmental agency, have the authority to sell or lease land for purposes other than housing?

John Yuan, School of Architecture and Fine Arts, Dalian University of Technology