9 Baseline Marine Ecological Resources

9.1 Introduction

This Annex presents the findings of ecological studies of Black Point and the surrounding Study Area. Marine ecological habitats and resources have been identified and the ecological value of the Study Area evaluated. The assessment has been based on a review of the currently available literature, as well as detailed field surveys to provide the most up-to-date information on existing conditions. Rationales for the surveys are presented, followed by the methodologies employed, results obtained and a discussion of the results and comparison with other similar studies. The findings of this report will form the basis of establishing the ecological importance of Black Point.

9.1.1 Ecological Study Area

The Study Area for the ecological assessment is 500m from the boundary of the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point. The Black Point LNG terminal is proposed to be located on the north face of the Black Point headland, as presented in Figure 9.1. Due to the steep slopes on the existing headland, some reclamation will be required to provide sufficient land for development. The jetty for the LNG carrier extends northwest, perpendicular to the coastline. To allow navigation for the LNG carrier, an approach channel and turning circle is required.

The Study Area for the terrestrial ecology baseline has included the footprint of the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point and the surrounding land-based habitats (500m from the Project Area). The Study Area for the marine ecology baseline has incorporated the proposed approach channel and turning circle as well as the reclamation area.

9.2 Legislative Requirements and Evaluation Criteria

9.2.1 Introduction

This section summarizes all legislative requirements and evaluation criteria for the protection of species and habitats of marine ecological importance.

9.2.2 Legislative Requirements and Evaluation Criteria

Legislative requirements and evaluation criteria relevant to the study are as follows:

1. Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap 476);

2. Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170);

3. Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586);

4. Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131);

5. Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines Chapter 10 (HKPSG);

6. The Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAOTM);

7. United Nations Convention on Biodiversity (1992);

8. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramseur Convention);

9. PRC Regulations and Guidelines; and,

10. City University of Hong Kong (2001). Agreement No. CE 62/98, Consultancy Study on Fisheries and Marine Ecological Criteria for Impact Assessment, AFCD, Final Report July 2001.

9.2.3 Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap 476)

The Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap 476) provides for the designation, control and management of marine parks and marine reserves. It also stipulates the Director of Agriculture and Fisheries as the Country and Marine Parks Authority which is advised by the Country and Marine Parks Board. The Marine Parks and Marine Reserves Regulation was enacted in July 1996 to provide for the prohibition and control certain activities in marine parks or marine reserves.

9.2.4 Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170)

Under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170), designated wild animals are protected from being hunted, whilst their nests and eggs are protected from destruction and removal. All birds and most mammals including all cetaceans are protected under this Ordinance, as well as certain reptiles (including all sea turtles), amphibians and invertebrates. The Second Schedule of the Ordinance that lists all the animals protected was last revised in June 1997.

9.2.5 Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586)

The Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586) was enacted to align Hong Kong’s control regime with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). With effect from 1 July 2006, it replaces the Animals and Plants (Protection of Endangered Species) Ordinance (Cap 187). The purpose of the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance is to restrict the import and export of species listed in CITES Appendices so as to protect wildlife from overexploitation or extinction. The Ordinance is primarily related to controlling trade in threatened and endangered species and restricting the local possession of them. Certain types of corals are CITES listed, including Blue coral (Heliopora coerulea), Organ pipe corals (family Tubiporidae), Black corals (order Antipatharia), Stony coral (order Scleractinia), Fire corals (family Milleporidae) and Lace corals (family Stylasteridae). The import, export and possession of listed species, no matter dead or living, is restricted.

9.2.6 Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131)

The recently amended Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131) provides for the designation of areas such as “Coastal Protection Areas”, “Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs)”, “Green Belt” and "Conservation Area” to promote conservation or protection or protect significant habitat.

9.2.7 Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines Chapter 10

Chapter 10 of the HKPSG covers planning considerations relevant to conservation. This chapter details the principles of conservation, the conservation of natural landscape and habitats, historic buildings, archaeological sites and other antiquities. It also addresses the issue of enforcement. The appendices list the legislation and administrative controls for conservation, other conservation related measures in Hong Kong, and Government departments involved in conservation.

9.2.8 Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance

Annex 16 of the EIAOTM sets out the general approach and methodology for assessment of ecological impacts arising from a project or proposal, to allow a complete and objective identification, prediction and evaluation of the potential ecological impacts. Annex 8 recommends the criteria that can be used for evaluating ecological impacts.

9.2.9 Other Relevant Legislation

The Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC) is a Contracting Party to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity of 1992. The Convention requires signatories to make active efforts to protect and manage their biodiversity resources. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has stated that it will be “committed to meeting the environmental objectives” of the Convention ([1]).

The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramseur Convention) applies in the HKSAR. The Convention requires parties to conserve and make wise use of wetland areas, particularly those supporting waterfowl populations. Article 1 of the Convention defines wetlands as "areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters." The Mai Po/Inner Deep Bay wetland was declared a Wetland of International Importance (“Ramseur site”) under the Convention in 1995.

The PRC in 1988 ratified the Wild Animal Protection Law of the PRC, which lays down basic principles for protecting wild animals. The Law prohibits killing of protected animals, controls hunting, and protects the habitats of wild animals, both protected and non-protected. The Law also provides for the creation of lists of animals protected at the state level, under Class I and Class II. There are 96 animal species in Class I and 156 in Class II. Class I provides a higher level of protection for animals considered to be more threatened.

9.3 Marine Ecological Resources

9.3.1 Introduction

This section of the report describes the baseline conditions of the marine ecological resources at Black Point and the Study Area. Baseline conditions have been assessed based on a review of the findings of relevant studies and the collation of available information regarding the marine ecological resources of this part of Hong Kong.

Based on this review, an evaluation of the information collected was conducted to identify any gaps that need to be filled in order to conduct an assessment of ecological importance of the marine habitats. Where information gaps were identified, or where certain habitats or species were considered to warrant further attention, field surveys have been conducted.

9.3.2 Site History

The site for the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point is in close proximity to the existing Black Point Power Station near the northern reaches of the Urmston Road and at outer Deep Bay. Black Point is located in the northwestern waters of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR). The surrounding waters are relatively shallow, often less than –5mPD.

9.3.3 Literature Review

Based on the literature review the following habitats and/or organisms of ecological interest have been identified at Black Point:

· Hard Bottom Habitats; and

- Intertidal Hard Bottom Habitats

- Subtidal Hard Bottom Habitats

· Soft Bottom Habitats;

- Subtidal Soft Bottom Habitats

Ú Epifaunal Assemblages

Ú Infaunal Assemblages

· Marine Mammals.

The existing conditions of each of the above habitats/organisms based on available literature are presented in the following sections.

9.3.4 Hard Bottom Habitats

Approximately 80% of Hong Kong’s complex shorelines and many islands are composed of rocky outcrops. Shores in Hong Kong display characteristic zonation patterns, with a progression of different species along the vertical gradient from terrestrial to marine environments. For the purposes of this review, information will be presented on assemblages that occur along the full gradient from the essentially marine, subtidal area, to the semi-terrestrial, intertidal area.

Intertidal Hard Bottom Habitats

No recent studies have been conducted on the shoreline at Black Point, a study in the early 1990’s to the south of the headland indicated that the intertidal hard bottom communities contained species that were typical of semi-exposed shores in Hong Kong([2]).

Prior to the construction of the Black Point Power Station, shoreline surveys were conducted along the Black Point headland. The results recorded that the rocky shoreline did not possess a diverse intertidal community nor habitats of significance in comparison to those found in southern and eastern Hong Kong ([3]).

A more recent study reported that the majority of intertidal species recorded in the northern part of Lung Kwu Tan Bay were common in Hong Kong and of generally low abundance and diversity ([4]). No species of conservation value were recorded.

Subtidal Hard Bottom Habitats

Coral reefs support a range of species providing shelter, feeding, spawning and nursery areas, resulting in the large and diverse community for which they are renowned. The coral reef system has been shown to be sensitive to pollution and impacts from development can cause the ecosystem to collapse, resulting in widespread mortality of coral and the numerous associated organisms. Natural fluctuations in water quality can also regulate coral communities.

The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department report that there are over 80 species of corals recorded in Hong Kong waters ([5]). It appears that coral distribution in Hong Kong is primarily controlled by hydrodynamic conditions as Hong Kong’s western waters are influenced by the Pearl River Estuary, which lowers salinities. The greatest diversity and abundances of corals are generally found in the northeastern waters of Hong Kong due to the optimal environmental conditions for settlement, growth and survival found in these waters. The western and southern waters of Hong Kong are influenced by the Pearl River Estuary, greatly reducing salinities, increasing turbidity and therefore reducing light penetration. Ahermatypic octocorals, including soft and black corals, which unlike the hermatypic hard corals do not require light for zooxanthellae photosynthesis, are more widely distributed and often occur at greater depths.

As part of a study for the EIA of the Aviation Fuel Receiving Facility at Sha Chau, dive surveys were undertaken at Sha Chau in order to investigate the hard bottom communities ([6]). The surveys found that only a few hermatypic hard corals (Family Faviidae) were recorded within the subtidal of the survey area.

Although these surveys were conducted at some distance from Black Point, the results of these surveys are deemed applicable due to similar environmental conditions. As such, coral communities of ecological value are not predicted to occur within the Study Area. Whilst it is possible that solitary gorgonians and sea pens may be present within the subtidal areas, large or important communities of hermatypic hard corals are not expected due to the unfavourable conditions imposed by the water quality.

9.3.5 Soft Bottom Habitats

Subtidal Soft Bottom Habitats

Epifaunal Assemblages

Subtidal soft bottom habitats, as well as supporting infaunal species, commonly support macro-benthic epifauna. These organisms are generally greater than 1mm in size and live either on or within the surface sediments.

A review of 10 years of data on fisheries resources collected from demersal trawls conducted as part of the ongoing marine monitoring of contaminated mud disposal at the East of Sha Chau Contaminated Mud Pits provides data on epifaunal assemblages in the vicinity of the Lung Kwu Chau and Sha Chau Marine Park ([7]). As these areas are in relatively close proximity to Black Point, these data can be considered to be representative of the epifaunal assemblages in this area.

These data indicate that epifaunal assemblages are dominated by gastropods (eg Turritella terebra), crabs and mantis shrimps. Abundance and species composition was considered to be relatively low in comparison to other areas in Hong Kong. No species that were considered to be rare in Hong Kong were found.

Based on the above, the epifaunal assemblages in the proposed Study Area are considered to be of low abundance, diversity and biomass in comparison to other areas of Hong Kong and have, thus, not been identified of conservation interest.

Infaunal Assemblages

Soft sediments consisting of silt, clay and sand dominate the seabed of Hong Kong. These soft bottom habitats support infaunal assemblages that act as a food source for Hong Kong’s inshore commercial fisheries resources. Due to the general dominance of these habitats in Hong Kong’s subtidal marine environment, extensive studies have been conducted on infaunal assemblages throughout Hong Kong. However, the majority of these studies have focussed on providing a “snapshot” of infaunal assemblages either within or in close proximity to a proposed area for development, or as part of a specific monitoring programme. In order to provide an indication of the potential ecological value of the infaunal assemblages at the LNG terminal location, it is considered useful to review studies that have investigated infaunal assemblages in Hong Kong on a wide scale. Where considered useful, studies of infaunal assemblages at specific locations have also been included in the review.

Both the waters around the proposed terminal site were surveyed as part of a Hong Kong wide study conducted in 1976, however, the findings of this study are considered to be no longer applicable due to the extensive development in both Hong Kong and the Pearl River Estuary that has since occurred. This is supported by the findings of a recent, second, Hong Kong wide study on infaunal assemblages undertaken in 2001([8]).

The most up-to-date study on the soft bottom assemblages has revealed that the benthic communities in Hong Kong can be divided into the following broad types: a relatively similar benthic community covering the majority of Hong Kong waters; an impoverished community in the northeastern waters; a coarser sediment benthic group in Victoria Harbour; and a distinct benthic group in Deep Bay ([9]). Deep Bay, where the proposed terminal site situated, has its own distinct infaunal assemblages group resulting from the influence of freshwater discharges from the Pearl River Estuary and the Shenzhen River. These conditions lead to seasonal changes in the assemblages between the summer and winter months.

A comparison of the results of the 1976 study and the 2001 study found that changes in benthic communities, particularly species composition had occurred. This was reported as being primarily a result of a wider distribution and increase in abundance of pollution tolerant species such as Prionospio spp and Mediomastus spp. The benthic biota consisted mainly of soft, muddy bottom species, but the diversity was less than those reported in South Lantau, Lamma and waters to the east of Hong Kong.

In addition to the above, a recent study in the Tuen Mun area found that the benthic infauna near Lung Kwu Tan, in the vicinity of Black Point has a generally mid-range total biomass and relatively high total number of individuals in comparison to other areas of Hong Kong ([10]). The fauna was found to be primarily polychaetes, which is typical for Hong Kong. The species richness was high compared to other sites surveyed using the same techniques. Overall the site was found to exhibit the same characteristics and ecological structure as other areas in the north Lantau and NWNT areas.

9.3.6 Marine Mammals

A total of 16 (and possibly up to 18) species of marine mammals, or cetaceans, have been recorded in Hong Kong waters ([11]). The Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin, Sousa chinensis, and the Finless Porpoise, Neophocaena phocaenoides, are the only two species of marine mammals regularly sighted in Hong Kong waters ([12]) ([13]).

Studies on the distribution, abundance, habitat use, and life history of humpback dolphins within Hong Kong have been undertaken since 1995 ([14]) ([15]) ([16]). The results of these ongoing studies indicated in 2004 that approximately 1,300 individual dolphins are estimated to utilise the waters of the Pearl River Estuary. Of these individual dolphins, approximately 360 are thought to include waters within Hong Kong as part of their range.

Historically, marine mammal data have been presented in terms of sightings ([17]). Recent analysis adopted in the marine mammals monitoring study ([18]) has allowed data to be standardised to reflect numbers of sightings in terms of survey effort. Such data are considered to be closer to a direct indication of abundance and habitat usage than raw observational data. In order to utilise the most up-to-date data, yet still allow comparison with previous studies to be made, both types of data will be discussed.

Abundance of humpback dolphins in Hong Kong waters is highest in the north and west Lantau areas (Figures 9.2 & 9.3). North Lantau and West Lantau are considered to be the major habitats for humpback dolphins in Hong Kong waters where individuals of humpback dolphins have been consistently sighted throughout the year.

Humpback dolphins exhibit a seasonal shifting in abundance and density and thus a seasonal variation of abundance in different locations. The variation is thought to be due to the increased input of freshwater from the discharge of the Pearl River Estuary and the subsequent movements of estuarine prey species ([19]) ([20]) ([21]) .

Recently published information indicates that the abundance of dolphins in Hong Kong ranges from 78 in spring to 217 in winter ([22]). Present estimates for the Pearl River Estuary population range from 731 in summer to 1,504 in winter ([23]). Data on the utilisation of the waters around the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point have been reported ([24]) ([25]). From October 1995 to November 2004, there were 29 sightings of humpback dolphins (20 from vessels and 9 from a helicopter) in Deep Bay ([26]). Deep Bay is found to be used by a small number of humpback dolphins (3-6) throughout the year. Dolphins were found almost exclusively in the southern portion of Deep Bay, mostly near Black Point. Average group size for humpback dolphins near Black Point was 2.9 ± 2.06 (range = 1-8, n = 29), which contained a smaller average group size than other areas in Hong Kong ([27]). Composition of humpback dolphin groups in Deep Bay, particularly near Black Point appeared to contain a higher proportion of calves and juveniles (SAs and UAs) but a lower proportion of mottled animals (which are probably mostly young males) among the small number of recorded individuals ([28]).

The recent studies on marine mammals in Hong Kong have attempted to conduct quantitative analysis of habitat use ([29]). Sighting densities have been calculated in terms of number of on-effort sightings per km², with the survey area mapped using a 1 km by 1 km grid. These data are presented as Sightings Per Survey Effort (SPSE) values. The average SPSE per grid in West Lantau (most of the grids has SPSE value >20) is the highest (15.55) compared with the average in Northwest Lantau of 5.30. The grids around Black Point have SPSE values ranging between 0 – 12. The results indicate that the area around Black Point has low density for dolphins ([30]), and the nearest high density area is along the east coast of Lung Kwu Chau (5 km away).

In contrast to humpback dolphins, studies on the finless porpoise indicate that the majority of sightings have been recorded in the southern and eastern waters of Hong Kong. Few sightings have been recorded in the waters surrounding the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point and the Study Area([31])([32]).

Based on the results of the information available from the long-term studies on marine mammals in the waters of Hong Kong, it appears that of Hong Kong’s resident cetacean species, only humpback dolphins were recorded within the waters surrounding the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point.

9.3.7 Baseline Marine Ecological Surveys

The literature review of the marine ecological habitats and resources of the waters within, and in close proximity to, the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point has provided an indication of their ecological importance. However, in order to provide up-to-date information on the marine ecological baseline conditions the following field surveys were considered necessary (Table 9.1).

Table 9.1 Marine Ecology Baseline Surveys at Black Point

Survey Type	Methodology	Date
Intertidal Assemblages	Quantitative (belt transects at 6 locations) survey, three 100 m belt transects (at high, mid and low intertidal zones) for each location, covered both wet and dry seasons.	22 & 23 March and 15 & 30 July 2004
Subtidal Benthic Assemblages	Quantitative grab sampling survey; covered both wet and dry seasons. Six stations sampled in each of 3 locations (BP1, BP2 and UR).	25 & 26 February and 5 & 6 July 2004.
Marine Mammal	Land-based visual survey during daytime, 5 days per month and 6 hours per day, covered four seasons (12 months).	16, 17, 18, 19 & 26 February, 19, 22, 23, 25 & 26 March, 6, 7, 13, 14 & 15 April, 11, 13, 17, 18 & 20 May, 11, 15, 24, 25 & 29 June 2004, 9, 14, 15, 20 & 25 July 2004, 25, 26, 27, 30 & 31 August, 15, 16, 17, 20 & 21 September 2004, 27, 28, 29, 30 & 31 October 2004, 24, 25, 27, 29 & 30 November 2004, 7, 8, 9, 13 & 14 December 2004, 21, 24, 25, 26 & 27 January 2005.
	Quantitative vessel based survey using line transect methods spanning Hong Kong western waters (Deep Bay, Southwest Lantau, Northwest Lantau and West Lantau) 3 days, 2 times per month.	18, 19, 20,,21, 22, 25, 26, 27 July 2005, 3, 4, 5,15, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26 August 2005, 5, 6, 7,15, 16 & 20 September 2005, 5, 6, 7, 17, 18 & 19 October 2005, 22, 24, 25, 28, 29 & 30 November 2005, 1, 2, 6,7,8 & 22 December 2005, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20 & 24 January 2006, 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 & 9 February 2006, 17, 23, 28, 29, 31 March 2006, 3, 6, 18, 25, 26, 27 April 2006, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 May 2006.

No surveys were considered necessary for subtidal hard bottom habitats and epifaunal assemblages as a review of the available literature provided sufficient evidence of low ecological importance habitats in the waters surrounding the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point.

Survey methodologies have been selected to follow standard and accepted techniques for marine ecological surveys. In addition, each methodology has been previously conducted as part of other Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) studies, accepted under the Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO).

Survey schedules were undertaken in accordance with the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance, Cap.499 Guidance Note – Ecological Baseline Survey For Ecological Assessment, specifically in terms of the following:

· Duration of Survey;

· Seasonality;

· Types of Survey Period; and

· Survey Effort.

The following sections present the methodology and results for each marine ecological survey undertaken as part of the assessment of marine ecological baseline conditions.

9.3.8 Intertidal Habitats

Methodology

Survey Locations

Six quantitative rocky shore surveys were conducted on the shores of Black Point, of which two were on natural rocky coastline and four on artificial rocky coastline (Figure 9.4).

Survey Methodology

Rocky Shore and Artificial Shoreline

A 100m transect tape was laid horizontally along the rocky and artificial shoreline at 2 metres above chart datum (CD). When tidal height was below 1m, transects could be started, local tide tables were used to assess tidal height at the site and times of surveys were adjusted accordingly. Random numbers between 1 and 100 were generated before the survey and these numbers corresponded to metres along the transect at which quadrats should be placed. Three sets of random numbers were generated per transect to represent upper, mid and low transects.

A 50cm x 50cm quadrat was used to assess abundance and distribution of flora and fauna. All fauna found within the quadrat were recorded to species level to allow density per square metre to be calculated. Sessile fauna such as barnacles and oysters recorded in samples were not counted but estimated as percentage cover on the rock surface. Species of algae (encrusting, foliose and filamentous) were also identified and recorded by estimating the percentage cover within the sample quadrat.

Results

Intertidal surveys have been conducted over two seasons, wet and dry. The date of each survey at each location is presented in Table 9.2. There were two types of coastal habitats, including natural rocky shore and artificial shoreline, recorded within the Study Area (Figure 9.5).

Table 9.2 Description of the Survey Transects and Survey Dates for Intertidal Hard Bottom Surveys at Black Point

Transect	Site Description	Date of Survey
		Dry Season	Wet Season
Natural Shoreline
T1	Transect 1 is the furthest south of the rocky shore transects at Black Point and is a very steep natural shoreline made up of bedrock and the occasional boulder.	23 Mar 2004	15 July 2004
T2	Bedrock interspersed with a few large boulders and ranges from very steep to moderately steep sloping rock faces.	3 Mar 2004	15 July 2004
Artificial Shoreline
T3	Southernmost artificial shoreline to the power stations cooling water outlet. Site consisted of steep large boulders.	23 Mar 2004	15 July 2004
T4	South of the power stations cooling water outlet. Steep artificial seawall consisting of large boulders.	22Mar 2004	30 July 2004
T5	Adjacent to the power stations cooling water outlet. Steep artificial seawall consisting of large boulders.	22Mar 2004	30 July 2004
T6	Located on the artificial shoreline on northern shore of Black Point power station. Steep artificial seawall consisting of large boulders.	22Mar 2004	30 July 2004

Dry Season

The littorinid snails, including Nodilittorina radiata, N. vidua and Littoraria articulata, were the dominant species in the high intertidal zone on the rocky shore and artificial shoreline during the dry season at Black Point (Tables 1 and 3 of Annex 9-A). The predatory gastropod Thais clavigera (the common dogwhelk), limpets (ie Nipponacmea concinna and Siphonaria japonica) and snail (Monodonta labio and Planaxis sulcatus) were recorded in the mid and low shore region. Sessile filter-feeding organisms such as the rock oyster (Saccostrea cucullata) and barnacles (Capitulum mitella, Tetraclita japonica, Tetraclita squamosa, Balanus amphitrite) were also recorded on the shores (Tables 1 and 3 of Annex 9-A). There were only 2 types of algae, including Ulva sp. and encrusting algae, of low coverage recorded at Black Point during the dry season surveys.

In total, there were 21 species recorded on the natural and artificial shores. 12 species recorded on natural shoreline were also found on artificial shoreline (Tables 3 and 4 of Annex 9-A). Except littorinid snails, all of the recorded species were in low abundances.

Wet Season

The species composition of the intertidal organisms during the wet season was similar to that of the dry season, with a total of 15 species on artificial shore and 12 species on natural shoreline (Tables 2 and 4 of Annex 9-A). The major differences between the seasons were the abundance of littorinid snails and rock oyster. The abundance of littorinid snails recorded during the wet season was much lower than those recorded during dry season, and vice versa for rock oyster. The total abundance of the intertidal organisms recorded in wet season was generally lower than the dry season.

9.3.9 Comparison of Black Point Intertidal Habitats With Other Hong Kong Sites

The intertidal organisms found at Black Point are distinct due to the influence of freshwater influx from the Pearl River Estuary and the Shenzhen River. The intertidal communities were not as diverse as those recorded in the eastern waters.

In comparison to other sites, species diversity of intertidal organisms recorded at Black Point was low. At Fa Peng and Pa Tau Kwu on Lantau Island to the East where 44 species were found in the dry season ⁽[33]⁾, only 12 and 21 species of flora and fauna were recorded at Black Point during the wet and dry seasons (Figure 9.6). During a study on the west coast of Lamma Island, 37 species were recorded.

Figure 9.6 Comparison of Intertidal Fauna and Flora at Various Sites in Hong Kong (Sources: # ERM 2000b, * ERM 1998 and ^o Babtie BMT 1999) ([34])([35])([36])

9.3.10 Infaunal Assemblages (Benthos)

Survey Methodology

Sampling Locations

Benthic samples were collected at three sites representative of subtidal soft bottom habitats in the vicinity of the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point (Figure 9.7). Sampling sites were as follows:

· Black Point (BP1 and BP2) and,

· Urmston Road (UR).

Field Sampling Methodology

In each survey site, six stations approximately 50 m apart were established and one grab sample was collected from each station. Stations were sampled using a modified Van Veen grab sampler (960 cm² sampling area; 11,000 cm³ capacity) with a supporting frame attached to a swivelling hydraulic winch cable.

Sediment from the grab samples were sieved on board the survey vessel.. The sediments were washed onto a sieve stack (comprising 1 mm and 500 mm meshes) and gently rinsed with seawater to remove all fine material. Material remaining on the two screens following rinsing was combined and carefully rinsed using a minimal volume of seawater into pre-labelled thick triple-bagged ziplock plastic bags. A 20% solution of buffered formalin containing rose bengal in seawater was then added to the bag to ensure tissue preservation. Samples were sealed in plastic containers for shipment to the taxonomy laboratory for sorting and identification.

Laboratory Techniques

The benthic laboratory performed sample re-screening after the samples had been held in formalin for a minimum of 24 hours to ensure adequate fixation of the organisms. Individual samples from the 500 mm and 1 mm² mesh sieves were gently rinsed with fresh water into a 250 mm sieve to remove the formalin from the sediments. Sieves were partially filled while rinsing a specific sample to maximize washing efficiency and prevent loss of material. All material retained on the sieve was placed in a labelled plastic jar, covered with 70% ethanol, and lightly agitated to ensure complete mixing of the alcohol with the sediments. Original labels were retained with the re-screened sample material.

Standard and accepted techniques were used for sorting organisms from the sediments. Small fractions of a sample were placed in a petri dish under a 10-power magnification dissecting microscope and scanned systematically with all animals and fragments removed using forceps. Each petri dish was sorted at least twice to ensure removal of all animals. Organisms representing major taxonomic groups including Polychaeta, Arthropoda, Mollusca, and miscellaneous taxa were sorted into separate, labelled vials containing 70% ethanol.

Taxonomic identifications were performed using stereo dissecting and high-power compound microscopes. These were generally to the family level except for dominant taxa, which were identified to species. The careful sampling procedure employed minimizes fragmentation of organisms. If breakage of soft-bodied organisms occurs, only anterior portions of fragments were counted, although all fragments were retained and weighed for biomass determinations (wet weight).

Survey Results

Survey Dates and Conditions

Grab samples were collected in each site in both the dry (25-26^th February 2004) and wet (5-6^th July 2004) seasons. In general, conditions during surveys were fine with relatively calm sampling conditions throughout.

Dry Season Survey Results

A total of 674 individual organisms were collected from the 18 grab sampling stations in the vicinity of Black Point and the Study Area during the dry season survey in 2004. The specimens belong to 6 Phyla with a total of 37 families and 50 genera identified. Table 9.3 presents information on the number of identified families, number of identified genera, number of individuals and biomass for each Phyla. A complete set of raw data is presented in Table 5 of Annex 9-A.

A breakdown of dry season 2004 benthic data by site revealed relatively large differences in terms of number of individuals, biomass and taxonomic richness (here represented by number of families of infaunal organisms) (refer to Table 5 of Annex 9-A). The Black Point site (BP2) recorded the highest number of individuals with mean of 63.3 individuals grab^-1 (± 47.8 SD) recorded, equating to 657.0 m^-2 (± 497.7 SD). In comparison, Urmston Road (UR) recorded the lowest mean numbers of individuals (15.2 (± 13.7 SD) grab^-1). The Black Point site BP1 recorded comparatively medium numbers, with 33.8 grab^-1 (± 39.3 SD) recorded. As can be seen from the standard deviation at each site, the numbers varied greatly between stations, particularly at the site with high numbers of individuals (BP2).

Site	Number of Stations Sampled	Total Number of Infaunal Individuals	Mean Number of Individuals Station^-1(±SD)	Mean Number of Individuals Station m^-2(±SD)	Total Biomass (g wet weight)	Mean Taxonomic Richness (No. Families) Station^-1 (±SD)	Mean Taxonomic Richness (No. Genera) Station^-1 (±SD)	Mean Biomass Individual^-1 (g wet weight)
UR	6	91	15.2 (± 13.7)	157.3 (± 142.8)	8.20	5.5(± 3.5)	5.8 (± 3.8)	0.09
BP1	6	203	33.8 (± 39.3)	351.0 (± 408.7)	56.9	6.7 (± 4.1)	6.8 (± 4.4)	0.28
BP2	6	380	63.3 (± 47.8)	657.0 (± 497.7)	25.2	11.0 (± 5.8)	12.0 (± 6.1)	0.07

Site	Number of Stations Sampled	Total Number of Infaunal Individuals	Mean Number of Individuals Station^-1(±SD)	Mean Number of Individuals Station m^-2(±SD)	Total Biomass (g wet weight)	Mean Taxonomic Richness (No. Families) Station^-1 (±SD)	Mean Taxonomic Richness (No. Genera) Station^-1 (±SD)	Mean Biomass Individual^-1 (g wet weight)
UR	6	2,993	498.8 (± 997.3)	5,174.6 (± 10,372.1)	174.5	7.0 (± 5.2)	11.5 (± 5.8)	0.06
BP1	6	335	55.8 (± 38.1)	580.7 (± 396.2)	161.4	10.0 (± 3.7)	6.0 (± 5.9)	0.48
BP2	6	234	39.0 (± 24.1)	405.6 (± 250.7)	376.6	8.0 (± 2.8)	7.2 (± 3.1)	1.61

The highest total biomass in the wet season 2004 was recorded at the Black Point (BP2) site, with 376.6 g wet weight (Table 9.4). The Black Point Station (BP1) and the Urmston Road (UR) site also recorded comparatively high biomass, with a total biomass of 161.4 and 174.5 g wet weight, respectively.

The Black Point (BP1) site recorded the highest diversity in the wet season 2004, with a mean number of 10.0 (± 3.7 SD) families and 6.0 (± 5.9 SD) genera grab^-1. Both the Black Point (BP2) and Urmston Road (UR) sites recorded slightly lower diversity under the wet season survey.

Overall, the majority (81.5%) of organisms recorded were Mollusca. The remainder were representatives from the Phyla Annelida (16.6%), Arthropoda (1.3%), or Echinodermata (0.6%).

The estuarine clam Potamocorbula laevis, from the family Corbulidae, was the most abundant species from the surveys owing to high numbers in samples from Urmston Road (UR). No rare or uncommon species were recorded in the wet season 2004 survey at Black Point and the Study Area.

The distribution of the mean number of individuals collected at each site during the wet season 2004 survey, according to class level, is presented in Figure 9.10

The distribution of mean biomass of infaunal organisms at each site according to class level is presented in Figure 9.11. The biomass of organisms is mainly contributed by the class Bivalvia at the Urmston Road (UR) site and Polychaeta at the Black Points sites (BP1 and BP2).

Figure 9.10 Mean numbers of individuals of infaunal organisms (Class level) from benthic samples collected at Black Point and the Study Area during the Wet Season Surveys 2004

Figure 9.11 Mean biomass grab^-1 infaunal organisms (Class level) from benthic samples collected at Black Point and the Study Area during the Wet Season Surveys 2004

9.3.11 Comparison of Black Point Benthic Fauna With Other Sites in Hong Kong

A comparison with similar sites in Hong Kong puts the ecological value of the study site in perspective with the ecology of the surrounding area and also other sites that may share the same physical attributes such as outlying islands around Hong Kong. Sources of information that were used in compiling this comparative data were the Seabed Ecology studies conducted by ERM ([37]), the study on marine benthic communities conducted by City U Professional Services Ltd ([38]) along with other EIAs and reports conducted by ERM.

The benthic biomass of comparable areas in Hong Kong varies greatly including across seasons (Figure 9.12). Compared with results of the previous surveys, biomass recorded during this survey at Black Point (BP1 and BP2) and at Urmston Road (UR) was comparatively higher than all other areas during the wet season while the biomass at Black Point (BP1 and BP2) was similar to or slightly lower than Western Lantau during the dry season. The biomass at Urmston Road (UR) was similar to areas such as Lung Kwu Chau & Sha Chau, Peng Chau and South West of Po Toi during the dry season.

Figure 9.12 Comparison of mean biomass of benthic communities around Hong Kong (Sources: +Present Study, *City U 2002, ºERM 1998 and #ERM 2000)([39])([40])([41])

The species diversity of the benthic community at Black Point and Urmston Road (UR) was recorded similar to most of the locations in Hong Kong ([42]). The number of species of the benthic organisms in Black Point and Urmston Road were recorded in the range of 26 to 31 species per 0.576 m²during wet season and 20 to 35 species per 0.576 m²during dry season, in which the mean number of species of the 120 stations surveyed by CityU ([43]) were 32.9 per 0.5 m² (wet season) and 33.7 per 0.5 m² (dry season) respectively.

9.3.12 Marine Mammals

Methodology

Land-based Visual Survey

Land-based visual surveys were conducted in the Study Area to qualitatively estimate marine mammal use of habitats in the vicinity of Black Point and nearshore areas. The results yielded from the land-based survey are qualitative in nature and were not intended for quantitative determination of marine mammal abundance. Land-based surveys were conducted to provide additional information to supplement the quantitative vessel-based surveys results. The observation site was on the natural rocky shore located at a distance of approximately 60 metres from Black Point Power Station. The 180° view of the existing environment around the observation site is shown in Figure 9.13. The location of the observation point was selected to allow the greatest visual coverage of the proposed reclamation and dredging area. In this way, the chosen site for the observation point was relatively close to the shoreline since this allowed visual coverage of the whole of the reclamation area of the proposed LNG terminal. However, any dolphin sightings located at a far distance (beyond approximately beyond 800 m) from the observation point may not be identified clearly due to the low elevation of the observer’s position on the shoreline.

During the survey period, one of the paired observers scanned the survey area continuously with Olympus 10 x 42 hand-held marine binoculars while the other used naked eye and occasional binocular scans to identify, estimate group size, and study behaviour of the any marine mammals observed in the Study Area. The role of observers rotated every 30 minutes. Each survey was 6 hours in length. Survey times shifted to record marine mammal activity during all possible daylight hours during the survey period.

Monitoring surveys were conducted for five days of each month. Surveys have been conducted monthly, commencing in February 2004, for a full calendar year up to end January 2005.

Data Collected

The locations of all marine mammals sighted within 800 m of the sighting point were recorded on a data sheet (Table 7 of Annex 9-A). The species and number of marine mammals, number of sightings and age classes were recorded, together with observed behaviours at the times of sightings. If fifteen minutes had passed with no sightings after an initial sighting was made, any observed marine mammals were then considered to be a new group or individual. As such, the "sighting" data recorded represents first count data, or the location where the marine mammals were first observed.

Distinguishing Features

Only the Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin was observed during the surveys. The Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin (Sousa chinensis) is distinguished by its wide-based, slightly falcate dorsal fin, located at mid-back. They have a long slender rostrum, with a shallow groove between the melon and the beak. Adults are white to pink in colour, and often have a variable degree of black spotting or mottling.

Age Classes

Age class of humpback dolphins was identified in accordance with the six age classes defined by Jefferson ([44]). The classification of their age class was mainly based on their body size and length, skin colouring pattern, and density of spotting. Their skin colour pattern changes dramatically throughout their lifespan, whitening increases as age increases. The spot patterns on juveniles and subadults disappear gradually as they get older, as presented in Table 9.5 ([45]).

Table 9.5 Age Classes of Sousa chinensis

Age Class	Body Length (m)	Colour Pattern	Spotted Pattern	Behaviour
Unspotted Calf (UC)	1 m to 1.3 m (approximately half length of adults); up to 6-8 months of age	Uniform black to dark grey	No spots	Swim dependently of adult, presumably the mother
Unspotted Juvenile (UJ)	Approximately 1.5 m to 2 m (two-third of the adult length)	Uniform light grey	No spots	Occur in the vicinity of adults
Mottled (MO)	Approximately similar length as SAs and UAs	Light pinkish grey	Heaving spotting	Same as SAs and UAs
Speckled (SP)	With same size as SAs and UAs	Pale pink to white	Less spotting pattern than MO	Full independence of movement and association; hard to distinguish from SA
Spotted Adult (SA)	Same as UA	Purely pink to white	Less spotting pattern than MO or SP	Same as SPs
Unspotted Adult (UA)	Up to 2.6 m	Purely pink to white	Essentially no spotting pattern but may have a few tiny spots	Same as SAs and SPs

Only three classes, adult (include MO, SP, SA and UA), juvenile (UJ) and calf (UC), can be identified during the land-based visual survey due to the distant observation.

Behaviour

Marine mammals exhibit certain behaviour and for humpback dolphins this has been previously characterised based on ongoing studies ([46]) ([47]). These are presented in Table 9.6.

Table 9.6 A Summary and Description of Specific Types of Behaviour and Activities exhibited by Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin Sousa chinensis

Type of Social Behaviours and Activities	Descriptions
Activities
Free Travelling	Directional motion, swimming fast, taking regular breaths on water surface.
Feeding/Foraging	Long jumping and high-speed chasing while hunting fish; On sea surface, swimming slowly rising intermittently before commencing the next dive. They may display certain behaviours such as feeding rushes, fish whacking, carousels, and fluking dives.
Boat chasing/ Feeding behind trawlers	Following behind trawlers as a sign of feeding, they catch fish through the net or escaping from it.
Milling/Resting	Remaining in one area without any sign of feeding or social interaction; move slowly with a drifting or gliding motion, rising slowly, or breathing while circling over the same area.
Socializing	Extensive bodily contact, inverted swimming, somersaulting, leaping and chasing with aerial activity; group activities centred on animate or inanimate objects; two to three individuals form a group.
Spot Behaviour
Breaching	A behavioural pattern also known as body slamming or a "log" jump. The animal rises out of the water at an angle between 90° to 45° to the sea surface. When exiting the water the dolphin’s flippers, its abdomen or peduncle may clear the surface.
Spyhopping	Raising the head vertically out of the water, then sinking below the water without a splash. Used to check an area for hazards.
Tail slapping	The act of slapping the tail against the sea surface.
Porpoising	Fast, shallow, arching leaps with the dolphin coming either partially or entirely out of the water. It was only observed when the dolphins were boat chasing and allows the animals to combine shallow dives for fish with a fast rate of travel. The adults will show noticeable colour changes, turning from white to a deep pink. This is probably due to vascular dilation in the blubber layer and is, possibly, a flush response to prevent overheating.
Nursing	An act of nursing a calf by a mother.

Site and Weather Conditions

Site conditions including sea state, weather and visibility were also recorded along with any changes in environmental conditions if they occurred during the duration of a survey. Surveys were only conducted under acceptable sighting and weather conditions. Acceptable sighting conditions were defined as days with sea state conditions of Beaufort 0 – 5, and visibility of at least 2 km from the observation point. No surveys were conducted during unacceptable weather conditions, such as during low visibility or during typhoons, thunderstorms or heavy rainstorm warnings reported by the Hong Kong Observatory.

Vessel Based Visual Survey

Survey Subareas and General Approach

Vessel-based surveys were undertaken to provide the scientific basis for calculating all quantitative estimates of dolphin abundance around Black Point and nearby waters for this EIA Study. Surveys were conducted in two subareas. General characteristics of the two survey subareas are listed in Table 9.7. Northwest Lantau (40 km²) is a narrow strip along the western border of Hong Kong, and it includes waters of the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park. The survey area for this project represents only the western portion of the Northwest Lantau area of the long-term study ([48]) ([49]). The very northern edge of the area would be affected by the LNG terminal, approach channel and turning basin.

Table 9.7 Summary of Characteristics of the Two Survey Subareas in Hong Kong

Survey Area	Area (km²)	Effort (km) ⁽¹⁾	Description
Deep Bay (DB)	30 ⁽²⁾	1,679	Very shallow enclosed bay with extensive mudflats and mangroves; influenced by the Pearl River (high turbidity)
Northwest Lantau (NWL)	38	530	Strong influence from Pearl River; location of Sha Chau/Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park; Urmston Road shipping channel goes through north end

Note: (1) Total survey effort conducted during this study is presented here, but the survey effort (L) presented in Table 9.17 is only that used in calculation of the abundance estimates (i.e., Beaufort 0-3 data).

(2) The total area of Deep Bay is about 97 km², but the portion that is within the Hong Kong SAR boundary is 60 km². However, only half of this area could be surveyed, due to the northern portion of the bay being too shallow for our vessel to operate. Thus, abundance was only estimated for the surveyed area of 30 km².

The Deep Bay subarea contains the Black Point site at its southern boundary. The Black Point Power Station is the ultimate destination of the gas pipeline. Deep Bay itself is actually about 97 km², but it is bisected by the Hong Kong SAR/Guangdong boundary. The portion that occurs within the Hong Kong SAR is only 60 km². However, the northern portion of Deep Bay is very shallow, with mud flats often exposed at low tides. Due to this fact, as well as the confounding presence of the Crosslinks Bridge (Deep Bay Link) and several oyster rafts, survey vessel were unable to safely navigate into the northern portion of Deep Bay. As a consequence, the vessel-based surveys were conducted only in the southern portion of Deep Bay (30 km²).

The seasons were defined as follows: Winter (December-February), Spring (March-May), Summer (June-August), and Autumn (September-November). This is the same as in the long-term study.

The survey transect lines were presented in Figure 9.14.

Survey Methods

Vessel surveys were conducted from two survey vessels, the King Dragon and the Tsun Wing (both ca. 12-15 m length, with similar configuration), weather permitting (Beaufort 0-6, no heavy rain, and visibility > 1,200 m). However, only data collected in calm conditions of Beaufort 0-3 are useable in calculating line transect estimates of density and abundance ([50]) ([51]). The vessel had an open upper deck, affording relatively unrestricted visibility. The observer team conducted searches and observations from the flying bridge area, 4-5 m eye height above the water's surface. Two observers made up the on-effort survey team. As the vessel transited the survey lines at a relatively constant speed of approximately 15 km/hr, the primary observer searched for dolphins and porpoises continuously through 7 X 50 Brunton marine binoculars. The data recorder searched with unaided eye and filled-out the data sheets. Both observers searched ahead of the vessel, between 270° and 90° (in relation to the bow, which is defined as 0°). On most surveys, there were three observers, and one auditor. Observers rotated positions after approximately 30 minutes of effort, to give them a rest after each hour of search effort, thereby minimizing fatigue. Observers had undergone a 3-day training program before the start of data collection, which included detailed classroom instruction and a day of at-sea training. Only two species of small cetaceans regularly occur in Hong Kong, the humpback dolphin and finless porpoise ([52]) ([53]). These two species are radically different in appearance and behavior, and so all sightings (even those seen briefly or from a distance) could be identified to species.

Effort data collected during on-effort survey periods included time and position for the start and end of search effort, vessel speed, sea state (Beaufort scale), visibility, and distance traveled in each series (a continuous period of search effort). When dolphins or porpoises were sighted, the data recorder filled out a sighting sheet, and generally the team was taken off-effort and the vessel diverted from its course to approach the dolphin group for group size estimation, assessment of group composition, behavioral observations, and collection of identification photos. The sighting sheet included information on initial sighting angle and distance, position of initial sighting, sea state, group size and composition, and behavior, such as response to the survey vessel and associations with fishing vessels (Tables 9 and 10 of Annex 9-A). Position, distance traveled, and vessel speed were obtained from a hand-held Global Positioning System (a Garmin Gecko GPS unit).

Observers were trained and calibrated in distance estimation, by asking them to make distance estimates to various objects (e.g., other boats, specific points on shore, floating debris, etc.). Simultaneously, a distance reading was taken with a laser rangefinder (Leica 800 or Bushnell Yardage Pro 800 model). Plots of measured vs. estimated distance were shown to observers occasionally, so they could see if they needed to refine their distance estimates. This procedure resulted in increased accuracy of observer distance estimates, and previous efforts have shown that significant bias is not caused by the remaining inaccuracy in distance estimation ([54]) ([55]) ([56]).

When dolphins were sighted, the observers typically went off-effort and the vessel approached the dolphin group for accurate estimation of group size/composition and for photo-identification. Photographs were taken with Canon 35-mm SLR autofocus cameras (EOS 20D digital model). Cameras were equipped with digital data recorders and date and time were associated with each frame, allowing it to be correlated with a particular sighting. The primary lens used was a Canon L series 300 mm / f4.0 image stabilizer telephoto. Usually, the lens was used with a 1.4 X teleconverter, thereby increasing its effective focal length. Images were shot at the highest available resolution (8.2 megapixels) and stored on Compact Flash cards (mostly 1.0 GB).

For photo-identification, generally, dolphin groups were approached slowly from the side and behind ([57]). Maneuvering the boat to within 15-40 m, directly alongside a moving group of dolphins resulted in the best shots. Every attempt was made to photograph each dolphin in the group, even those that appeared to have no unique markings. If possible, both sides of the dolphins were photographed, since the coloration markings are not completely symmetrical.

Data Analysis Methods

Line Transect Analysis

One day’s survey effort was used as the sample for analyses. For estimation of density and abundance, only surveys with at least 2.0 km of useable effort were included. Estimates were calculated from sighting and effort data collected during conditions of Beaufort 0-3 ([58]) ([59]) ([60]), using line transect methods([61]). The estimates were made using the computer program DISTANCE Version 2.2 (Laake et al. 1994) ([62]). The following formulae were used to estimate density, abundance, and their associated coefficient of variation:

where D = density (of individuals),

n = number of on-effort sightings,

f(0) = trackline probability density at zero distance,

E(s) = unbiased estimate of average group size,

L = length of transect lines surveyed on effort,

g(0) = trackline detection probability,

N = abundance,

A = size of the survey area,

CV = coefficient of variation, and

var = variance.

For the Northwest Lantau area, because the current study did not survey the entire survey area used in the long-term study, individual encounter rates for each season were calculated as a basis for comparison. This is largely equivalent to calculating densities, but it does not explicitly take into account variations in sightability of the dolphins. However, despite this, it provides a useful basis for comparison with future surveys. The encounter rates were calculated by dividing the number of individual dolphins observed on a particular day by the amount of effort conducted on that day. Seasonal averages and their standard deviations were then computed. Only data collected during Beaufort 0-3 conditions were used for this.

Pooling and Stratification Strategies

A strategy of selective pooling and stratification was used, in order to minimize bias and maximize precision in making the estimates of density and abundance ([63]). Data from the long-term database were pooled with data from the present study to increase sample sizes and improve the robustness of the analyses. It was applied directly to the Deep Bay areas. The Northwest Lantau area of the current study was defined specifically for this project, and this subarea was not used in the long-term study. Different strategies were used for various line transect components, and these are described below:

Sighting Rate [n/L] - Sighting rate varies strongly with season and area ([64]) ([65]), and thus a fully-stratified analysis (full stratification by both season and survey area) was used. Clearly, sighting rate is one of the major parameters affecting density and abundance estimates, and although sample sizes were small for some strata (n < 5), pooling of data was not deemed justified.

Trackline Probability Density [f(0)] - Because biases associated with small sample sizes can strongly affect the accuracy of density and abundance estimates, Buckland et al.'s ([66]) guidelines regarding minimal sample sizes for estimation of the trackline probability density were followed. They suggested a minimum sample size of 60 sightings for modeling of this parameter. Several mathematical models were fitted to the data (hazard-rate, half-normal, and uniform), and the model with the lowest value of the Akaike’s Information Criterion was automatically chosen by DISTANCE for estimation of f(0). Because most seasons within a phase did not have adequate numbers of sightings, all the data (from all four seasons and the three main survey subareas) were pooled to calculate a single humpback dolphin trackline probability density, and then used this in all the estimates of density and abundance. This strategy ensured sample sizes of > 100 for humpback dolphins.

Average Group Size [E(s)] - Because of indications that group size varies by geographic region and season ([67]) ([68]), a fully-stratified analysis was used. DISTANCE computed both the arithmetic mean and a size-bias corrected mean; the lesser of these two values was used in the calculations (in order to avoid size-bias generally caused by missing smaller groups at large perpendicular distances).

Trackline Detection Probability [g(0)] - For Hong Kong humpback dolphins, Jefferson ([69]) reported group dive time data and collected 71.8 hours of independent observer data, and from this estimated that the detection probability is unity for that study. The present study was an extension of Jefferson's study ([70]), with all survey techniques held constant. Therefore the previously estimated value of g(0) = 1.0 was used for all density and abundance calculations.

Coefficient of Variation [CV] – The variance component for the appropriate estimate of each component of the line transect equation was used in calculating the overall CV of the estimated density and abundance (see formula above). This resulted in more precise estimates for some areas and seasons than would have been the case with a fully-stratified analysis. However, this came at the expense of some slight potential for increase in bias.

Photo-identification and Age Class Composition

Photographs of dolphins taken during surveys were first examined and sorted into those that contained a potentially identifiable individual. Then, those photos were again examined in detail and any identifiable individuals were compared to the photo-ID catalog accumulated over the last 10+ years of dolphin research in Hong Kong and the Pearl River Estuary. Any new individuals were given a new identification number and their data were added to the catalog. Most of the analyses used data from the long-term database.

Observers attempted to classify dolphins observed into the six age classes identified in the long-term study on humpback dolphins in Hong Kong (see Table 9.5). However, many animals were not seen at close enough range to place them into an age class, and therefore only data on groups from which the age class composition of the entire group was determined were analyzed.

Grid Analysis of Habitat Use

For the quantitative grid analysis of habitat use of humpback dolphins and finless porpoises, positions of on-effort sightings were plotted onto 1 km² grids within the two survey subareas. Sighting densities (number of on-effort sightings per km²) were calculated for each grid. Sighting density grids were then further normalized with the amount of survey effort conducted within each grid. The survey effort spent in each grid for each survey day was examined in detail (i.e., when the survey boat traversed through a specific grid once, one unit of survey effort was counted for that grid), and then the amount of survey effort per grid was calculated for all sighting density grids. After normalizing the original sighting density grids by survey effort, a new sighting density data were generated. The new density unit is termed “SPSE”, representing the number of on-effort sightings per unit of survey effort. This sighting density information was further elaborated to look at actual dolphin densities (exact number of dolphins from on-effort sightings per km²). The new unit for this approach was termed “DPSE”, which is the number of individual dolphins per unit of survey effort. Plotting the DPSE values of surveyed grid squares on maps allows areas where the most dense sightings of dolphins occur to be identified.

Ranging Pattern Analysis

Location data were obtained from the long-term sighting database and photoidentification catalog, and only those individuals sighted ten times or more were included for analysis of individual home ranges ([71]). A desktop GIS (ArcView© 3.1) with the Animal Movement Extension was used to examine individual ranging patterns. Using the Animal Movement Extension for ArcView©, a polygon joining the outermost sighting positions was formed, indicating the area used by an individual dolphin during the long-term study period. Range dimensions of the dolphin were then calculated by GIS with land masses excluded.

Behavioural Data Analysis

When dolphins were sighted during vessel surveys, their behaviors were recorded through direct observations and by digital video system. Different activities were categorized (i.e., feeding, milling/resting, traveling, socializing) and recorded on the sighting datasheets, and the dolphin behaviors were taped by a digital video recorder. These data were input into a separate database with sighting information, which was then used to determine the distribution of behaviors with desktop GIS.

Survey Results

Landbased Visual Survey

Seasonal Records

During February 2004 to January 2005, there were a total of 60 marine mammal surveys undertaken (a total of 360 hours). Over this period, only one of the two resident marine mammals in Hong Kong, the Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin Sousa chinensis, was observed and recorded at Black Point. There were 74 sighting records of humpback dolphins (a total of 141 individuals), and no sighting records of finless porpoise reported during the surveys. Seasonal records of marine mammal sightings are presented in Table 8 of Annex 9-A. Humpback dolphins were recorded in all four seasons. The locations of sightings within the 0.8km radius survey area were plotted in relation to season, and are presented in Figure 9.15 ([72]).

Corrected for effort sightings and number of individuals of marine mammals are presented in Figure 9.16.

Figure 9.16 Number of Sightings and Individuals of Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphin Sousa chinensis at Black Point (Data collected from February to January 2005)

Humpback dolphins exhibited a seasonal pattern at Black Point. The majority of dolphins (seasonal average) were recorded in winter (with 31 sightings and 64 individuals) and autumn (with 23 sightings and 44 individuals) (Figure 9.16). Only a few sightings of Sousa chinensis were recorded during summer and spring months ([73]) .

Marine Mammal Age Class

The majority of humpback dolphins recorded during the land-based surveys were identified as Adults (SA/ UA/ SP/ MO) (109 individuals). Juveniles (UJ) (25 individuals) and Calves (UC) (7 individuals) were also recorded(Table 8 of Annex 9-A).

Vessel Based Visual Survey

Data Collected

In the 11 months (July 2005 to May 2006) of this study, 70 days of survey have been conducted. During this time, a total of 1,561 km of transect lines were surveyed. Of this, 1,291 km (83% of the total) were done during relatively calm sea conditions of Beaufort 0-3, and therefore were useable in the estimation of density and abundance. Of the effort conducted in Beaufort 0-3 conditions, 385 km was in Northwest Lantau, and 906 km was in Deep Bay.

There were a total of 87 sightings of Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphins during the LNG surveys. Most sightings took place in Northwest Lantau (n = 62), and fewer in Deep Bay (n = 25).

Distribution

It is important to recognize that, due to differential survey effort in various survey subareas, it is not possible to compare densities of dolphins by examining maps of distribution. The distribution maps are only useful for determining where animals do and do not occur, and for comparing use of the area on a small scale (within a survey subarea). Comparisons of density or habitat use on a larger scale should make use of numerical density estimates or the results of the grid analyses (discuss below).

Dolphins were observed throughout both of the surveyed areas, and sightings occurred in nearly all areas except directly south of the Sha Chau/ Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park and at the very northern end of the Deep Bay survey area (Figure 9.17). To date, there appears to be no strong seasonal differences in distribution of dolphins between the different survey subareas, except there are fewer dolphins around in the spring months (Figures 9.18 & 9.19).

The distribution of young dolphins (Unspotted Calves and Unspotted Juveniles) (Figures 9.20 & 9.21) indicated that they were concentrated in two areas: (1) southern Deep Bay, and (2) around Lung Kwu Chau. If the analysis focuses at Unspotted Calves, then Deep Bay drops-out, and only the latter area looks to be important. One further point of interest is the strong tendency for any Unspotted Calves and Unspotted Juveniles in the Northwest Lantau area to be found close to (within a few hundred meters of) Lung Kwu Chau – consistent with previous indications that the waters around Lung Kwu Chau may be a “nursery area.”

The distribution of dolphins engaged in feeding and socializing behaviours are shown in Figures 9.22 & 9.23, respectively. These will be discussed in more detail under the Behaviour section below.

Abundance and Density

Estimates of density and abundance, and their associated parameters are presented for Deep Bay in Table 9.8. For humpback dolphins, Deep Bay had low densities (0.08 - 0.23 dolphins km^-2) and low estimates of abundance (<10 dolphins in all seasons). It is clear that dolphins use the mouth of Deep Bay at a low level throughout the year. Northwest Lantau had higher levels of dolphin density (0.57-0.94) and abundance (49-82) than Deep Bay.

Table 9.8 Estimates of Abundance and Associated Parameters for Humpback Dolphins in Deep Bay Survey Subareas (NWL is discussed in the text).

Note: (1) L=total length of transect surveyed; n=number of on-effort sightings; f(0)=trackline probability density; E(s)=unbiased mean group size; D=individual density; N=individual abundance; and CV=coefficient of variation.

(2) Only data collected in Beau 0-3 conditions are included here.

(3) As explained previously, the individual density value (D) represents an estimate of the number of individual dolphins in a 1 km² grid square area.

For the Northwest Lantau area, the seasonal estimates of average individual encounter rate are also shown in Table 9.9. Encounter rates increased from summer to autumn and then increased again from autumn to winter, finally decreasing dramatically in spring months ([74]).

Table 9.9 Individual Encounter Rate Information for Dolphins in Northwest Lantau (Analysis Uses only Data Collected during Beaufort 0-3 Conditions)

Season	No. Surveys	Individuals	Encounter Rate	Std. Dev.
Summer	7	36	24.9	31.7
Autumn	6	53	46.5	20.6
Winter	3	65	166.3	52.6
Spring	6	18	17.1	20.9

Grid Analysis of Habitat Use (July 2005 – 2006)

Grid analysis of habitat use provides the best way to compare dolphin use of specific areas, especially on a small scale. Because the data are standardized for differential survey effort, it is possible to compare density of two grids, even if they are in different survey subareas.

Using the line-transect survey data from the 11 months of the study, combined with AFCD data collected during the same period, survey effort data and dolphin sighting data were retrieved to calculate DPSE values for 158 grids among the four study subareas. The map of dolphin density (DPSE) with corrected survey effort per km²of the two areas is shown in Figure 9.24.

The western end of Northwest Lantau indicated high dolphin usage, with average DPSE values and 0.443 respectively. However, Deep Bay was only used to a small extent (Table 9.10).

Table 9.10 Average DPSE for Different Survey Subareas during the Study

	# grids	Ave. DPSE	# grids w/ DPSE>1
Deep Bay	26	0.06 ± 0.12	0
Northwest Lantau	28	0.44 ± 0.54	2

Habitat use of humpback dolphins was very uneven among the 1 km²grids in the two areas. In Deep Bay, dolphin usage was higher toward the south western end of the survey area, and the highest densities occurred near the Black Point Power Station (Grids H5, I5 & J5). In Northwest Lantau, dolphin usage was higher around Lung Kwu Chau, especially at the eastern sides of the island. Dolphin densities were also higher around the small island of Pak Chau (Grid G13). On the contrary, the southern portion of Northwest Lantau was less heavily used by dolphins, especially the waters just west and northwest of the airport platform.

Grid Analysis of Habitat Use (Seasonal)

To examine the seasonal habitat use patterns of humpback dolphins quantitatively in recent years, survey effort and dolphin sighting data from the long-term monitoring database and the additional LNG survey data were stratified by season to calculate DPSE values (total number of dolphin/porpoises per unit of survey effort) within 1 km² grids in the survey subareas. For humpback dolphins, line-transect data collected during 2003-06 was used, and DPSE values for grid squares in Deep Bay, Northwest Lantau and Northeast Lantau were examined (see Figure 9.25).

Seasonal habitat use patterns were less obvious in Northwest Lantau, and dolphins appeared to use this area as their important habitats with very high densities throughout the four seasons. Several areas were heavily used by dolphins in all four seasons, including the northern waters of Lung Kwu Chau (G9-10 & H9-10).

In Northeast Lantau, dolphin densities were moderately high in summer, autumn and winter months, but were generally low in spring months. Off Black Point (I7), dolphin density was highest in autumn. Similarly, the waters around the Brothers Islands were used consistently throughout the year, with higher dolphin densities in summer and autumn months.

In Deep Bay, dolphin usage was very low in spring and summer months, but was more intensified in autumn and winter months. In these two seasons, dolphins appeared to have preference to use the waters near the mouth of Deep Bay (H5, I5 & J55).

Individual Movements and Patterns of Use

During the study period, a number of individual dolphins in both of the study subareas were successfully identified. The individuals identified so far are listed in Table 9.11, along with an assessment of the importance of the subarea as part of the dolphin’s home range. The subarea was considered an important part of the dolphin’s range if >25% of the sightings of that individual occurred in the area.

Table 9.11 Individual Humpback Dolphins Observed during the LNG Study (July 2005 – May 2006)

Dolphin’s ID	Total sightings ⁽¹⁾	EIA Study sightings ⁽²⁾	DB ^{(3) (4)}	West NWL ^{(3) (4)}	HR Study?
CH03	18	1		4 (22%)	Yes
CH37	7	1		1 (14%)
DB02	2	2	2 (100%)
DB03	1	1	1 (100%)
EL01	43	1		6 (14%)	Yes
EL03	5	1		1 (20%)
EL07	57	1		2 (4%)	Yes
NL11	45	3	1 (2%)	16 (36%)	Yes
NL24	95	2		18 (19%)	Yes
NL37	35	1		5 (14%)	Yes
NL46	15	1		8 (53%)	Yes
NL59	18	1		3 (17%)	Yes
NL60	16	1		8 (50%)	Yes
NL76	10	1		6 (60%)	Yes
NL98	47	1		6 (13%)	Yes
NL123	43	5		11 (26%)	Yes
NL128	10	1		1 (10%)	Yes
NL136	8	1		5 (63%)
NL139	42	1		5 (12%)	Yes
NL141	31	1		6 (19%)	Yes
NL150	7	1	1 (14%)	6 (86%)
NL169	10	3	3 (30%)	6 (60%)	Yes
NL170	4	1		2 (50%)
NL181	14	5	4 (29%)	9 (64%)	Yes
NL191	9	1		2 (22%)
NL202	6	1		4 (67%)
SL07	13	2			Yes
WL11	16	2		6 (38%)	Yes
WL25	22	2		1 (5%)	Yes
WL30	2	1	1 (50%)

Note: (1) Total sightings in the long-term database.

(2) Sightings in ERM’s surveys (July 2005 – May 2006) for this EIA Study.

(3) Number of sightings in each of the LNG survey areas (along with the proportion of the total in parentheses).

(4) Areas with >25% of the total sightings are in bold.

Twenty-six dolphins were observed in Northwest Lantau during the LNG surveys, and there appear to be at least 12 different dolphins that used Northwest Lantau as part of their range during the study period.

The Deep Bay subarea contains the Black Point site at its southern boundary. Only seven dolphins in Deep Bay were identified during the LNG study. However, of these, five (DB02, DB03, WL26, NL169 and NL181) appeared to use Deep Bay as a portion of their home range during the study period (although the sample sizes were small). In addition, two other dolphins were identified in Deep Bay in previous surveys, and both of them used it as a part of their home range.

The ranging patterns of 18 individual dolphins identified during the 11-month surveys are shown in Figures 9.28 & 9.29. Of these individuals, 18 were identified in Northwest Lantau, and three in Deep Bay.

Currently, among the 398 individuals identified in Hong Kong and Chinese waters of the Pearl River Estuary, 59 individuals (15%) were re-sighted 10 or more times, which were used in the ranging pattern analysis. Among them, 51 individuals (86%) had home ranges covering the western end of Northwest Lantau. On the contrary, only one (NL11) had range covering Deep Bay. The large proportion of identified individuals sighted in Northwest Lantau strongly suggested the importance of this habitat to dolphins residing in the Pearl River Estuary.

Group Size and Composition

Humpback dolphin average group size was smaller for the Deep Bay than for the Northwest Lantau subarea (Table 9.12).

Table 9.12 Average Group Size for Dolphins and Porpoises among the Different Survey Subareas

Species	Subarea	N	Mean	±Sd	Range
Humpback dolphin	Deep Bay	55	3.0	2.37	1 to 12
	Northwest Lantau	62	3.7	2.89	1 to 17

Due to the need to observe dolphin groups for extended periods at close range (which somewhat conflicted with the goal of completing all the transect lines), the surveys were only able to accurately record complete age class composition for a portion of the groups observed in each area (Table 9.13). In this subsample, no Unspotted Calves were found in Northwest Lantau. However, as discussed previously, Unspotted Calves are seen in Northwest Lantau waters with sightings clustered within a few hundred meters of Lung Kwu Chau.

Table 9.13 Age Class Composition of Groups of Dolphins among the Two Survey Subareas (Percentage of Total Given in Parentheses). Note that only groups in which the composition of the entire group was determined are presented

Area	No. of Groups	UC	UJ	SJ	SS	SA	UA
Deep Bay	19	4 (7%)	8 (14%)	13 (24%)	14 (25%)	13 (23%)	4 (7%)
Northwest Lantau	16	0 (0%)	5 (11%)	6 (13%)	12 (26%)	18 (39%)	5 (11%)

Besides that mentioned above, there were no dramatic differences in group composition among the different subareas, but there were some differences in the age classes most represented (i.e., those with greater than 20% of the total).

Behaviour

Dolphin sightings associated with different types of activities were examined on GIS to determine important areas for certain types of dolphin activity. In Northwest Lantau, most of the feeding activities occurred around Lung Kwu Chau and Sha Chau (Figures 9.22 & 9.23). Feeding activities were rarely observed in Deep Bay.

Dolphins were occasionally observed socializing during the study period, and there was no particular area where sightings associated with socializing activities were frequently observed. These socializing sightings were sparsely made around Lung Kwu Chau and within Deep Bay (Figures 9.22 & 9.23).

9.4 Evaluation of Ecological Importance of the Study Area

The existing conditions of the marine ecological habitats and resources in the waters of the proposed LNG terminal at Black Point have been assessed. These baseline conditions have been based on available literature and, where considered necessary, detailed field surveys to update and supplement the data. Based on this information, the ecological importance of each habitat has been determined according to the EIAO-TM Annex 8 criteria, as follows:

· Naturalness

· Size

· Diversity

· Rarity

· Re-creatability

· Fragmentation

· Ecological Linkage

· Potential Value

· Nursery Ground

· Age

· Abundance

9.4.1 Intertidal Habitats

The criteria listed below have been applied to the information gathered or reviewed on the marine ecology of the intertidal habitats at Black Point in order to determine the ecological value. The application of these criteria has led the artificial shoreline and natural rocky shore to be classified as low ecological importance (Table 9.13).

Table 9.14 Ecological Importance of Intertidal Habitats at Black Point

Criteria	Rocky Shore	Artificial Shorelines
Naturalness	The natural rocky shoreline is interspersed with areas of artificial seawall and are largely undisturbed prior to the development of the thermal power station (BPPS) commenced in 1993.	Artificial, constructed habitat.
Size	Large. Within the Study Area, rocky shore habitat are approximately 600 m in total length and are predominant habitat on Black Point headland.	Large. The total length of the artificial shore in the Study Area at Black Point is approximately 120 m and are predominant habitat to the north of the power station.
Diversity	Low. The intertidal communities are composed of typical biota of semi-exposed rocky shores in Hong Kong, but with low diversity.	Records indicate that sloping artificial shores support similar assemblages to natural intertidal shores.
Rarity	No species recorded are considered rare or of recognised conservation interest.	No species recorded are considered rare or of recognised conservation interest.
Re-creatability	The habitat can be re-created.	n/a.
Fragmentation	Low. The surrounding environment contains similar intertidal habitats.	Low. The surrounding coastlines are composed of a mixture of natural and artificial intertidal shores.
Ecological Linkage	The habitat is not functionally linked to any high value habitat in a significant way.	The habitat is not functionally linked to any high value habitat in a significant way.
Potential Value	Unlikely that the site can develop conservation interest.	Unlikely to become an area of conservation value
Nursery Area	No significant records identified during the literature review or field surveys.	No significant records identified during the literature review or surveys.
Age	n/a for these assemblages as the life cycle of the fauna and flora is very short.	The artificial seawall has been in place since the site access of Black Point Power Station was obtained in March 1993.
Abundance	Typical of other semi exposed shores in Hong Kong.	Lower abundance than natural rocky shore habitat.
SUMMARY	The fauna of the intertidal region appears to be typical of semi exposed shores in Hong Kong, but with low diversity. The sites appear to have suffered some human disturbance. Ecological Importance - Low.	The fauna of the intertidal region of the artificial shores is reported to support a similar diversity and abundance of intertidal organisms as natural shores. Ecological Importance - Low.

Note: n/a: Not Applicable

9.4.2 Subtidal Habitats

The criteria listed above have been applied to the information gathered or reviewed on the marine ecology of the subtidal soft bottom benthic habitat at Black Point in order to determine the ecological importance. The application of these criteria has led the habitat to be classified as of low - moderate ecological importance (Table 9.15).

Table 9.15 Ecological Importance of the Subtidal Soft Benthos Assemblages at Black Point and the Study Area

Criteria	Subtidal Soft Benthos at Black Point (BP1, BP2 and UR)
Naturalness	Habitat disturbed to some extent by fisheries vessel trawling activities and is influenced by discharges from the Pearl River and Shenzhen River.
Size	Large in extent.
Diversity	The assemblages are of similar diversity to other areas in the western waters.
Rarity	No organisms were found that are considered as rare or of conservation interest.
Re-creatability	Benthic organisms may recolonise disturbed seabed area.
Fragmentation	The habitat is not fragmented.
Ecological Linkage	The habitat is not functionally linked to any high value habitat in a significant way.
Potential Value	Unlikely that the site can develop conservation interest.
Nursery Area	No significant record identified in the review or surveys.
Age	The fauna appear to be typical of those present in Hong Kong's soft benthos. The sediments in the habitat are constantly accreting and eroding and the fauna present there are typically short lived.
Abundance	In comparison to parts of the southern and western waters the assemblages are of moderate abundance.
SUMMARY	The sediments support moderate diversity and abundance of benthic organisms that are typical of Hong Kong's benthos. Ecological Importance – Low – Moderate.

Note: n/a: Not Applicable

9.4.3 Marine Waters off Black Point

The same assessment criteria have been applied to the marine waters within the Study Area with regard to the usage of the area by marine mammals. This habitat has been classified as of medium importance on the use of the area by Indo-Pacific Humpback Dolphins Sousa chinensis (Table 9.16).

Table 9.16 Ecological Importance of the Marine Waters off Black Point

Criteria	Marine Waters off Black Point and the Study Area
Naturalness	Close proximity to marine traffic lanes in Hong Kong.
Rarity	Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis has been recorded in coastal waters near Lan Kok Tsui and off Black Point Power Station.
Re-creatability	n/a
Ecological Linkage	Preferred marine mammal habitat occurs to the south (north-western and west Lantau) for humpback dolphin. Based on photo-identification studies, identified individual dolphins sighted near Black Point have extensive home ranges which span large areas of North Lantau waters and beyond (see Figures 9.28 and 9.29). In this context, Black Point waters form only a small portion of individual dolphin’s home range.
Potential Value	Limited value due to fishing activities and marine traffic of the area.
Nursery Area	Not key nursery area in the review of baseline conditions or field surveys.
Abundance	Seasonal changes in the distribution patterns of dolphins were observed near the areas of the proposed LNG terminal, with comparatively higher densities in autumn and winter months. Analysis of dolphin density data indicates these animals occur in moderate densities in waters in proximity to the proposed reclamation.
SUMMARY	Sightings of humpback dolphin have been made in these waters in all seasons in spite of significant vessel traffic, and dolphin density (DPSE) levels in waters in proximity to the proposed reclamation are considered to be moderate compared to preferred habitat elsewhere in Northwest Lantau and West Lantau. Ecological Importance – Medium for humpback dolphin at Black Point.

9.4.4 Species of Conservation Interest

In accordance with EIAO-TM Annex 8 criteria, an evaluation of species of conservation value recorded from the Study Area is presented in Table 9.17.

Table 9.17 Species of Conservation Interest within the Study Area

Common Name	Scientific Name	Protection Status	Distribution, Rarity and other Notes
Chinese White Dolphin (also known as the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin)	Sousa chinensis	Wild Animals Protection Ordinance Class I Protected Species in the PRC. CITES Appendix 1	Range across Pearl River estuary and across Hong Kong western and Southern Waters from Deep Bay to Lamma.

9.5 Summary

The findings from the literature review and field surveys on marine ecological conditions are detailed above and are summarized as follows.

The key finding of the literature review was the recorded presence in the waters in outer Deep Bay of the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin Sousa chinensis. The review highlighted that the waters around Black Point reported sightings occurred throughout the year.

No recent studies of the subtidal hard bottom habitats in vicinity to the proposed Black Point LNG terminal have been conducted.

Due to the limited literature available for some components of the marine environment, field surveys were necessary to fill the information gaps identified for the baseline conditions of the habitats. The baseline surveys commenced in February 2004 and have included both the dry and wet seasons. Detailed and comprehensive seasonal surveys were conducted examining the major habitats and species surrounding Black Point and the Study Area. The details of the baseline surveys are summarized in Table 9.18.

Table 9.18 Marine Ecology Baseline Surveys

Survey Type	Methodology	Date
Intertidal Assemblages	Quantitative (belt transects at 4 locations) survey, three 100 m belt transects (at high, mid and low intertidal zones) for each location, covered both wet and dry seasons.	22 & 23 March and 15 & 30 July 2004
Subtidal Benthic Assemblages	Quantitative grab sampling survey; covered both wet and dry seasons. Six stations sampled in each of 3 locations (BP1, BP2 and UR).	25 & 26 February and 5 & 6 July 2004.
Marine Mammal	Land-based visual survey during daytime, 5 days per month and 6 hours per day, covered four seasons (12 months).	16, 17, 18, 19 & 26 February, 19, 22, 23, 25 & 26 March, 6, 7, 13, 14 & 15 April, 11, 13, 17, 18 & 20 May, 11, 15, 24, 25 & 29 June 2004, 9, 14, 15, 20 & 25 July 2004, 25, 26, 27, 30 & 31 August, 15, 16, 17, 20 & 21 September 2004, 27, 28, 29, 30 & 31 October 2004, 24, 25, 27, 29 & 30 November 2004, 7, 8, 9, 13 & 14 December 2004, 21, 24, 25, 26 & 27 January 2005.
	Quantitative vessel based survey using line transect methods spanning Hong Kong western waters (Deep Bay, Southwest Lantau, Northwest Lantau and West Lantau) 3 days, 2 times per month.	18, 19, 20,,21, 22, 25, 26, 27 July 2005, 3, 4, 5,15, 23, 24, 25 & 26 August 2005, 5, 6, 7,15, 16 & 20 September 2005, 5, 6, 7, 17, 18 & 19 October 2005, 22, 24, 25, 28, 29 & 30 November 2005, 1, 2, 6,7,8 & 22 December 2005, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20 & 24 January 2006, 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 & 9 February 2006, 17, 23, 28, 29, 31 March 2006, 3, 6, 18, 25, 26, 27 April 2006, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 May 2006.

The ecological importance of the habitats was determined through reference to the following:

Literature review;

Findings of the field surveys;

Comparison with other areas in Hong Kong; and,

Annexes 8 and 16 of the EIAO TM.

The information on marine ecological resources presented in this report has not identified any habitats of high ecological value. Humpback dolphins have been sighted in the area. Although the waters do not support high number of sightings in comparison to other areas in Hong Kong, such as West and Northwest Lantau, marine waters around Black Point were regarded as of medium importance to the humpback dolphins. The majority of other marine habitats were considered to be of low ecological importance.

([1]) Planning Environment and Lands Bureaux 1996. Environmental Policy Commitments.

([2]) ERL Asia Ltd. 1992. Environmental Impact Assessment of the Proposed 6000MW Thermal Power Station at Black Point: Initial Assessment Report Volume 1 The Surrounding Environment, prepared for China Light and Power Company Limited.

([3]) ERL Asia Ltd. 1992. op. cit.

([4]) ERM - HK Ltd. 2000. Sludge Treatment and Disposal Strategy: Site Specific Feasibility Study of Sludge Management Strategy (SMS) and Sludge Disposal Plan (SDS). Final Report for the Environmental Protection Department.

([5]) AFCD. 2004. Ecological Status and Revised Species Records of Hong Kong’s Scleractinian Corals, undertaken by Marine Conservation Division.

([6]) ERM – HK Ltd. 1995. Environmental Impact Assessment of the Proposed Aviation Fuel Receiving Facility at Sha Chau, prepared for the Provisional Airport Authority.

([7]) ERM - HK Ltd. 2004. Environmental Monitoring and Audit Manual of the Permanent Aviation Fuel Facility for Hong Kong International Airport, prepared for Hong Kong Airport Authority.

([8]) City U Professional Services Ltd. 2002. Consultancy Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong: Final Report, prepared for Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department.

([9]) City U Professional Services Ltd. 2002. Consultancy Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong: Final Report, prepared for Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department.

([10]) ERM - HK Ltd. 2000. Sludge Treatment and Disposal Strategy: Site Specific Feasibility Study of Sludge Management Strategy (SMS) and Sludge Disposal Plan (SDS). Final Report for the Environmental Protection Department.

([12]) Parsons C, Mary L. Felly and Lindsay J. Porter. 1995. An Annotated Checklist of Cetaceans recorded from Hong Kong’s Terrestrial Waters. The Swire Institute of Marine Science, The University of Hong Kong, Cape d’ Aguilar, Shek O, Hong Kong.

([13]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Conservation Biology of the Finless Porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides) in Hong Kong waters: Final Report. Ocean Park Conservation Foundation Ocean Park Aberdeen, Hong Kong.

([14]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Population Biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([15]) Jefferson T.A., S.K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey and N. Tregenza.2002. Distribution and Abundance of Finless Porpoise in Hong Kong and Adjacent Waters of China. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 2002 Supplement No. 10: 43-55.

([16]) Jefferson T.A. and S.K. Hung. 2004. A review of the status of the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin in Chinese waters. Aquatic Mammals (Special Issue) 30: 149-158.

([17]) AFCD. 2004. Monitoring of Chinese White Dolphins (Sousa chinensis) in Hong Kong waters – Data collection, Final Report (1 April 2003 to 31 March 2004), prepared by Hong Kong Cetacean Research Project

([19]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Population Biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([20]) Jefferson T.A. and S.K. Hung. 2004. A review of the status of the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin in Chinese waters. Aquatic Mammals (Special Issue) 30: 149-158.

([21]) Barros, N.B., T.A. Jefferson, and E.C.M. Parsons. 2004. Feeding habits of Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins (Sousa chinensis) stranded in Hong Kong. Aquatic Mammals (Special Issue) 30: 179-188.

([22]) Jefferson T.A. and S.K. Hung. 2004. A review of the status of the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin in Chinese waters. Aquatic Mammals (Special Issue) 30: 149-158.

([29]) AFCD. 2004. Monitoring of Chinese White Dolphins (Sousa chinensis) in Hong Kong waters – Data Collection, Final Report (1 April 2003 to 31 March 2004), prepared by Hong Kong Cetacean Research Project.

([33]) ERM – HK Ltd. 2000. Environmental Impact Assessment of the Construction of an International Theme Park in Penny’s Bay of North Lantau and its Essential Associated Infrastructures, prepared for Civil Engineering Department.

([34]) ERM – HK Ltd. 2000. Environmental Impact Assessment of the Construction of an International Theme Park in Penny’s Bay of North Lantau and its Essential Associated Infrastructures, prepared for Civil Engineering Department.

([35]) ERM – HK Ltd. 1998. Environmental Impact Assessment of a 1800 MW Gas-Fired Power Station at Lamma Extension: Marine Ecological Assessment – Final Benthic Ecology Survey Report, prepared for the Hong Kong Electric Co Ltd.

([36]) Babtie BMT (Hong Kong) Ltd. 1999. Green Island Development EWQIA & MTIA Studies. Final Environmental and Water Quality Impact Assessment Report. For the Territory Development Department.

([37]) ERM – HK Ltd. 1998. Environmental Impact Assessment of a 1800 MW Gas-Fired Power Station at Lamma Extension: Marine Ecological Assessment – Final Benthic Ecology Survey Report, prepared for the Hong Kong Electric Co Ltd.

([38]) City U Professional Services Ltd. 2002. Consultancy Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong: Final Report, prepared for Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department.

([39]) City U Professional Services Ltd. 2002. Consultancy Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong: Final Report, prepared for Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department.

([40]) ERM – HK Ltd. 1998. Environmental Impact Assessment of a 1800 MW Gas-Fired Power Station at Lamma Extension: Marine Ecological Assessment – Final Benthic Ecology Survey Report, prepared for the Hong Kong Electric Co Ltd.

([41]) ERM – HK Ltd. 2000. Environmental Impact Assessment of the Construction of an International Theme Park in Penny’s Bay of North Lantau and its Essential Associated Infrastructures, prepared for Civil Engineering Department.

([42]) City U Professional Services Ltd. 2002. ibid.

([43]) City U Professional Services Ltd. 2002. ibid.

([44]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([45]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([46]) Parsons E.C.M. 1998. The Behaviour of Hong Kong’s Resident Cetaceans: the Indo-Pacific Hump-Backed Dolphin and the Finless Porpoise. Aquatic Mammals 1998, 24.3, 91-110.

([48]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Mongraphs 144:1-65.

([49]) Jefferson T.A. 2005. Final report to AFCD

([50]) Jefferson T.A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Mongraphs 144:1-65.

([51]) Jefferson T. A., S. K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey, and N. Tregenza. 2002. Distribution and abundance of finless porpoises in Hong Kong and adjacent waters of China. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement 10:43-55.

([52]) Parsons C, M. L. Felley and L. J.Porter. 1995. An Annotated Checklist of Cetaceans Recorded From Hong Kong’s Territorial Waters. Asian Marine Biology 12: 79 - 100.

([53]) Jefferson T. A., S. K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey, and N. Tregenza. 2002. ibid.

([54]) Jefferson T. A. and S. Leatherwood. 1997. Distribution and abundance of Indo-Pacific hump-backed dolphins (Sousa chinensis Osbeck, 1765) in Hong Kong waters. Asian Marine Biology 14:93-110.

([55]) Jefferson T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([56]) Jefferson T. A., S. K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey, and N. Tregenza. 2002. Distribution and abundance of finless porpoises in Hong Kong and adjacent waters of China. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement 10:43-55.

([57]) Würsig B. and T. A. Jefferson. 1990. Methods of photo-identification for small cetaceans. Reports of the International Whaling Commission (Special Issue) 12:43-52.

([58]) Jefferson T. A. and S. Leatherwood. 1997. Distribution and abundance of Indo-Pacific hump-backed dolphins (Sousa chinensis Osbeck, 1765) in Hong Kong waters. Asian Marine Biology 14:93-110.

([59]) Jefferson T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([60]) Jefferson T. A., S. K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey, and N. Tregenza. 2002. Distribution and abundance of finless porpoises in Hong Kong and adjacent waters of China. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement 10:43-55.

([61]) Buckland S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham and J. L. Laake. 2001. Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. Chapman and Hall, Landon, UK.

([62]) Laake J.L., S. T. Buckland, D. R. Anderson and K. P. Burnham. 1994. DISTANCE User’s Guide, Version 2.1. Colorado Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Fort Collins, CO, USA.

([63]) Buckland S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham and J. L. Laake. 2001. Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. Chapman and Hall, Landon, UK.

([64]) Jefferson T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Mongraphs 144:1-65.

([65]) Jefferson T. A., S. K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey, and N. Tregenza. 2002. Distribution and abundance of finless porpoises in Hong Kong and adjacent waters of China. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement 10:43-55.

([66]) Buckland S. T., D. R. Anderson, K. P. Burnham and J. L. Laake. 2001. ibid.

([67]) Jefferson T. A. 2000. Population biology of the Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphin in Hong Kong waters. Wildlife Monographs 144:1-65.

([68]) Jefferson T. A., S. K. Hung, L. Law, M. Torey, and N. Tregenza. 2002. Distribution and abundance of finless porpoises in Hong Kong and adjacent waters of China. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology Supplement 10:43-55.

([71]) Jefferson T.A. and S.K. Hung. 2004. A review of the status of the Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin in Chinese waters. Aquatic Mammals (Special Issue) 30: 149-158.

([72]) There are certain limitiations associated with the land-based survey. It should be noted that there is a decrease in detection objects with increase in distance from the observer. It should also be noted that areas to the south of Black Point were obstructed from view..

([73]) These seasonal trends in dolphin abundance also evident from vessel-based survey results (see Sections below).

([74]) These data reflect a similar trend to estimates of abundance for Northwest Lantau presented in Jefferson 2005 ibid. (Winter: 73 (cv=23%), Spring; 47 (cv=22%), Summer: 72 (cv=18%) and Autumn: 103 (cv=18%).