The following notes have been largely collated from the publishers ‘ publicity materials. A Report or full Review may appear in a subsequent issue of Animal Welfare.

The following notes have been largely collated from the publishers’ publicity materials. A Report or full Review may appear in a subsequent issue of Animal Welfare.

Sir, Hereby we would like to describe a small project on rehabilitation in gibbons.

At the Gibbon Rehabilitation Project (GRP) Phuket, Thailand, lar gibbons (Hylobates lar) that have lived their youth as pets are being rehabilitated, with release as the final aim. Rehabilitation consists of minimizing human contact, encouraging conspecific contact, and giving appropriate food and opportunities to brachiate. After having been cages at the project for a period ranging from a few months to a few years, gibbons which are thought to have a good chance of surviving in the wild are moved to one of three islands near Phuket. As a semi-natural environment is thought to facilitate the process of rehabilitation, the islands are used as an intermediate between the cages and the wild. As a rule, only pair-bonded couples and groups of single (mostly immature) gibbons are moved to the islands. Pair-bonded couples because only they have a fair chance of surviving in the wild (Brockelman 1990); single gibbons because this allows them to choose their own partners.

Sir, Leg-hold traps are the devices most commonly used by researchers to capture wolves. These traps can cause injury, as they cannot usually be monitored closely enough to prevent captured animals from struggling in them. In areas where guard dogs are not used, typical methods for controlling wolf predation on livestock are culling and building substantial or electric fences to exclude wolves. These methods have two major drawbacks - culling can threaten the population, and conventional fences are expensive and difficult to maintain.

Sir, In your February issue, a paper by E L Bradshaw and P Bateson claims that on 29 August 1995 a deer was attacked by hounds belonging to the Quantock Staghounds. It was not. The video footage shown on television, and upon which this claim is based, was stopped at the point the hounds were apparently on top of the deer. The tape went on to show hounds over running the deer without attacking it. I would be grateful if you would set the record straight on this.

Dr Bradshaw and Professor Bateson reply: We replayed slowly the video of the hounds catching up with the stag which fell during a hunt on 29 August 1995. After many viewings we were convinced that the hounds did bite the stag, although we have stated repeatedly that the control of hounds is generally impressive. Since we submitted our paper to Animal Welfare, a much clearer case of hounds biting a stag has been videoed. This was at Marsh Bridge on 3 April 1999. We doubt very much if this case can be denied or explained away. We do not think this matter of biting is central in the debate about the welfare of the hunted deer, but if it is to be settled, both videos should be analysed by independent experts nominated by the stag-hunts and ourselves.

Sir, I have read Prof Broom's article in Animal Welfare 1999, 8: 205-228 in which he reviews the welfare of farmed mink.