8. Marine ecology

8.2 Environmental Legislation, Policies, Plans, Standards and Criteria

8.2.1 This Section makes reference to the following guidelines, standards, documents and the HKSAR Government ordinances and regulations when identifying habitats and species of ecological importance and evaluating ecological impacts:

· Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170);

· Animals and Plants (Protection of Endangered Species) Ordinance (Cap. 187)

· Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap. 476) and subsidiary legislation;

· Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131);

· Sites of Special Scientific Interest Register;

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

· Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499)

· Technical Memorandum on the Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM)

· EIAO Guidance Note Nos. 6/2002, 7/2002

8.2.2 Under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170), designated wild animals are protected from being hunted, whilst their nests and eggs are protected from injury, destruction and removal. All marine cetaceans and sea turtles are protected under this Ordinance. The Second Schedule of the Ordinance, which lists all the animals protected, was last revised in June 1992.

8.2.3 The Animals and Plants (Protection of Endangered Species) Ordinance (Cap. 187) provides protection for certain plant and animal species through controlling or prohibiting trade in the species. Certain types of corals are listed in Schedule 1 and 2 of the Ordinance, 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 scheduled corals, no matter dead or living, is restricted.

8.2.4 The Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap. 476) and Subsidiary Legislation allows for designation, control and management of marine parks and marine reserves through regulation of activities therein to protect, conserve and enhance the marine environment for the purposes of nature conservation, education, scientific research and recreation. The Ordinance came into effect on 1 June 1995. The Authority administering marine parks and reserves is the Country and Marine Parks Authority.

8.2.5 The amended Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131) provides for the designation of coastal protection areas, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), Conservation Area, Country Park, Green Belt or other specified uses that promote conservation or protection of the environment. The authority responsible for administering the Town Planning Ordinance is the Town Planning Board.

8.2.6 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 describes enforcement issues. The appendices list the legislation and administrative controls for conservation, other conservation related measures in Hong Kong and government departments involved in conservation.

8.2.7 Annex 16 of the TM-EIA 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 habitat and ecological impact.

8.2.8 EIAO Guidance Note No. 6/2002 clarifies the requirements of ecological assessments under the EIAO.

8.2.9 EIAO Guidance Note No. 7/2002 provides general guidelines for conducting ecological baseline surveys in order to fulfil requirements stipulated in the TM-EIA.

8.2.10 Furthermore, the assessment undertaken also makes reference to the following international conventions and conservation treatises.

· Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (the “Bonn Convention”)

· United Nations Convention on Biodiversity (1992);

· The PRC National Protection List of Important Wild Animals;

· IUCN Red Data Books; and

· Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

· Key Protected Wildlife Species List

8.2.11 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (the Bonn Convention”) has two main objectives. These are a) to provide strict protection for species listed in Appendix I of the Convention (migratory species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of their range), and b) to encourage Range States for such species to conclude agreements for the conservation and management of Appendix II species (migratory species which have an unfavourable conservation status and require international agreements for their conservation, or which have a conservation status which would significantly benefit from international co-operation). Hong Kong was originally a Party to the Convention through the United Kingdom. The convention continues to apply to Hong Kong after 1st July 1997 by agreement of the Sino-British Joint Liason Group, though the PRC is not a party thereto.

8.2.12 The PRC are one of the Contracting Parties 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. Hong Kong Government has stated it will be ‘committed to meeting the environmental objectives’ of the Convention (PELB, 1996).

8.2.13 The IUCN Red List is the world’s most comprehensive inventory of the global conservation status of plants and animals. It uses a set of criteria to evaluate the extinction risk of thousands of species and subspecies. These criteria are relevant to all species and all regions of the world. There are seven Categories of Threat in the IUCN Red List System: Extinct, Extinct in the Wild, Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened and Least Concern. A species is listed as threatened if it falls in the Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable categories.

8.2.14 The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a voluntary international agreement to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. PRC became a Party to the agreement in 1981.

8.2.15 The Key Protected Wildlife Species List details Category I and Category II protected animal species under Mainland Chinese Legislation.

· Oceanway (2003) Field Diving Surveys of Corals for the Engineering and Feasibility Assessment Studies (EEFS) in relation to the way forward for the Harbour Area Treatment Scheme (HATS) (with permission). Submitted to EPD. (HATS Dive Survey Report)

· CityU Professional Services (2003) Consultancy Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong. Final Summer Field Survey Report. Submitted to AFCD.

· Scott Wilson (2001) Tseung Kwan O Development Phase III Road P2 connecting Town Centre and Western Coast Road Final EIA Report (Road P2 EIA Report).

· M₂ Environmental (2000) Tseung Kwan O Port Development at Area 131. Further Ecological Study. Submitted to TDD. (Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report)

· Maunsell (2000) Feasibility Study for Intensification and Extension of Tseung Kwan O New Town Final EIA Study (TKO Extension EIA Report).

· ERM (1999) Feasibility Study on the Alternative Alignment for the Western Coast Road, Tseung Kwan O. (Western Coast Road EIA Report).

· Jefferson T (2000) Conservation Biology of the Finless Porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides) in Hong Kong Waters: Final Report. Ocean Park Conservation Foundation. Submitted to AFCD.

· Report on Underwater Dive Surveys (October 1991 – November 1994) Volumes I & II (CED, 1995);

8.3.2 Field surveys were undertaken, where appropriate, to supplement and check the validity of data collected through the literature review process. Focused surveys were conducted on the intertidal and subtidal habitats inside and in proximity to the proposed reclamation area in the wet season from May to October 2004.

8.3.3 Potential ecological impacts arising from the development were assessed following TM-EIA Annex 16 guidelines and the impacts evaluated based on the criteria in TM-EIA Annex 8. During the assessment, particular attention was paid to species of conservation interest identified through literature review and field survey for this EIA Study.

8.4 Description of the Environment

8.4.1 Junk Bay (also known as Tseung Kwan O) is a south-facing bay located on the northern side of the Tathong Channel at the southeast part of the New Territories. To the west, its waters connect to Victoria Harbour through the narrow Lei Yue Mun Channel. To the south and south-east, its waters open into the wider Tathong Channel, which either side is bounded by the east coast of Hong Kong Island and the neighbouring coasts of the Clearwater Bay Peninsula and Tung Lung Chau.

8.4.2 Although facing the oceanic south-eastern waters of Hong Kong, in summer Junk Bay waters are within reach of the seasonal influence of the massive discharges of water from Pearl River, which extends from the west. In terms of hydrology, Junk Bay is therefore regarded as being situated close to the eastern margins of a transitional zone between Hong Kong’s oceanic eastern waters and the more estuarine western waters (Morton & Morton 1983). Details on the baseline water quality conditions in Junk Bay and adjoining channels are presented in Tables 5.5 and 5.6.

8.4.3 The Assessment Area encompasses Junk Bay and a substantial area of the adjoining coastal waters. The Assessment Area spans Victoria Harbour across Hong Kong’s eastern and south-eastern coastal waters to include Clear Water Bay, the Nine Pins island group, Sung Kong and Waglan Islands and the east coast of Hong Kong Island to Cape d’Aguilar. This assessment area comprises several broad habitat types including:

· Intertidal habitats on hard substrata such as natural rocky shore and artificial seawall.

· Intertidal habitats on mobile soft substrata such as sandy shore

· Subtidal habitats including infaunal benthic communities on soft substrata.

· Subtidal habitats on hard substrata such as coral communities.

· Marine mammal habitat for the locally resident cetacean, the Black Finless Porpoise .(Neophocaena phocaenoides)

8.4.4 The baseline marine ecological conditions of the assessment area are described in the sections below. Locations of key marine ecological resources in the assessment area are shown in Figure 8.1.

Areas of Conservation Interest

8.4.5 Within the assessment area, there are several marine areas of recognised or potential conservation interest. The Cape d’ Aguilar (Hok Tsui) Marine Reserve is located about 10km south of Junk Bay and comprises a sea area of about 18 hectares. This reserve was established in July 1996 and has been a designated SSSI since July 1990. It is also recognised as Hong Kong’s only no-take Marine Protected Area (MPA). This area supports diverse marine life including corals dominated by Platygyra sinensis, Favites abdita and Goniastrea aspera (Clark 1997, 1998), as well as some subtidal macrofaunal assemblages that are unique to the reserve (Morton & Harper 1997, Morton 1998, Morton 2003).

8.4.6 The Shek O Headland SSSI is located about 8km south of Junk Bay. This exposed rocky shore habitat was designated a SSSI in February 1998 because it is among the areas with the richest assemblages of macroalgae (seaweed) in Hong Kong.

8.4.7 The assessment area also extends as far as the coastal areas to the north of Clear Water Bay approximately 8km from Junk Bay. These shallow inshore waters to the north of Clear Water Bay support corals and were previously identified as a possible marine park (The Marine Parks and Reserves Working Group, 1990) or a potential Marine Conservation Area (Planning Department 1998), mainly due to its existing use as a recreational dive site (Morton 1998, Morton 2003).

Representative Habitats

8.4.8 Representative marine habitat of the assessment area is illustrated in Figure 8.2. Baseline information giving the ecological profile of each habitat type within the assessment area is provided below.

Rocky Shore

8.4.9 Within Junk Bay, natural rocky shore habitat is located along the western side of the bay extending from Chiu Keng Wan to Lei Yue Mun with a small stretch located along the former Junk Island on the eastern side of the bay. In recent years, natural rocky shore at the inner and east coast of Junk Bay has been almost entirely lost to large-scale reclamation.

8.4.10 Elsewhere within the Assessment Area, natural rocky shore habitat is located mainly outside Victoria Harbour, fringing the east coast of Hong Kong Island and from Joss House Bay around the coast to Clear Water Bay. Offshore islands such as Tung Ping Chau, Waglan, Sung Kong and Nine Pins are also predominantly fringed by natural rocky shores.

8.4.11 The natural rocky shore at Chiu Keng Wan in the north west corner of Junk Bay was previously surveyed in March and November 1997 with findings presented in the Western Coast Road EIA Report. Both qualitative and quantitative surveys were conducted. Qualitative surveys based on visual inspection covered approximately 500m of shoreline. Quantitative surveys used belt transects laid at 3 representative tidal heights with ten quadrats placed along each transect to assess the abundance of intertidal flora and fauna.

8.4.12 It was found that the assemblages comprised typical species of similar composition and abundance to other semi-exposed rocky shores in Hong Kong. None of the species were rare and were deemed to be of low conservation interest. Fauna found on the rocky shore at Chiu Keng Wan were represented by 27 species comprising marine snails (periwinkles: Nodolittorina trochoides, Nodolittorina vidua, Nodolittorina radiata, Littoraria articulata, Peasiella roepstorffina; whelks: Thais clavigera, Morula musiva; topshells: Chlorostoma argyrostomas, Monodonta labio; turban shells: Lunella coronata; and nerites: Nerita albicilla), barnacles (Tetraclita squamosa, Capitelum mitella), limpets (Cellana toreuma, Cellana grata, Patelloida pygmaea, Patelloida saccharina), false limpets (*Siphonaria japonica, Siphonaria sirrius***, Siphonaria atra^), chitons (Acanthopleura japonica, Ischnochiton comptus), bivalves (mussels: Septifer virgatus; oysters: Saccostrea cucullata; and ark shells: Barbatia virescens), sea anemones (Anthopleura sp.) and rock crabs (Grapsus albolineatus).

8.4.13 Algal cover on the rocky shore comprised erect coralline algae (Corallina sessilis), red encrusting algae (Peysonnelia sp., Hildenbrandtia prototypus), brown encrusting algae (Ralfsia expansa, Endopleura aurea, Hapalospongidion gelatinosum), green foliose algae (Ulva fasciata), brown turf algae (Hincksia mitchelliae), red turf algae (Gelidium pusillum, Gymnogongrus flabelliformis) and cyanobacteria (Kyrtuthrix maculans).

8.4.14 In order to check and update information on the ecological profile of rocky shore habitat at Chiu Keng Wan obtained from the literature review, ecological surveys were conducted twice at the rocky shore during the 6-month field survey period. Both qualitative and quantitative surveys were undertaken in the wet season on 21st May and 19th October 2004. Location of the surveys is shown in Figure 8.3.

8.4.15 The qualitative surveys involved visual reconnaissance along the entire Chiu Keng Wan shoreline to record general site conditions and ecological features. Quantitative information on representative rocky shore assemblages was obtained by deploying standard line transects at low tide at two representative locations on the rocky shore. The line transects were deployed perpendicular to the shore to cover from the high water mark to low water. Along each transect, standard ecological sampling quadrats (dimensions 0.5m x 0.5m) were laid at 1m intervals. Intertidal flora and fauna were identified and enumerated. In general, mobile fauna were counted to establish abundance per unit area. Abundance of sessile organisms such as barnacles, oysters, algae and cyanobacteria were estimated in terms of percentage cover per fixed area. All flora and fauna were identified to species level as far as practicable.

8.4.16 Based on reconnaissance observations, the natural rocky shore habitat was highly comparable to conditions presented in the literature. The majority of the rocky shore along the Chiu Keng Wan was similar in nature comprising southeast facing, steeply sloping bedrock slabs and tuffs of volcanic origins, which extend to a considerable height above intertidal levels. The rocky shore was generally steeper at the north of the Chiu Keng Wan coast, which included a small stretch of vertical sea cliffs occurring along at the rocky prominentry near to O King Road. In general, the rocky shore at Chiu Keng Wan was formed by bedrock with little or no boulders. An exception was the small stretches of small/medium-sized rocky boulders also occurred adjacent to the middle cove and to a lesser extent adjacent to the seawall at the north.

8.4.17 Rocky shore fauna along the Chiu Keng Wan coast comprised species typical of other semi-exposed rocky shores of eastern Hong Kong waters and followed typical vertical zonation patterns mediated by tidal exposure. Qualitative surveys in May and October 2004 revealed a similarly composed rocky shore community. On the high shore, fauna was dominated by the periwinkles (Nodolittorina spp.), while seaslaters, Ligia exotica were also present but very infrequent along the coast. At the mid-shore, assemblages were dominated by the limpet Cellana toreuma, and barnacles Tetraclita spp. and Common Top Shell Monodonata labio. On the low shore, rock oysters Saccostrea cucullata and mussels Sepifera virigatus dominated. Also occasionally seen close to the water’s edge was the Common Rock Crab, Grapsus albolineatus.

8.4.18 More detailed quantitative survey results of rocky shore assemblages at 2 representative locations on the Chiu Keng Wan coast are presented in Tables 8.1 and 8.2. Findings from the quantitative survey were highly similar to results from previous surveys of this coast reported in the literature. The only notable difference was the limited macroalgae found in the surveys for this EIA Study, compared to previous survey findings. This was explained by the surveys conducted in the hot summer months of the wet season, which are unsuitable for macroalage to survive in the intertidal zone.

Table 8.1 Composition and abundance (no. of individuals/ percentage cover per 0.25m2) of rocky shore biota at Transect 1 at the Chiu Keng Wan coast on 19th May 2004 and 19th October 2004.

Species / Distance on transect	1m	2m	3m	4m	5m	6m	7m	1m	2m	3m	4m	5m	6m	7m
Survey date	19^th May 2004							21^st October 2004
Level	High------------------------------>Low shore							High------------------------------>Low shore
Snails
Nodolittorina trochioides	96	15						69	5
Nodolittorina vidua & radiata	7	46	21					5
Monodonta labio				22	15	2				13	15
Lunella coronata
Nerita albicilla				3	1						1	2
Nerita costata
Peasiella sp.											1
Thais clavigera					1	1						1	1
Morula musiva
Barnacles
Tetraclita japonica			15		2							24
Tetraclita squamosa						1	13							19
Capitelum mitellum
Chthalmus malayensis		2
Megabalanus volcano
Limpets
Cellana toreuma				55		137					4		35	5
Cellana grata			2	2								1	2
Siphonaria japonica					1					1
S. japonica egg coils
Siphonaria laciniosa														11
Patelloida pygmaea												1
Patelloida saccharina				5	19	10					11	4
Bivalves
Septifera virgatus					4%	5%	4%
Saccostrea cucullata				2%	5%							5%	10%	5%
Perna viridis												1%		5%
Barbatia virescens
Chitons
Acanthopleura japonica											1		1	1
Crabs
Hemigrapsus sanguineus
Sea anemones
Spheractis chungae							7				1	1
Bristleworms
Perinereis cultrifera														1
Tubeworms
Hydroides sp.	33						39
Moquito larvae
Culicidae sp.
Isopods
Unidentified sp.							1				1
Algae
Hildenbrandtia rubra						10%	80%
Ulva lactuca				5%	5%	8%
Ralfsia expansa							10%
Gellidium pusillum							2%
Pseudulvella applanata														3%
Lithophyllum sp.														10%

Table 8.2 Composition and abundance (no. of individuals/ percentage cover per 0.25m²) of rocky shore biota at Transect 2 at the Chiu Keng Wan coast on 19^th May 2004 and 19^th October 2004.

Species / Distance on transect	1m	2m	3m	4m	5m	6m	1m	2m	3m	4m	5m	6m	7m	8m
Survey date	19^th May 2004						21^st October 2004
Level	High---------------------->Low shore						High------------------------------------>Low shore
Snails
Nodolittorina trochioides	9	102	4				100	190
Nodolittorina vidua & radiata	2	6	40				1	30
Monodonta labio				5	11			24	19	5		4
Lunella coronata
Nerita albicilla					1					3
Nerita costata			1
Peasiella sp.
Thais clavigera					1	1			21	5	4	3	11	4
Morula musiva														3
Barnacles
Tetraclita japonica		2	7		7	6			1			41	30
Tetraclita squamosa
Capitelum mitellum										2%	1%
Chthalmus malayensis
Megabalanus volcano					1
Limpets
Cellana toreuma				28	127	15				5	12	35	8
Cellana grata				8					1			6
Siphonaria japonica				1	7	3				1
S. japonica egg coils					3
Siphonaria laciniosa
Patelloida pygmaea											2	3
Patelloida saccharina				2	4						4	18
Bivalves
Septifera virgatus				8%	25%	3%					3%	2%	5%	5%
Saccostrea cucullata				15%		5%						4%	40%	60%
Perna viridis													5%	10%
Barbatia virescens														2%
Chitons
Acanthopleura japonica													1
Crabs
Hemigrapsus sanguineus		1
Sea anemones
Spheractis chungae					2
Bristleworms
Perinereis cultrifera
Tubeworms
Hydroides sp.		13
Moquito larvae
Culicidae sp.		3
Isopods
Unidentified sp.
Algae
Hildenbrandtia rubra
Ulva lactuca					5%	30%
Ralfsia expansa
Gellidium pusillum						1%
Pseudulvella applanata
Lithophyllum sp.													20%	20%

8.4.19 Although the rocky shore harboured a similar species composition in May and October, some differences in assemblages were noted particularly in terms of the lifestage of organisms present. Assemblages of rocky shore fauna in May tended to reflect to recent recruitment onto the rocky shore, which is indicative of a healthy functioning community. For instance, during the May survey it was noted that the limpet populations, particularly C. toreuma, generally comprised small individuals indicating their early lifestage. Egg coils of Siphonaria japonica were occasionally observed. Similarly, in May mussels Septifera virgatus, which were clustered in crevices on the low shore also tended to be dominated by small individuals of an early lifestage.

8.4.20 Visual survey over small stretches of boulder areas revealed these areas were dominated by the snails Monodonata labio, Nerita albicilla and Lunella coronata with many undersides of boulders covered with tubeworms Hydroides sp. Small shore crabs such as Hemigrapsus sanginuineus, and Metagrapsus spp. were also common among the boulders. At the low shore, the rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata was abundant, encrusted on many boulders. Other species, which were infrequently recorded at low water were the Curly Murex Chicoreus microphyllus, Silver-mouthed Turban Turbo argyrostoma and cowrie Cypraea arabicus. At the northern end of the shoreline near the seawall, a small patch of boulders was largely devoid of intertidal biota. At this location, pebbles of dead hard coral rubble, including of Cyphastrea, were noted to be accumulated among the boulders.

8.4.21 Along the Chiu Keng Wan coast, fish recorded in rock pools included the goby Bathygobius fusca and a single incidence of a stranded Doublebar cardinalfish Apogon pseudotaeniatus. During the May survey, it was also noted that small open tidal gullies along the low rocky shore provided shelter for dense schools of unidentified fish fry. Small schools of fish fry as well as juvenile grey mullet Mugil cephalus were also occasionally observed passing along the waters edge, whilst angler’s catches were noted to include Rockfish, Sebasticus marmoratus, Russell’s snapper Lutjanus russellii, White-spotted Rabbit fish Siganus canaliculatus, Chinese damselfish Neopomacentrus bankieri, Japanese seaperch Lateolabrix japonicus and Red Drum Sciaenops ocellatus.

8.4.22 One marine species of potential conservation interest was discovered at the rocky shore habitat at Chiu Keng Wan. On May 21^st 2004, a large rock pool up to 70cm deep located on the high shore with a dense growth of Enteromorpha seaweed and sand/rubble/small boulder bottom substrata was found to have 5 individuals of the Grassy Puffer fish (also known as the Starry or Snowy Puffer), Takifugu niphobles. Several other dead individuals were found stranded on the high shore nearby.

8.4.23 Takifugu niphobles is listed as ‘data deficient’ in the IUCN red list of threatened species (Roberts 1996, UNEP/GEF 2003). Listing of taxa in this category indicates that more information is required and acknowledges the possibility that future research will show that threatened classification is appropriate. As an intertidal spawner, Takifugu niphobles gathers at the waters edge at dusk at the full or new moon when tidal heights are at their highest and strands in rock pools to spawn. Spawning is stimulated by groups of 2-4 males that bite and hang on the side of single females as they deposit eggs in sand and rubble at high tide. Individuals may remain stranded in rock pools on the high shore, until they are freed by the next high tide (Yamahira 1997a,b).

8.4.24 An ad hoc intensive search for this species was conducted on 25^th May 2004. The puffers observed a couple of days before were still stranded in the same rock pool as previously found, though one was recently dead and another lethargic presumably on account of the physiologically stressful conditions associated with extremes of temperature and salinity in rock pools in summer. During the survey, all rock pools along the entire Chiu Keng Wan coast were searched. No other rock pools with similar characteristics (i.e. dense macroalgae, deep with sandy boulder bottom) were found. Other rock pools tended to be shallow mid or low shore pools. No other stranded puffers were found except a single small dead Milk-spotted puffer Chelonodon patoca in a crevice. Ad hoc observations on the presence of Takifugu niphobles were also noted during other ecological survey visits to the coast in June, July, August and September. No puffers were observed in rock pools in these months. During focused rocky shore surveys conducted on 21^st October, two individual Takifugu niphobles were found in the same large rock pool.

8.4.25 Despite its IUCN listing, T.niphobles has a widespread regional distribution, with records from throughout the Pacific North-west region (including Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China, Hong Kong and Vietman, Roberts, 1996). According to Sadovy & Cornish (2000), Takifugu niphobles “is moderately abundant in Hong Kong and is known recently from several individuals along shallow boulder shores, such as within the Cape d’Aguilar Marine Reserve”. Although it appears not to be among species recorded during monitoring of artificial reefs (cf. Wilson 2003), this may be because it generally occupies waters that are shallower than the depths at which artificial reefs are deployed (Cornish pers. comm.). Other researchers (e.g. Yu & Yu 2002) have also reported this species to be common in Hong Kong coastal waters.

Artificial Seawall

8.4.26 More than half of the shoreline within the Assessment Area comprises artificial seawall habitat. Seawall forms virtually all of Victoria Harbour and most of the Junk Bay shorelines. Assemblages of species present on artificial seawalls, particularly sloping rubble mound seawall, which better mimics natural conditions, may be expected to be similar to natural coasts. A study on reestablishment of intertidal communities on the fringes of reclaimed land in Hong Kong indicated it might take some eight to ten years for assemblages of colonising intertidal organisms to reach peak complexity (i.e. a ‘climax’ community state) (Yip 1979). Given that seawalls in Junk Bay are relatively new, it can be inferred that these seawalls support limited intertidal biota and are of low ecological value.

8.4.27 Common ‘biofouling’ organisms previously recorded on artificial seawalls and wharfs in Hong Kong include barnacles (Tetraclita squamosa, Capitelum mitella and Balanus amphitrite), polychaete tube-worms (Hydroides elegans, Spirobis foraminosus), mussels and oysters (Perna viridis, Septifer virgatus, Saccostrea cucullata), bryozoans (Bugula neritina), ascidians (Ascidia sydneiensis, Ciona intestinalis, Styela plicata) and various macro-algae (Ulva fasciata, Entromorpha prolifera, Codium cylindricum, Colpomenia sinuosa) (Morton & Morton 1983). Recent results presented in the HATS Dive Survey Report for spotdives conducted close to seawalls inside Victoria Harbour (e.g. off Kai Tak, Hung Hom and North Point) in January 2003 recorded bryozoans (Schizoporella errata), barnacles, mussels (Perna viridis) and sponges.

Sandy Shore

8.4.28 Within the Assessment Area, sandy shore habitats are relatively few. In Junk Bay, remaining sandy shore habitats are restricted to a small number of isolated coves along the remaining natural shores at the western edge of the bay and Junk Island. There are also small stretches of sandy shore at Lei Yue Mun Point, Joss House Bay and Tung Lung Chau. Elsewhere in the assessment area, sandy shores most notably occur in the wave-exposed bays at Clearwater Bay and at a few locations on the east coast of Hong Kong Island including Big Wave Bay and Shek O. Sandy shores are mobile and unstable environments subjected to constant water movement and wave action. Few intertidal organisms are able to tolerate these conditions such that sandy shores in Hong Kong may appear devoid of intertidal life (Morton & Morton 1983, Morton et al. 1995).

8.4.29 Of the 3 small coves located in the north west corner of Junk Bay at Chiu Keng Wan, two comprise sandy shore habitat, while the smaller northernmost cove consists of a mixture of sand and small boulders. Following recent large-scale reclamation, these are among the few remaining sandy shores in Junk Bay. The sandy shores in these coves were previously surveyed in 1998 with findings presented in the Road P2 EIA Report. Sand samples (0.5m² by 0.25m deep) were collected and sieved at five points each along two transects spanning the low to high shore in order to assess the abundance of any macrofauna present such as burrowing bivalves. According to Road P2 EIA Report no macrofaunal invertebrates (>500mm) were present in the ten samples collected from the sandy shore at Chiu Keng Wan. Nevertheless, a number of ghost crabs (Ocypode sp.) burrow openings were found.

8.4.30 In order to provide up-to-date baseline data, sandy shore surveys were conducted at low tide on 19^th May 2004 and 21^st October 2004. On each survey date, visual reconnaissance surveys were conducted along the entire length of the sandy shores in the 2 sandy coves. In addition quantitative surveys were conducted by deploying line transects perpendicular to the shore at representative locations. At 2m intervals along the transects, a 0.5x 0.5m quadrat was sampled for burrowing macrofauna to a depth of at least 30cm. Locations of the surveys are shown in Figure 8.3.

8.4.31 Based on the surveys, it was considered that the same ecological conditions persist and survey results from 1998 remain valid. No burrowing macrofauna were found in the sand including in the swash zone on both survey dates. It was also noted that observed shell debris on the shores were not of sandy shore fauna. At Chiu Keng Wan, the factors contributing to the apparent absence of burrowing macrofauna are likely to include water pollution and the course grain size of sand on the beaches. Shin (in press) note that pollution caused by anthropogenic activities is a possible source of low species diversity on soft shore habitats. Eutrophication of sandy shore habitats at Chiu Keng Wan was suggested by the presence of large numbers of pollution tolerant polychaete tube-worms (Hydroides elegans) on the underside of boulders found along the shores. Sandy shores with coarse grain size are well-draining, which limits interstitial water retention leading to rapid desiccation of the shore and hence intolerable conditions for sandy shore infauna at the intertidal zone.

8.4.32 Nevertheless, reconnaissance surveys of the sandy shores revealed there were numerous ghost crab burrows at high shore and above the strandline among backshore vegetation (Ipomea pes-caprae and Scaevola sericea). A count of burrows on both survey dates revealed a sizeable population of ghost crabs inhabiting these sandy shores with more than 150 large burrows found at each of the sandy shores. As confirmed by ad hoc observations during night surveys, burrows were made by the common nocturnal Large Ghost Crab (Ocypode ceratophthalma).

8.4.33 Also of note, as previously reported, the sandy shores at Chiu Keng Wan had little flotsam and other debris accumulated at the strandline and due to their general inaccessibility exhibited few signs of disturbance from recreational use. However discarded gillnets washed ashore were occasionally observed.

8.4.34 Elsewhere in the assessment area, sandy shores with higher wave exposure than Junk Bay were previously surveyed at Big Wave Bay and Shek O beach by Wong (1990). Sampling techniques involved collection of sand samples from the swash zone on the low shore followed up by visual survey. These surveys were conducted monthly or bi-monthly covering 14 months starting from April 1987. It was found that the sandy shore faunal assemblages at these two locations were similar, though a lack of ghost crabs at Shek O was attributed to human disturbance. Dominant species were the surf clams Donax semigranosus and Donax cuneatus. Other species recorded were mole crabs (Hippa pacifica), hermit crabs (Calcinus herbstii), ghost crabs (Ocypode ceratophthalma), sand crabs (Matuta lunata), mysid shrimps (Archaeomysis sp.), and the isopod (Excirolana chiltoni) (Wong 1990). Although these data are relatively old, habitat conditions at Big Wave Bay and Shek O have not changed substantially since the surveys were conducted, and can therefore be considered broadly representative of faunal assemblages currently residing in these areas.

Hard Substrata Subtidal Habitat

8.4.35 The assessment area encompasses a portion of Hong Kong eastern and south-eastern coastal waters. Locally, these are among the waters that provide the most sustaining conditions for coral growth and support many hard (scleractinian) coral species (Morton & Morton 1983, Morton 1992, Ang 2002). Nevertheless, waters closer to urban areas including within Junk Bay are subject to more pronounced pollution levels (refer to Chapter 5).

8.4.36 A large amount of information on the general distribution and abundance of corals in the assessment area waters is available from the literature. Dive surveys conducted for CED between 1991 and 1997 at numerous locations across Hong Kong provided extensive information on coral species distribution in the assessment area. According to these surveys (mainly using qualitative techniques), the Assessment Area supports several shallow fringing coral communities of high ecological value close to Clear Water Bay and along the east coast of Tung Lung Chau. More recently, long stretches of coastline within Junk Bay and the neighbouring Joss House Bay (Tai Mui Wan), Tung Lung Chau and Ngan Wan (south of Cape Collinson) have also been surveyed for various studies.

8.4.37 Coral information from the literature on the areas closest to proposed development at Tseung Kwan O are presented in the following sections, including at Chiu Keng Wan, which is the area that would be directly lost due to the proposed WCR tunnel toll plaza reclamation.

Chiu Keng Wan (northwest Junk Bay)

8.4.38 Information on the ecological condition of subtidal habitats at Chiu Keng Wan that may be subject to reclamation under the project are presented in 3 separate reports; namely the Road P2 EIA Report, the Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report and the HATS Dive Survey Report.

8.4.39 In October 1998, the first dive surveys were conducted along the Chiu Keng Wan coastline with findings presented in the Road P2 EIA Report. Survey techniques used included 8 general reconnaissance bounce dives lasting up to 10 minutes and covering an area of 50-100m² each. In addition, information on depth profiles and marine life was collected along 6 transects extending from the shoreline up to between 50m and 100m offshore to a depth of about –7mPD. Quantitative data were also collected from a total of 120 60cm x 40cm photo-quadrats deployed at about 2m intervals along two 100m transects positioned parallel to the shore at –3mPD and –5mPD respectively. The placement of these two transects covered stretches of rocky seabed identified as having among the highest abundance of marine life of the entire survey area.

8.4.40 In total, the coral survey conducted for the Road P2 EIA Report recorded the presence of 5 hard coral species at Chiu Keng Wan. Four of these hard coral species (Psammocora haimeana, Alveopora sp., Favia speciosa, Montipora sp.) were small and isolated colonies recorded from half a dozen locations during reconnaissance dives. The other recorded hard coral species (Leptastrea purpurea) was found inside one of the photoquadrats at –5mPD. These survey findings indicated that this coast supported a very sparse cover and low species richness of hard corals.

8.4.41 According to the Road P2 EIA Report, the soft coral Dendonephthya spp. was the most commonly occurring coral found. It occurred either in isolation or in small groups of up to 5 to 6 colonies. Of the 120 photo quadrats recorded, Dendonephthya occurred in 22 (i.e. 18%). In addition, gorgonian sea whips (Ellisella sp.) and sea fans (Melithaea sp.) were also recorded and were more frequently encountered in deeper water (below –6mPD) where the seabed turned from rocky bedrock and boulders to silty mud. At shallower depths, the sea whip (Ellisella sp.) was recorded in 3% of photo quadrats (i.e. present in 3 out of 120). Other subtidal marine life recorded included sponges (Halichondria spp.), hydroids (Algaophenia whiteleggei), burrowing anemones (Entacmea quadricolor, cf. Discosoma sp.) and cucamarid sea cucumber (Colochirus crassus). A suspected octopus midden containing broken crab carapaces was also encountered.

8.4.42 Coral data for this stretch of coastline is also available from Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report. Under this study, surveys were conducted in February 1999 along 100m transects laid perpendicular to the shore. A total of 5 such transects (i.e. Transects 10, 9, 8A, 8 and 7A) were located inside the footprint of the proposed WCR reclamation. Within these transects a patchy and sparse presence of faviid (mainly Favia speciosa) gorgonians and soft corals were recorded. In the northernmost transect the black coral Cirripathes sp. was also recorded in deeper waters. Additionally, a further two 90m long horizontal transects were laid parallel to the shore in shallow and deeper waters respectively. Along the 90m transect, corals within 1.5m either side of the transect were recorded. No hard or soft corals were found along these two transects. Only gorgonian seawhip and fans were recorded. These numbered 15 colonies along the shallow water transect and 137 along the deeper water transect respectively.

8.4.43 Most recently, a spot dive of this area (labelled spotdive No. S033) covering about 50m between depths of 1.5 to 10m was conducted in January 2003 with results presented in the HATS Dive Survey Report. The amount of coral cover was determined to be very sparse (<1% cover). During the spot dive, 3 species of hard coral were recorded. These were Platygyra sp., the ahermatypic Turbinaria sp. and Leptastrea sp. In addition, two gorgonian coral species (Echinomuricea sp. and Euplexaura sp.) were also recorded.

8.4.44 In summary, the literature review indicated that the subtidal habitat at Chiu Keng Wan has been the subject of intensive survey effort in recent years. In total, surveys have included eleven 50 or 100m transects laid perpendicular to the shore, four 90-100m transects laid parallel to the shore and 9 reconnaissance/ spot dives. Information from these recent surveys is considered to provide adequate up-to-date and representative data reflecting the ecological conditions of this area. Based on these surveys, a total of 7 hard coral, 4 gorgonian, 1 soft and 1 black coral taxa were recorded. The literature indicated hard coral colonies occurred as small isolated colonies and in very low abundance. In contrast, soft corals and gorgonian seawhips frequently occurred but with a relatively lower abundance compared to other neighbouring coastal areas.

Southwest coast of Junk Bay (south of Chiu Keng Wan)

8.4.45 Information on the subtidal habitat along the coastline from the south of Chiu Keng Wan to Lei Yue Mun is available from the Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report and HATS Dive Survey Report. Although the West Coast of Junk Bay is contiguous with Chiu Keng Wan coast, for assessment convenience, the literature on this coastal stretch was reviewed separately. In this way, literature review to establish the ecological profile of the Southwest Coast of Junk Bay encompasses the area outside but immediately adjacent to the proposed reclamation footprint.

8.4.46 Dive surveys for the Area 131 Further Ecological Study in February 1999 were the first to investigate the subtidal habitat along west coast of Junk Bay to the south of Chiu Keng Wan. Subtidal areas along this coastal stretch were surveyed along thirteen 50m underwater transects laid perpendicular to the shore at roughly regular intervals along the coast to Lei Yue Mun (i.e. Transects 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 3, 3A, 4, 4A, 5, 5A, 6, 6A and 7). Although survey along these transects indicated very low abundance of hard coral (Tubastrea sp. and Faviids), it was found that an area at the south of this coast close to Lei Yue Mun was notable for its high abundance of soft and gorgonian corals (mainly Dendronephthya spp. and Euplexaura curvata). This area of abundant corals, which have colonised rubble dumped in a disused spoil ground in shallow water about 100m offshore, covered an estimated 2.5 hectares. Some black corals (Cirripathes sp.) were also recorded in this area. Two 90m long transects were laid close to this area to count the number of coral colonies present inside a 3m wide swathe of seabed. In the transect laid in shallower water 15m from shore, 118 colonies of Dendronephthya spp., 241 gorgonian colonies and 12 Faviid colonies were recorded. In the deeper water transect laid a distance of 90m from shore, 337 colonies of Dendronephthya spp. and 328 gorgonians were recorded.

8.4.47 More recently, the southwest coast of Junk Bay was surveyed again with results presented in the HATS Dive Survey Report. In January 2003, a reconnaissance dive (labelled spot dive S034) was conducted covering a distance of approximately 350m between the depths of 5.7m to 11.5m. From this survey, coral cover was estimated at >20% but affected by relatively high (30%) partial mortality. Species recorded were ahermatypic hard corals including Tubastrea sp. as well as gorgonian corals (Echinomuricea sp., Menella sp., Guaiagorgia sp. and Euplexaura sp.). Following reconnaissance dives, this area was selected for survey using Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA) methods. This technique deployed transects to assess coral composition and relative abundance across 200m² of sea bed in three different depth zones (shallow:-2 –5mCD; middle: -7 – 9mCD; deep: -12 – 15mCD). This REA survey (labelled REA 7) indicated soft and gorgonian corals were especially prevalent in the middle and deep depth zones (25-50% cover in middle and deep zones, <10% in shallow) with a few hard corals confined to the shallows (<5% cover). Seven species of gorgonian and soft corals were recorded. These were Echinomuricea sp., Euplexaura sp., Dendronephthya sp., Echinogorgia sp., Anthogorgia sp., Menella sp. and sea fans. The few hard corals present comprised a total of 8 hard coral species. These were Goniopora stuchburyi, Cyphastrea sp., Cyphastrea seralia, Favites pentagona, Oulastrea crispata and Turbinaria peltata as well as the ahermatypic Tubastrea sp. and Dendrophyllia sp.

8.4.48 In summary, the literature, derived from recent surveys conducted in 1999 and 2003, provides extensive information on the ecological profile of the subtidal coastal fringes of the Southwest Coast of Junk Bay. Based on the literature, the southwest coast of Junk Bay supports a very low cover of hard corals with a total of 8 species recorded (including 2 ahermatypic species). Coral assemblages mostly comprise soft and gorgonian corals dominated by the seawhip Echinomuricea sp. These soft and gorgonian corals were common along the coast and formed an area with high abundance at the south-west end of the bay. Black coral (Cirripathes sp.) was also recorded from this area.

Junk Island

8.4.49 Junk Island (also known as Fat Tong Chau) is located on the eastern side of Junk Bay and has been partially engulfed by reclaimed land. Its remaining natural subtidal area was investigated in underwater dive surveys conducted in 1999 and 2003 with findings presented in the Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report and the HATS Dive Survey Report respectively.

8.4.50 In early February 1999, a total of four qualitative reconnaissance dives were conducted within 100m of the shoreline on the west coast of Junk Island. According to the Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report, this area supported small Faviid hard corals, some colonies of Tubastrea sp., soft corals (Dendronephthya sp.) and gorgonians but with lower abundance as compared to the southwest coast of Junk Bay.

8.4.51 In January 2003, this area was surveyed again with findings presented in the HATS Dive Survey Report. Initially, two reconnaissance spot dives (labelled S030 and S031) were conducted between 2.7m and 13.3m depth and covered a total distance of approximately 350m. Results indicate 2 hard coral species (Porites sp. and Cyphastrea sp.) and 5 gorgonian taxa (Echinomuricea sp., Menella sp., Guaiagorgia sp., Euplexaura sp. and Echinogorgia sp.) were present. Coral cover observed during these two dives was estimated to be >10% (with partial mortality of 10%) and >20% (with partial mortality of 15%) respectively. Further information on this area was then gathered using Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA) methods. This technique deployed transects to assess coral composition and relative abundance across 200m² of sea bed in three different depth zones (shallow:-2 –5mCD; middle: -7 – 9mCD; deep: -12 – 15mCD). With the exception of one colony of Acanthastrea echinata in the shallows, no hard corals were recorded during the dive survey (labelled REA 6). In contrast, soft corals and gorgonians were relatively abundant (shallow: 10-25% cover; middle: 25-50% cover; deep: <5% cover) represented by Echinomuricea sp., Euplexaura sp., Anthogorgia sp., Dendronephthya sp., Menella sp. and Echinogorgia sp..

8.4.52 In summary, recent surveys at Junk Island in 1999 and 2003 indicated that this coastal stretch harboured very few hard corals in terms of abundance and the number of species present. Nevertheless, soft corals and gorgonians were frequent and occurred in moderate abundance.

Tathong Channel

8.4.53 To the south/southeast of Junk Bay, waters open into the Tathong Channel. The coastal fringes on the north and south sides of the Tathong Channel were previously surveyed in 2003 at Ngan Wan (east coast of Hong Kong Island), Joss House Bay and Tung Lung Chau. These areas neighbouring Junk Bay also support the growth of corals and were recently investigated by the HATS coral dive surveys in 2003.

8.4.54 Of the coastal stretches bordering the Tathong Channel, these recent surveys indicated the richest coral communities occurred at East Joss House Bay, North Tung Lung Chau and Ngan Wan. At East Joss House Bay, there was 10 – 25% cover of hard corals confined to shallow areas with a total of 23 species coral recorded. Platygyra acuta was the most common hard coral at this site. In contrast, there was relatively little soft / gorgonian coral at this location (<5% cover). Similar hard coral cover (10-25%) occurred in the shallows off North Tung Lung Chau, though fewer hard coral species were present. Of the 7 hard coral species recorded, Favites dominated. In deeper waters off North Tung Lung Chau, soft / gorgonian corals were scattered and sparse (<5% cover). In contrast, at Ngan Wan, surveys discovered a rich and diverse soft / gorgonian coral community extending from the shallows into deeper waters and dominated by Echinomuricea sp.. In the shallows, the seafan, seawhips and soft corals were markedly larger than middle and deep depths and occurred with 25-50%. In middle and deep depths, soft/ gorgonian coral cover was 10 - 50%. In addition, 7 species of hard coral occurred in the shallows but with sparse cover (<5%). Goniopora stuchburyi was the most frequently occurring hard coral at this location.

8.4.55 Other areas surveyed along the fringes of the Tathong Channel in 2003 at West Joss House Bay and South Tung Lung had relatively low coral abundance and diversity. Rapid ecological assessment survey of West Joss House Bay revealed sparse hard coral cover of <5%. Eight species of hard coral were recorded in the shallows of which Cyphastrea seralia was most abundant. Soft /gorgonian coral was virtually absent from this location. Similarly, according to findings of the HATS coral dive surveys, South Tung Lung Chau supported low cover (<5%) of hard corals represented by 4 species as well as low soft /gorgonian corals (<5%).

Dive survey of Chiu Keng Wan

8.4.56 Based on the review of the literature above, it was considered there was extensive and recent information on most of Junk Bay for assessment purposes. However, in comparison with adjacent coast of Junk Bay’s west coast, there was relatively less information available for the Chiu Keng Wan coast, which would be totally lost under the proposed WCR reclamation. In light of this, it was decided further ecological surveys within the footprint of the proposed WCR reclamation area were needed. The dive surveys of this coast under this EIA Study were conducted to supplement and verify findings obtained from the literature review and to obtain up-to-date information on baseline conditions of this coast. In this way, the dive survey was conducted to cover subtidal habitat along the 800m stretch of coastline inside the proposed WCR tunnel toll plaza reclamation area, as well as a 100m section of coastline to the south of the proposed reclamation.

8.4.57 The methodology used in the dive survey was discussed with AFCD and involved reconnaissance dives as well as Rapid Ecological Assessment (DeVantier et al., 1998) survey of 20 representative transects. Furthermore, information on the size, growth form, health and substratum association of hard corals was recorded. The dive surveys were conducted in 4 days (1^st, 6^th, 9^th and 10^th September 2004). Details on the methodology, location, results and discussion are provided in Appendix 8.1.

8.4.58 Reconnaissance dives were conducted to identify the extent of hard substrate with an emphasis on gaining an overview of coral occurrence within and adjacent to the proposed reclamation area. Figure 3.1 of Appendix 8.1 shows the areas covered by the reconnaissance dives, while Figure 3.2 of Appendix 8.1 shows an underwater habitat map based on underwater dive observations.

8.4.59 As illustrated in Figure 3.2 of Appendix 8.1 (habitat map), the substrata in the proposed reclamation area closely matched shoreline features by comprising mainly sandy areas fringing the small sandy coves and with hard substrata bedrock extending between 20m to 70m off shore from rocky shore areas and from 8m to 12m deep. In deeper waters offshore, the seabed consisted of mud and silt. The reconnaissance dives covered areas from approximately –3mCD to –14mCD. Cross sections of the seabed features and substrata composition at 4 representative intervals along the Chiu Keng Wan coast are shown in Appendix 8.1.

8.4.60 Reconnaissance dive observations revealed that most of the Chiu Keng Wan coast supported a low cover (in general about 1% cover) of octocorals (soft coral, seawhips and seafans) and a sparse cover (<1% cover) of hard corals. At the south of the dive survey area at the margin of the southern most edge of the proposed reclamation area it was estimated that patches of octocoral reached up to about 10% cover.

8.4.61 Coral cover (in addition to other biota) was further quantified using Rapid Ecological Assessment techniques along a total of 20 representative, 100 m long x 2 m wide belt transects laid at intervals along and parallel to the shore were deployed in 3 different depth ranges (shallow, middle, deep). Figure 3.4 of Appendix 8.1 shows the locations where the REA transects were deployed. Table 8.3 provides a summary of REA survey findings.

Table 8.3 Summary of Rapid Ecological Assessment dive survey results.

		South < ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > North
Shallow	Transect	T01	T03	T06	T07	T10	T11	T14	T15	T18
	Substratum type	Bedrock & boulder	Bedrock & rubble	Sand	Bedrock & boulder	Sand	Bedrock	Bedrock & boulder	Bedrock & boulder	Bedrock & boulder
	Hard coral cover (%)	<1	<1	0	0	0	<1	<1	<1	<1
	Octocoral cover (%)	5	10	<1	0	0	2-3	<1	<1	0
Middle	Transect	T02	T04		T08		T12		T16	T19
	Substratum type	Bedrock & boulder	Bedrock, boulder & sand		Sand		Bedrock, boulder & sand		Sand	Sand & rubbles
	Hard coral cover (%)	0	0		0		<1		0	0
	Octocoral cover (%)	15	10-15		0		6-10		0	0
Deep	Transect		T05		T09		T13		T17	T20
	Substratum type		Mud		Mud		Mud		Mud	Mud
	Hard coral cover (%)		0		0		0		0	0
	Octocoral cover (%)		0		0		0		0	0

8.4.62 Findings of the REA survey found hard coral cover was sparse along the entire Chiu Keng Wan coast in all depth zones. Hard coral cover did not reach higher than 1% cover in any of the twenty transects. Hard corals were typically small, of encrusting growth form and attached to bedrock. In all, surveys identified 8 species of hard coral from the Chiu Keng Wan coast. Species recorded in the dive surveys were Goniopora stutchburyi, Plestiastrea versipora, Psammocora superficialis, Oulastrea crispata, Favites pentagona, Favia cf. favus, Turbinaria peltata and the ahermatypic Tubastrea sp.

8.4.63 The cover of octocoral was also generally low, ranging from 0% to 15% cover. The highest soft coral cover of 10 – 15% was found at the south the Chiu Keng Wan coast with another area of octocoral with 5-10% cover found about midway along the Chiu Keng Wan coast. Overall, the surveys revealed that the Chiu Keng Wan coast supported 2 soft corals and 4 gorgonian seawhip / seafan corals. Soft corals were Dendronephthya sp. and Cladiella sp. The gorgonians were Echinomuricea sp, Menella sp., Euplexaura sp. and Echinogorgia sp. No black corals were found during the surveys.

8.4.64 These findings were similar to information obtained from literature review (see sections 8.4.24 to 8.4.30) and indicate that the Chiu Keng Wan coast supports a sparse cover of hard corals of species that are common and widespread across Hong Kong as well as patches of low to moderate cover of common and widespread soft and gorgonian corals.

8.4.65 A summary of the coral species recorded in Junk Bay is provided in Table 8.4.

Table 8.4 Summary Information on Coral Species recorded in Junk Bay

Coral Species	*Chiu Keng Wan (i.e. proposed reclamation area)**	Southwest coast of Junk Bay*	Junk Island*	Chiu Keng Wan (i.e. proposed reclamation area) and adjacent 100m stretch of southwest coast of Junk Bay**
Hard Coral
Achanthastrea echinata			+
Alveopora sp.	+
Cyphastrea seralia		+
Cyphastrea sp.		+	+
Favia speciosa / 'Faviids'	+	+	+
Favites pentagona		+		+
Goniopora stuchburyi		+		+
Leptastrea purpurea / sp.	+
Montipora sp.	+
Oulastrea crispata		+		+
Platygyra sp.	+
Plesiastrea versipora				+
Porites sp.			+
Psammocora haimeana	+
Psammocora superficialis				+
Turbinaria peltata		+		+
Turbinaria sp.	+
Hard coral (Ahermatypic)
Dendrophyllia sp.		+
Tubastrea sp.		+	+	+
Soft Corals
Dendronephthya spp.	+	+	+	+
Cladiella sp.				+
Gorgonian seawhips/ seafans
Anthogorgia sp.		+	+
Echinogorgia sp.		+	+	+
Echinomuricea sp.	+	+	+	+
Ellisella sp.	+
Euplexaura sp.	+	+	+	+
Guaiagorgia sp.			+
Melithaea sp.	+
Menella sp.		+	+	+
‘sea fans’		+
Black coral
Cirripathes sp.	+	+
Number of species recorded
Hard coral	7	9	4	7
Soft coral	1	1	1	2
Gorgonians	4	7	6	4
Black coral	1	1	0	0

*Information collated from Road P2 EIA Report (1998), Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report (1999) and HATS Dive Survey Report (2003)

**Dive survey results of this EIA study

Soft Substrata Benthic Habitat

8.4.66 The most recent information available from the literature on the benthic infauna of Junk Bay is provided in Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong Report. As part of this territory-wide study commissioned by AFCD, 5 replicate 0.1m² grab samples were collected from a depth of 14m at a sampling station (Station 85) located in the middle of Junk Bay in July 2001. Results showed that this habitat supported a low abundance of benthic infauna recorded at 114 benthic animals m² with biomass (wet wt.) of 1.62 g m². The benthos was characterised as moderately disturbed (W Statistic value = 0.051). Of the 23 species recorded, none were deemed to be rare or of conservation interest.

8.4.67 According to the Study on Marine Benthic Communities in Hong Kong Report, the benthos at Station 85 in the middle of Junk Bay was dominated by polychaete worms in terms of numerical abundance (84.2%) and biomass (79.0%). Moreover, 17 of the 23 species recorded at the sampling station were polychaetes. Polychaetes recorded in Junk Bay were Ophlina acuminata, Agaeophalmus dibranchis, Mediomastus sp., Glyceridae sp., Sigambra hanaokai, Sigambra sp., Paraprionospio pinnata, Prionispio malmgreni, Syllinae sp., Tharyx marioni, Mediomastus californiensis, Sthenolepis japonica, Notomastus latericeus, Marphysa depressa, Aglaophamus lyrochaeta, Heteromastus sp. and Heteromastus filiformis. Of these, Mediomastus sp. was the most numerically abundant with 21% of all animals recorded belonging to this species. However this species comprised only 11% of the assemblage’s biomass. Therefore in terms of biomass, Aglaophamus dibranchis was the most abundant species since it contributed about a fifth (22%) of the assemblage’s biomass but with lower numerical abundance (14%). The remainder of the benthic animals recorded in Junk Bay comprised nemertean ribbonworms (Procephalathrix arenarius, Cerebratulus dervelli and Lineus binigrilinearis), bivalves (Tapes literata and Tellina cygnus) and ghost shrimps (Callianassa japonica).

8.4.68 In order to further characterise the infaunal benthos in the Assessment Area, a benthic grab survey was conducted along the north west coast of Junk Bay (Chiu Keng Wan), focused on the soft substrata seabed area inside the proposed reclamation area. This survey was conducted on 1st September 2004 (wet season). Five replicate grab samples from a total of three representative survey stations were collected using a Van Veen grab sampler with a gape of 0.1m² (dimension of 15cm wide, 32cm long and biting depth of 16cm). The location of the survey stations is presented in Figure 8.3. This map shows sample stations labelled ‘Station 1’, ‘Station 2’ and ‘Station 3’ roughly evenly spaced along the Chiu Keng Wan coast.

8.4.69 Standard methods were employed to handle the samples. Each grab sample was sieved immediately on landing on board the survey vessel so that material > 0.5 mm was retained. This material was stained and preserved using rose bengal solution for examination and sorting in the laboratory. Infauna present in the samples were identified to the lowest taxonomic level practicable, enumerated and biomass (wet weight) measured. Analysis of the ecological attributes of benthic assemblages from each of the stations was conducted to include calculation of diversity (H’), evenness (J) and disturbance status (W). A summary of key findings and benthic community attributes are presented in Table 8.5. Detailed findings of the benthic survey are presented in Appendix 8.2.

Table 8.5 Summary of benthic survey results.

Attribute	Station 1*	Station 2*	Station 3*	Overall
Physical
Location	22°17°840’ N 114°15°346’E	22°17°727’ N 114°15°242’ E	22°17°645’ N 114°15°161’ E	-
Depth	8.1m	9.2m	10.2m	-
Sediment type	Silty mud / shell debris/ sand / gravel	Silty mud / shell debris	Silty mud / shell debris	-
Abundance
No of individuals Actinaria Nemertea Polychaeta Sipunculida Mollusca Crustacea Phoronida Echinodermata Chordata	230 - 2.61% 69.93% 4.35% - 22.59% - 0.43% -	188 0.53% 0.53% 93.58% 2.66% - 1.59% 1.06% - -	187 - 0.53% 88.75% - 5.35% 4.27% 0.53% - 0.53%	605 0.17% 1.32% 83.14% 2.48% 1.65% 10.41% 0.50% 0.17% 0.17%
Biomass (wet wt.) Actinaria Nemertea Polychaeta Sipunculida Mollusca Crustacea Phoronida Echinodermata Chordata	1.14g - 4.42% 58.77% 3.54% - 23.89% - 8.85% -	1.00g 1.00% 1.00% 81.00% 3.00% - 12.00% 2.00% - -	1.69g - 0.59% 38.46% - 21.89% 32.54% 0.59% - 5.92%	3.83g 0.26% 1.83% 55.76% 1.83% 9.69% 24.61% 0.79% 2.61% 2.61%
Density
Density of individuals	460 individuals/ m²	376 individuals/ m²	374 individuals/ m²	404 individuals/ m² (average)
Density of biomass	2.28 g/m²	2.00 g/m²	3.38 g/m²	2.55 g/m² (average)
Community
Species richness	34 species	30 species	29 species	51 species
Diversity (H’)	2.69	2.41	2.37	2.49 (average)
Evenness (J)	0.76	0.71	0.71	0.73 (average)
Disturbance
W statistic	-0.175	-0.211	-0.059	-0.148 (average)

· Pooled data from 5 replicate samples

8.4.70 The collected sediment at the three survey stations was of a similar composition and was retrieved from similar depths. Sediment in each replicate from Stations 1, 2, and 3 was composed of silty mud with some shell debris. At Station 1 it was noted that a higher fraction of the bottom mud consisted of coarse sand with some gravel. The depth at Stations 1, 2, and 3 was 8.1m, 9.2m and 10.2m respectively.

8.4.71 In total, more than 600 infaunal individuals were enumerated from the grab survey as a whole. Overall, the benthos was numerically dominated by the polychaetes (83.1%). The remaining portion comprised crustaceans (10.4%), sipunculids (2.5%), molluscs (1.7%), nermerteans (1.3%), phoronids (0.5%), echinoderms (0.2%), actinians (0.2%) and chordates (0.2%). A summary of the species composition and numerical abundance of the surveyed benthos is presented in Table 8.6.

Table 8.6 Composition and abundance of the soft substrata benthic community in grab samples collected from Chiu Keng Wan, Junk Bay on 1 September 2004.

Group	Species	Survey Station
Group	Species	1	2	3	Total
ACTINIARIA (sea anemones)	Actiniarian sp.	-	1	-	1
NEMERTEA (ribbonworms)	Nemertean sp.	6	1	1	8
POLYCHEATA (bristleworms)	Aglaophamus dibranchis	-	1	2	3
	Aglaophamus lyrochaeta	1	2	2	5
	Amphicteis sp.	1	-	-	1
	Aonides oxycephala	1	-	-	1
	Armandia leptocirrus	-	1	-	1
	Chaetozone setosa	7	5	-	12
	Euclymene natalensis	-	1	-	1
	Eunice indica	2	-	-	2
	Euniphysa aculeata	-	1	-	1
	Glycera rouxi	1	-	-	1
	Glycera tridactyla	1	2	1	4
	Glycinde kameruniana	51	33	21	105
	Laonice cirrata	-	1	-	1
	Leocrates chinensis	-	1	1	2
	Leonnates persica	6	-	-	6
	Lumbrineris nagae	-	1	-	1
	Lumbrineris sp.	3	2	2	7
	Magelona crenulifrons	2	3	1	6
	Mediomastus californiensis	10	2	6	18
	Minuspio cirrifera	1	-	2	3
	Nephtys polybranchia	19	12	9	40
	Nereis guangdongensis	1	-	-	1
	Notomastus latericeus	2	-	-	2
	Ophelina grandis	1	-	2	3
	Paraleiocapitella sp.	-	-	3	3
	Paraprionospio pinnata	3	6	10	19
	Pectinaria papillosa	1	-	-	1
	Phyllodoce malmgreni	3	4	1	8
	Poecilochaetus serpens	7	-	1	8
	Prionospio ehlersi	2	7	15	24
	Prionospio malmgreni	18	10	6	34
	Pseudopolydora kempi	9	68	75	152
	Sigambra hanaokai	3	6	2	11
	Sternaspis scutata	1	1	-	2
	Terebellides stroemi	-	1	-	1
	Tharyx marioni	4	5	4	13
SIPUNCULIDA (Peanutworms)	Apionsoma sp.	10	5	-	15
MOLLUSCA (clams, snails etc.)	Gafrarium sp.	-	-	2	2
	Marcia sp.	-	-	2	2
	Bivalve sp. 1.	-	-	6	6
CRUSTACEA (isopods, amphipods, crabs and shrimps etc.)	Gnathia sp.	1	-	-	1
	Amphipod sp.1	47	2	-	49
	Amphipod sp.2	1	-	-	1
	Amphipod sp.3	-	-	1	1
	Unidentified shrimp	-	-	1	1
	Typhlocarcinus nudus	3	1	6	10
PHORONIDA (tubeworms)	Phoronis australis	-	2	1	3
ECHINODERMATA (urchins, starfish, sea cucumbers etc.)	Holothurian sp.	1	-	-	1
CHORDATA (vertebrates e.g. fish)	Odontamblyopus rubicundus	-	-	1	1

8.4.72 The polychaetes were the dominant benthic group, represented by a total of 36 species from 22 families. Overall, the Spionidae and Goniadidae were the most represented polychaete families in terms of numerical abundance. These accounted for 46.5% and 20.9% of all polychaetes identified respectively. Of the remaining polychaete families, other relatively well-represented families were the Nephtyidae (7.9%), Cirratulidae (5.0%), Capitellidae (4.6%) and Pilargiidae (2.2%).

8.4.73 The most numerically abundant species from any group in the benthic survey was also a polychaete being Pseudopolydora kempi. Approximately 25% of all benthic animals found were identified as belonging to this species. Another polychaete, which dominated the benthos in terms of numerical abundance, was Glycinde kameruniana. Overall, this species comprised 17.4% of all benthic animals found in samples.

8.4.74 Apart from being enumerated, benthic animals were also weighed to determine their biomass. In terms of biomass, the polychaetes were also the dominant component of benthos. Polychaetes accounted for more than half (55.8%) of the total biomass of the survey’s benthos as a whole. In the same way, crustaceans accounted for about a quarter (24.6%) of the biomass. This crustacean biomass was mainly contributed by the crab, Typhlocarcinus nudus, which was also the survey’s dominant species in terms of biomass. It accounted for 21% of the total biomass despite its overall low numerical abundance of only 10 individuals. Of the polychaetes, Glycinde kameruniana was the dominant species in terms of its biomass. It contributed 5.7% of the total overall biomass. Other polychaete species with relatively high abundance in terms of biomass were Euclymene natalensis (5.3%) and Glycera tridactyla (5.3%). The most numerically abundant species, the polychaete Pseudopolydora kempi ranked as the fourth most abundant polychaete in terms of its biomass. Its contribution was 3.7% of the total. Overall, the biomass of the benthos off Chiu Keng Wan was considered to be low (2.55g/m²) compared to benthic communities examined from elsewhere in Hong Kong.

8.4.75 Aside from aiding description of the ecological profile of the subtidal benthic community, biomass information combined with numerical abundance data is also useful to characterise the disturbance status of a benthic community. For each of the grab stations, an abundance biomass comparison was conducted which may be used to infer the extent to which benthos are affected by environmental disturbance such as organic pollution (Clarke 1990). Abundance biomass comparison plots (ABC plots), together with W statistic, for each sample station are illustrated in Appendix 8.2. The W statistic measures the extent the biomass curve lies above the numerical abundance curve. In general, positive values indicate ‘undisturbed’, while negative values indicate ‘disturbed’ conditions. Calculation of the W Statistic indicated that all stations were characterised as ‘disturbed’. W Statistic for Stations 1, 2 and 3 were -0.175, -0.211 and -0.059 respectively.

8.4.76 In total, 51 species of benthic fauna were found in the samples. In terms of diversity, the sampled benthic community off Chiu Keng Wan was considered to be of moderate diversity (average H’ = 2.49) in comparison to other benthic communities in Hong Kong.

8.4.77 In summary, survey results indicated that the soft substrata seabed off Chiu Keng Wan supported a disturbed benthic community of moderate diversity and of low abundance. No species of conservation interest were identified.

Marine Mammal Habitat

8.4.78 While there are two resident cetacean species in Hong Kong, the home range of only one, the Finless Porpoise (Neophocaena phocaenoides) coincides with the Assessment Area. In the IUCN Red Data Book, the Finless Porpoise is listed as ‘data deficient’ meaning that based on current understanding, it is not certain whether the species is threatened (Reeves et al. 1997). Nevertheless local populations elsewhere in China are considered ‘endangered’ and this species is probably the most intensively exploited marine cetacean in China (Reeves et al. 1997). The Finless Porpoise is listed under Appendix 1 of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Locally, this species is considered to be of high conservation interest.

8.4.79 The Finless Porpoise is a shy and difficult to see animal but is known to occur over much of Hong Kong coastal waters (Morton et al. 1995). The most detailed knowledge of the local Finless Porpoise population’s distribution and abundance has been acquired through sightings data collected during line transect surveys by the Ocean Park Conservation Foundation (OPCF) from late 1995 to late 2000 and since that time by AFCD. Finless porpoise sightings occur across the southern and eastern waters of Hong Kong from South Lantau to Mirs Bay. Southern waters off South Lantau. Lamma and Po Toi (and neighbouring Aizhou waters outside Hong Kong) are particularly important habitat for finless porpoises although there are seasonal differences in their use. For instance, porpoises appear to vacate South Lantau waters in summer and autumn. In eastern waters such as off Nine Pins, the Sai Kung peninsula and Mirs Bay, Finless Porpoise sightings occur in offshore areas throughout the year. In contrast, inshore areas in Hong Kong eastern waters such as portions of Port Shelter, the Tolo inlet, Double Haven and Crooked Harbour did not appear to be used by finless porpoises.

8.4.80 Based on the 1995-2000 surveys, which were conducted in Hong Kong as well as adjacent Guangdong (Aizhou) waters, Jefferson (2000) estimated that the finless porpoise population was at least 217 animals. Inside Hong Kong waters, the estimated number of animals was calculated to vary from a peak of 152 animals in spring to 55 animals in autumn.

8.4.81 Eight years’ records (1996 - 2004) of Finless Porpoise sightings recorded by Jefferson (2000) and by recent AFCD monitoring are presented in Figure 8.4. This indicates there are no records of finless porpoise sightings in Junk Bay or immediately adjacent waters. The nearest isolated sighting of a live finless porpoise to Junk Bay was recorded about 2km south of Tung Lung Chau in 1997 (AFCD). In addition, inspection of stranding records collected from 1996-2004 of finless porpoises also revealed no animals had been discovered washed ashore in Junk Bay, which provides further evidence on their absence from this area. In contrast, confirmed reports of strandings of dead finless porpoises were in other parts of the assessment area at Shek O (10 strandings, 1996-2000, AFCD), Clearwater Bay (10 strandings, 1996-2004, AFCD), Cape d’Aguilar (2 strandings, 1997 & 1999, AFCD), Big Wave Bay (1 stranding, 2004, AFCD), Nine Pins (1 stranding, 2000, AFCD) and Po Toi (1 stranding, 2000, AFCD).

8.4.82 Based on the available records, waters within and adjacent to Junk Bay do not appear to be utilised by Finless Porpoises and are considered not important for this species.

8.5 Ecological Value

8.5.1 In accordance with the EIAO TM Annex 8 criteria, the ecological importance of recorded habitats has been evaluated in Tables 8.7a to 8.7c below.

Table 8.7a Ecological Value of natural rocky shore and artificial seawall habitats

Criteria	Natural Rocky Shore	Artificial Seawall
Naturalness	The rocky shore is largely undisturbed by human activity.	Artificial, constructed habitat.
Size	Large in extent.	Large in extent and the most predominant intertidal habitat of the Assessment Area
Diversity	Typical of other semi-exposed shores in eastern Hong Kong	Low
Rarity	One species of conservation interest recorded – Grassy Puffer fish (Takifugu niphobles) is catalogued in the IUCN red list of threatened species	Species assemblages similar to rocky shore. No records of species of conservation interest
Re-creatability	Habitat is re-creatable. Intertidal biota may recolonise hard substrata shores	N/A
Fragmentation	Very low.	N/A
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	Low	None identified.
Nursery ground	One Rock pool on rocky shore is apparently used for spawning by Takifugu niphobles. However this species is widespread in Hong Kong waters, and breeding populations in Junk Bay are not thought to be of particular conservation significance.	No significant records.
Age	N/A	Seawalls of Junk Bay were recently constructed and are generally <10 years old.
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife	Moderate. Typical species of similar composition and abundance as other semi-exposed rocky shores in Hong Kong.	Low
Ecological value	Low-Moderate.	Low.

Table 8.7b Ecological Value of sandy shore habitat and hard substrata subtidal habitat

Criteria	Sandy Shore	Hard Substrata Subtidal Habitat
Naturalness	The small semi-exposed sandy shores at Chiu Keng Wan are relatively free from physical modifications and disturbance from recreational use, but are affected by water pollution to some extent.	Coral habitats are largely natural. Corals in Junk Bay may be affected by water pollution to some extent.
Size	3 small coves in Junk Bay. 2 sandy shores span 75m and 80m of coastline respectively. Sandy/boulder shore spans 50m.	Medium in extent. Corals are restricted to shallow hard substrate and attain moderate or high cover at a restricted number of sites in the Assessment Area. Chiu Keng Wan supports low cover of hard and soft corals.
Diversity	Very Low.	Low.
Rarity	No species of conservation interest recorded. Sandy Shores in the Assessment Area support faunal assemblages with low species diversity.	No species recorded in surveys were considered rare. Species recorded are found in similar habitats across Hong Kong.
Re-creatability	Habitat is re-creatable	Corals may recolonise subtidal hard substrata
Fragmentation	Moderate-High. Sandy shores form a small portion of intertidal habitat in the Assessment Area.	Low.
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	Moderate.	Coasts with corals are of conservation interest. ~2.5 ha area of high gorgonian and soft coral cover at the southwest corner of Junk Bay was noteworthy in the context of its close proximity to Victoria Harbour.
Nursery ground	No significant records.	No significant records
Age	N/A	N/A
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife	Very low diversity but sizeable ghost crab populations	Sparse presence of hard corals and low to moderate abundance of common gorgonians and soft corals in Junk Bay.
Ecological value	Low – Moderate.	The Assessment Area supports numerous coral communities of high or medium ecological value predominantly near Clearwater Bay, Sung Kong, Nine Pins, Joss House Bay, Tung Lung Chau and Ngan Wan. Corals at the proposed reclamation area (i.e., Chiu Keng Wan) comprise small, isolated colonies in very low abundance and diversity Chiu Keng Wan – Low West Coast of Junk Bay – Moderate Junk Island – Moderate

Table 8.7c Ecological Value of soft substrata subtidal and marine mammal habitats

Criteria	Soft Substrata Subtidal	Marine Mammal
Naturalness	Habitat disturbed by pollution, fisheries and coastal development	Some disturbance through vessel traffic and commercial fishing operations.
Size	Large.	Small. The known range of Neophocaena phocaenoides only overlaps the southern and eastern margin of the Assessment Area.
Diversity	Moderate species diversity dominated by polychaetes.	Finless Porpoise (Neophocaena phocanoides) is the only resident cetacean of the assessment area waters.
Rarity	No species of conservation interest recorded	IUCN listed N. phocanoides is a species of conservation importance.
Re-creatability	Benthic organisms may recolonise disturbed seabed areas	This habitat cannot be recreated.
Fragmentation	The habitat is not fragmented.	Marine mammal habitat is not fragmented
Ecological linkage	The habitat is not functionally linked to any high value habitat in a significant way.	Sightings of the Finless Porpoise are more frequent to the south and east of the Assessment Area.
Potential value	Low. It is unlikely that soft subtrata habitat will develop conservation value.	Monitoring records indicate no Finless Porpoise have been sighted within or in the immediate vicinity of Junk Bay.
Nursery ground	No significant record.	No strandings of N. phocanoides have been recorded from Junk Bay
Age	N/A	N/A
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife	Benthic infauna recorded in low abundance.	Low
Ecological value	Low.	Low.

8.5.2 Based on the ecological conditions presented in the above sections, the ecological value of marine habitats in the assessment area was considered to be as follows.

8.5.3 Artificial seawall was considered to be of low ecological value given that it is the most extensive intertidal habitat type in the Assessment Area and supports common and widespread biota with no significant species records.

8.5.4 Rocky shore is a common habitat, which was largely natural, undisturbed and extensive in size in the Assessment Area. It supported common and widespread species typical of semi-exposed shores in Hong Kong. This intertidal habitat was found to be utilised as a spawning site by a species of potential conservation interest Takifugu niphobles, although only one small rock pool along the whole of the coastline was used by this species, which is relatively common in Hong Kong waters. Overall, rocky shore habitat was considered to be of low-moderate ecological value.

8.5.5 Sandy shore habitats along the coast at Chiu Keng Wan are considered of low-moderate ecological value only. Although these habitats were observed to be relatively free from physical modification and disturbance from recreational use, they were also noted to be small in size, and compared to other sandy shore habitats (e.g., Big Wave Bay and Shek O Beaches, section 8.4.34 refers), supported faunal assemblages with extremely low diversity. As noted in section 8.4.31, factors contributing to the low faunal diversity of these shores are likely to include water pollution and course grain size of the sand on the beach.

8.5.6 Soft substratum subtidal habitat supported low abundance of common and widespread species dominated by the polychaetes. This habitat was considered to be of low ecological value

8.5.7 Owing to the sparse and patchy cover of hard and soft corals and the small size of hard corals which comprised species commonly found in coral areas elsewhere in Hong Kong, hard substrata subtidal habitat at Chiu Keng Wan inside Junk Bay were considered to be of low ecological value. Elsewhere in Junk Bay, the west coast of Junk Bay (to the south of Chiu Keng Wan) and Junk Island (Fat Tong Chau) were considered to be of moderate ecological value.

8.5.8 Since records of live sightings of Finless Porpoises only occur at the southeast margin of the Assessment Area not within Junk Bay, it was considered that these marine waters were of low ecological value as marine mammal habitat.

8.5.9 In accordance with the TM-EIA Annex 8 criteria, the species of conservation interest are evaluated in Table 8.8 below.

Table 8.8 Species of Conservation Interest within Assessment Area

Common Name	Scientific Name	Status*	Protection Status	Distribution, Rarity and Other Notes
*Fauna*
Grassy (also known as Starry) Puffer fish	Takifugu niphobles	DD	Not protected	Reported to be moderately abundant in Hong Kong. Intertidal spawner.
Black Finless Porpoise	Neophocaena phocaenoides	DD	Wild Animals Protection Ordinance Grade I Protected Species in the PRC. CITES Appendix 1	Range from South Lantau waters to Mirs Bay and adjacent PRC waters. Peak abundance in HK waters is about 150 animals in spring.
Coral communities	-	-	Some taxa protected under Cap. (187)	Corals found in various marine habitats in Hong Kong waters, particularly in northern and north-eastern waters.

* CR – Critically Endangered (Best available evidence indicates it is facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild); EN – Endangered (Best available evidence indicates it is facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild); VU – Vulnerable (Best available evidence indicates it is facing a high risk of extinction in the wild); NT – Near Threatened (It is close to or likely to qualify for a threatened category in the near future) LC – Least Concern (It does not qualify for threatened or near threatened categories); DD – Data deficient (No assessment of extinction risk can be made but it should receive same degree of attention as taxa in threatened categories). Refer to IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria (version 3.1) (2001) for further details.

8.6 Identification of Environmental Impacts

8.6.1 The scope and extent of the Project works are described in detail in Section 2 of this Report. Potential marine ecological impacts resulting from construction and operation phase activities have been identified, and are outlined in the following sections.

Construction Phase

Direct Impacts

8.6.2 Potential direct impacts on marine ecology arising from the proposed construction activities would include:

· Loss of approximately 1km of largely natural intertidal rocky shore and 0.2km of sandy shore habitat due to WCR reclamation

· Loss of approximately 0.25km of artificial seawall habitat due to WCR reclamation

· Loss of seabed affecting approximately 16.3ha of soft and hard substrata subtidal habitats due to WCR reclamation

· Loss of approximately 0.2ha soft substrata subtidal habitat due to construction of piers for the Cross Bay Link.

Indirect Impacts

8.6.3 Potential indirect construction phase impacts would include:

· water quality impacts on coral areas due to dredging for WCR reclamation and potential disturbance impacts to marine mammal habitat due to increased vessel traffic and construction activities. These potential impacts are discussed in more detail in the following sections.

Water Quality Impacts – Suspended Sediments

8.6.4 Possible indirect impact on subtidal habitat may arise due to water quality deterioration, and particularly due to siltation effects during the marine works. Hard corals are known to be at particular risk of deleterious impacts from sedimentation through smothering and clogging of their respiratory and feeding apparatus. Similarly, more turbid water may reduce the amount of light reaching beneath the water surface, which may also be detrimental to hard corals. With less light, growth rates of hermatypic hard corals (coral which possesses photosynthetic algae called zooanthellae) may be reduced. The effects of increased sediment levels in the water column also extend to other marine groups apart from the corals. For instance, fauna inhabiting soft substrate may also be smothered if sedimentation rates are high.

8.6.5 Hard corals possess mechanisms for rejecting sediment from their surfaces, but employment of these mechanisms expend energy and may cause stress ultimately leading to bleaching (expulsion of zooxanthellae) or tissue necrosis. The vulnerability of different corals to sedimentation effects is not the same. Hard corals with horizontal plate-like or massive growth forms are more vulnerable than hard corals that grow with plates arranged vertically or with upright branches. Hard corals with convex surfaces or possessing tall polyps are also less sensitive. Sensitivity to sediment loading also varies markedly between species of the same genus (Hawker and Connell 1992) and may even vary between individual colonies of the same species as individual colonies change their growth form to best cope with different sedimentation regimes where they live (Pastorok and Bilyard 1985).

8.6.6 In contrast, soft and gorgonian corals are considered to have greater tolerance of turbid conditions. Owing to their flexible branches and erect growth forms, it is known that soft and gorgonian corals are not prone to sediment accumulation. Furthermore, gorgonian and most soft corals feed independently without contributions from algal associates and are therefore not affected by light reduction due to increased turbidity.

8.6.7 Since potential impacts on corals may arise through increased turbidity (i.e. elevation in SS) and excessive sediment deposition, the magnitude of impacts on corals was assessed based on both of these water quality parameters.

8.6.8 To assess the impacts associated with elevated SS, the assessment was based on compliance with the statutory Water Quality Objectives (WQO) for Junk Bay Water Control Zone (see Table 5.2), which are set for among other reasons, to offer protection for marine ecological resources. Water quality modelling predictions were assessed for compliance with the WQO through comparison of worst case scenario’s 15-day depth-averaged SS level against baseline levels. Using this criterion, if the elevation in SS levels exceeds 30% above ambient baseline conditions, adverse impacts would be predicted (and suitable mitigation pursued).

8.6.9 There are no WQOs regarding sedimentation rates. To assess impacts on corals due to sediment deposition, criteria were adopted that were derived from research work by Pastorok and Bilyard (1985). These leading authorities on sedimentation effects, published criteria that suggested impact levels on corals would occur as follows:

· 10 – 100 g m^-2 per day slight to moderate impacts

· 100 – 500 g m^-2 per daymoderate to severe impacts

· >500 g m^-2 per daysevere to catastrophic impacts

8.6.10 With reference to the above criteria, the sedimentation rate of not exceeding 100 mg cm^-2 per day (or 0.1 kg m^-2 per day) which has been adopted in previous EIAs⁽[1]⁾ in Hong Kong, is also considered as suitable for use in this study.

8.6.11 This sedimentation rate criterion was considered to offer sufficient protection to corals and is anticipated to guard against unacceptable impacts. This protection has been confirmed by EM&A programmes, which have indicated no adverse impacts to corals have occurred when this assessment criterion was adopted.

Water Quality Impacts – Dissolved oxygen

8.6.12 Apart from sedimentation effects, corals in particular may also be sensitive to changes in other water quality parameters during the construction phase. As bottom sediment is disturbed during dredging and particles released into the water column, organic substances contained in the sediment may be oxidised or fed upon by microbial life. These processes use up some of the oxygen in the water. If oxygen levels are depleted to low levels, benthic organisms unable to tolerate such conditions may suffer hypoxia-induced mortality and / or stress including diminished feeding and growth rates (Diaz & Rosenberg 1995). In particular, corals are more sensitive to low oxygen levels than other benthic groups. For this EIA study, the WQO standard that bottom water DO should remain above 2 mg L-1 90% of the time was broadly adopted.

Disturbance Impacts To Marine Mammal Habitat

8.6.13 Marine construction and dredging may result in the generation of underwater noise and an increase in marine traffic. Although records of finless porpoise sightings and strandings appear to show these cetaceans do not frequently utilise the Assessment Area, nevertheless, cetaceans are protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170), 1980 and so any lethal and sublethal impacts due to, for example, underwater noise associated with the project will be deemed unacceptable.

8.6.14 Studies have shown that because of the efficient transfer of sound in water, cetaceans can detect noises associated with vessels similar to dredgers at distances up to approximately 5 km. Finless Porpoises use ultrasonic pulses for echolocation of prey, navigation and communication with conspecifics (Jefferson, 2000) so that noise disturbance may lead to behavioural changes. There is evidence suggesting that some cetacean species will minimise their use of areas affected by underwater noise. However, noise generated by underwater construction activities such as dredging and pile-driving have their highest energy at lower frequencies, from about 20 Hz to 1 kHz, whereas the important communication channels for smaller whales, dolphins and porpoises tend to range from 1kHz to 10kHz (Wűrsig et al. 2000). It is therefore unlikely that construction activities associated with this Project would cause substantial impact to finless porpoises utilizing nearby waters.

8.6.15 In addition, finless porpoises in Hong Kong have been found killed and injured by vessel collisions (Parsons & Jefferson, 2000). Overall, about a fifth (17%) of known finless porpoise mortalities in Hong Kong have been attributed to vessel collision (Jefferson, 2000). Vessel collision (also termed boat strike) is therefore one of the most significant anthrogenically-induced causes of finless porpoise mortality locally.

Operation Phase

Direct Impacts

8.6.16 No direct marine ecological impacts are expected during the operation stage of the Project.

Indirect Impacts

8.6.17 Potential indirect impacts on marine ecology arising during the operation phase may include water quality impacts on coral sites due to the effects of altered coastal configuration and infrastructure on the hydrodynamic flow pattern of Junk Bay.

8.6.18 Other water quality issues assessed in Section 5 were impacts of emergency discharge of sewage in the event of malfunction of HATS (sections 5.7.22-5.7.31 refer). Potential impacts resulting from such a malfunction were discussed largely in the context of the danger posed to users of water recreational facilities proposed for Inner Junk Bay. As the functioning (or malfunctioning) of sewage discharge of HATS does not fall under the remit of this Project, assessment of marine ecology impacts resulting from emergency sewage discharge are not discussed in further here.

8.6.19 Because the proposed development plans of the Project do not include port facilities such as docks or piers (except for a recreational water sports facility which will consist mostly of non-motorised vessels such as windsurfers and rowing boats), increased marine traffic during the operation phase was not considered to be of concern in relation to potential impacts on Finless Porpoises. Operational phase impacts on Finless Porpoises are therefore not considered further in this assessment.

8.7 Prediction and Evaluation of Environmental Impacts

8.7.1 Potential ecological impacts to habitats in the assessment area resulting from the current Project have been evaluated according to Table 1 of Annex 8 of the TM-EIA.

Construction Phase

Rocky shore habitat

8.7.2 The proposed WCR reclamation would cover all areas between the proposed seawall and margin of the land. As a result, all natural rocky shore habitat enveloped by the seawall in the northeast corner of Junk Bay would be permanently lost. This loss of habitat would be an unavoidable consequence of the project. Taking into account the irregular configuration of the coastline, a total of approximately 1km of rocky shore would be lost.

8.7.3 The loss of natural rocky shore would be partially compensated by the construction of 1.05km of sloping rubble mound seawall. Rubble mound seawall consists of irregular medium to large sized boulders, which would provide suitable substrata for recolonisation by intertidal flora and fauna. In addition, the 30 piers constructed in the sea for the CBL would also provide hard substrata for colonisation.

8.7.4 Surveys along the Chiu Keng Wan coast subject to the proposed reclamation found a single intertidal rock pool on the upper shore, which was temporarily utilised as a spawning site by a species of potential ecological interest, the Grassy Puffer. As discussed in Section 8.4.23, this species, which lives in open water, may temporarily strand itself in high shore rock pools between spring tides in order to spawn. Owing to the reported moderate abundance of this species in Hong Kong waters and the prevalence of natural rocky shore habitat, which comprises about 62% of the Hong Kong coastline, loss of this one rock pool spawning site was considered to be a very minor impact . Nevertheless, construction activities such as filling may kill any individuals that have stranded in the rock pool during the construction phase and therefore mitigation measures to rescue individuals are recommended.

Table 8.9 Overall Impact Evaluation for Rocky Shore Habitat

Evaluation Criteria	Rocky shore habitat
Habitat quality	Habitat quality was considered low-medium
Species	Potential loss of intertidal spawning site for one species of potential conservation interest, the Grassy Puffer, Takifugu niphobles
Size/Abundance	1km length of natural rocky shore
Duration	Loss of habitat would be permanent
Reversibility	Loss of natural rocky shore is irreversible but would be partially compensated by availability of sloping rubble mound seawall for recolonisation by rocky shore organisms
Magnitude	The scale of habitat loss is low in the context of similar surrounding similar habitat
Overall impact conclusion	Low

Sandy shore habitat

8.7.5 WCR reclamation would result in the loss of 3 sandy coves along the Chiu Keng Wan coast with a combined length of approximately 0.2km. The loss of this habitat and its associated fauna from the west coast of Junk Bay would be permanent. Overall, impacts to sandy shore habitats were considered low-moderate in scale only. As described in section 8.5.5, sandy shore habitats were considered low-moderate ecological value. Although the habitats were observed to be relatively free from physical modification and disturbance from recreational use, they were also noted to be small in size and supported faunal assemblages with extremely low diversity.

Table 8.10 Overall Impact Evaluation for Sandy Shore Habitat

Evaluation Criteria	Sandy shore habitat
Habitat quality	Low-moderate
Species	No species of recognised conservation interest were recorded
Size/Abundance	Small. Stretches of sandy shore inside the reclamation footprint have a combined length of approximately 0.2km
Duration	Loss of habitat would be permanent
Reversibility	Loss of natural sandy shore would be irreversible
Magnitude	The scale of habitat loss is moderate in the context that this habitat is generally uncommon in the Assessment Area
Overall impact conclusion	Low-Moderate

Artificial Seawall habitat

8.7.6 Artificial seawall subject to loss was vertical seawall of limited ecological value and would not be of particular ecological concern. Impact of the WCR reclamation on artificial seawall habitat was rated as very low.

Table 8.11 Overall Impact Evaluation for Artificial Seawall Habitat

Evaluation Criteria	Artificial seawall habitat
Habitat quality	Low
Species	No species of note were identified.
Size/Abundance	Approximately 0.25km of vertical seawall would be lost.
Duration	The loss of vertical seawall would be permanent
Reversibility	Loss of vertical seawall would be partially compensated by construction of sloping rubble mound seawall, which would better mimic natural hard shore habitat.
Magnitude	Low
Overall impact conclusion	Very Low

Hard Substrata Subtidal Habitat

8.7.7 WCR reclamation would lead to the permanent loss of areas of subtidal hard substrata that supports a sparse and patchy cover (<1%) of hard corals as well as a sparse or occasionally moderate cover (0 – 15% cover) of soft and gorgonian corals. This coral loss would be an unavoidable consequence of the project. Owing to their sparse cover, generally small size and low species richness and because they are common species which are well represented in coral communities across Hong Kong, the loss of the hard corals was considered to be of limited ecological significance. Similarly, although soft corals and gorgonians attained moderate cover namely inside the southern margin of the reclamation area, it was known that the species identified are widespread and commonly found along the coastal fringes of Hong Kong. Moreover, the current WCR engineering design was proposed to avoid a 2.5ha area of very high abundance of soft and gorgonian corals located close to Lei Yue Mun at the southwest corner of Junk Bay.

8.7.8 Indirect impacts on corals due to WCR reclamation and CBL bridge construction are assessed with reference to findings presented in Section 5 of this report. The proposed WCR reclamation would be constructed in 3 phases (refer to Figure 5.8) and would involve a construction sequence and methods that are designed to lessen resulting water quality impacts due to dispersion of suspended sediments. Works for the WCR reclamation would only require dredging at Phase I area, located at the southern end of the Chiu Keng Wan coast. There would be no dredging to remove seabed sediment at reclamation Phases II and III since bottom sediments would be left in situ at these locations. Water quality impact arising due to filling would also be avoided since this land formation work would be contained behind an enclosing seawall. To construct the seawall sections for Phases II and III, a Deep Cement Mixing (DCM) process would be used. This is a construction method that results in less water quality impact than conventional seawall construction methods that require dredging. Similarly, no dredging would be conducted for the placement of CBL bridge piers. Instead, piers would be installed using a Large Diameter Bored Piling (LDBP) platform, which is considered to be a construction method that would cause negligible release of sediment into the water column.

8.7.9 In this way, the major source of water quality impact arising from the Project, which may impact coral sites in Junk Bay, would be associated with Phase I WCR reclamation works. [Note: Phases I, II and III of the WCR reclamation would not be constructed concurrently.] Using a sediment plume prediction model, a worst-case scenario of Phase I works, called Scenario A was examined to determine potential impacts on coral sites. The modelling results of Scenario A show the predicted unmitigated water quality impacts of dredging a total of 20,000m³ of sediment using a closed-grab, assuming 12 working hour each day and lasting for 27 days. Further details on the (conservative) assumptions of Scenario A are described in Sections 5.5.24 – 5.5.25 and 5.5.29 – 5.5.30. Apart from the proposed dredging works, Scenario A modelling also incorporates water quality impacts arising from concurrent seawall construction (refer to Table 5.16).

8.7.10 According to the Scenario A sediment plume modelling results, construction works would not cause levels of SS at coral sites in Junk Bay to breach WQO standards. At the southwest Junk Bay coral site (S1)(refer to Figure 8.1), corals would experience mean depth-averaged SS levels of 4.49mg L^-1 and 6.36mg L-1 in the dry and wet seasons respectively. This corresponds to a 14.3% and 21.4% elevation of SS levels above baseline respectively, which would be in compliance with the WQO for Junk Bay. At the Junk Island coral site (S2), depth-averaged SS levels would be 3.94mg L^-1 and 5.07mg L^-1 in the dry and wet seasons respectively. This would represent a 2.1% and 1.8% elevation in depth-averaged SS levels above baseline respectively, which indicates that WQO would be achieved at this coral site during construction works. This assessment indicates no unacceptable adverse impact on coral sites due to elevated SS levels during the construction phase would be anticipated. Figure DA 1 and Figure WA 1 of Appendix 5.3 shows the mean depth-averaged SS levels for Scenario A for the dry and wet season respectively. .

8.7.11 Maximum sedimentation rates at Junk Bay coral sites (refer to Figure 8.1) under Scenario A conditions were predicted to remain well below critical levels. At the Southwest Junk Bay coral site (S1), maximum sedimentation rate were predicted to be 3.3g m² day^-1 and 3.2g m² day^-1 in the dry and wet season respectively. Similarly, maximum sedimentation rates at the Junk Island coral site (S2) were predicted to be 3.3 g m² day^-1 and 3.2 g m² day^-1 in the dry and wet season respectively. No unacceptable adverse impacts to corals sites due to increased sediment deposition during the construction phase was anticipated. Figure DA 2 and Figure WA 2 of Appendix 5.3 shows the maximum sedimentation rate for Scenario A for the dry and wet season respectively.

8.7.12 In terms of sediment impacts on coral communities, water quality mitigation measures were recommended in Section 5 including the deployment of silt curtain to limit the dispersal of the sediment plume. With employment of water quality mitigation measures, it was considered that no unacceptable indirect sediment plume related impacts on coral areas would occur.

8.7.13 Figure DA 3 and Figure WA 3 of Appendix 5.3 illustrate mean depth-averaged dissolved oxygen conditions during Scenario A for the dry and wet season respectively. The average dissolved oxygen of the bottom waters under Scenario A is shown in Figure DA 4 of Appendix 5.3 and WA4 of Appendix 5.3. These modelling results indicated that under Scenario A, there would be a negligible impact on dissolved oxygen levels.. Dissolved oxygen levels at the Southwest Junk Bay (S1) and Junk Island (S2) coral sites would be in compliance with the WQOs of Junk Bay. During the construction phase, no unacceptable adverse impacts at these coral sites beyond predicted baseline water quality conditions were anticipated.

8.7.14 The operation phase impacts on water quality due to changes in coastal configuration arising from the Project were assessed in Section 5. According to this assessment, it was concluded that changes in hydrodynamics due to the WCR reclamation and CBL would have little effect on water quality. All water quality parameters would be in compliance with WQOs at coral sites in Junk Bay and no unacceptable adverse impacts were predicted.

Table 8.12 Overall Impact Evaluation for Hard Substrata Subtidal Habitat

Evaluation Criteria	Hard substrata subtidal habitat
Habitat quality	Chiu Keng Wan (i.e. reclamation area) - Low West coast of Junk Bay (excluding and at the south of Chiu Keng Wan) - Medium
Species	Hard, soft and gorgonian corals occur at Chiu Keng Wan as well as to the south along the west coast of Junk Bay
Size/Abundance	Chiu Keng Wan supports sparse hard corals and sparse to moderate cover of soft and gorgonian corals
Duration	Direct loss of corals inside the reclamation would occur during the construction phase and would be permanent. Indirect water quality impact on coast supporting corals adjacent to the reclamation would occur for approximately 1 month during dredging at Phase 1 of WCR reclamation. Due to construction methods, water quality impact are not expected during filling and pier construction
Reversibility	Loss of corals would be irreversible though 1km sloping seawall may provide hard substrata for recolonisation
Magnitude	Direct impact: Low-moderate Indirect impact: Very Low
Overall impact conclusion	Low with mitigation

Soft Substrata Subtidal Habitat

8.7.15 WCR reclamation would cause direct loss of approximately 16.3ha of seabed, whilst pier construction for CBL would lead to the loss of approximately 0.2ha. Loss of this disturbed habitat, which supports low abundance of infauna of no recognised conservation interest, was considered to minor in the context of similar surrounding habitat.

Table 8.13 Overall Impact Evaluation for Soft Substrata Subtidal Habitat

Evaluation Criteria	Soft Substrata Subtidal Habitat
Habitat quality	Low
Species	No species of conservation interest were identified
Size/Abundance	16.5ha of seabed would be lost due to WCR reclamation
Duration	Loss of this habitat would be permanent
Reversibility	Habitat loss would be irreversible
Magnitude	The scale of habitat loss is low in the context of similar surrounding similar habitat
Overall impact conclusion	Low

Marine Mammal Habitat

8.7.16 Based on finless porpoise sightings records used to establish baseline ecological conditions, there is no evidence that finless porpoises utilise Junk Bay. The loss of sea area due to the project would not constitute direct loss of marine mammal habitat for the Finless Porpoise.

8.7.17 Indirect disturbance impacts arising from the project are expected to be very low given that finless porpoises are not expected to present in the vicinity of the works and that construction methods would not involve production of high power underwater sound. Construction activities for WCR reclamation would include dredging, placement of boulders to construct the rubble mound seawall and filling behind the seawall. Dredging, seawall construction and filling for the three phases of the WCR reclamation is expected to last 1, 8 and 12 months respectively. Marine construction activities for the CBL would be bored piling works. These activities are expected to generate low intensity underwater sounds that would not be disruptive to porpoises.

8.7.18 The increase in marine traffic associated with the WCR reclamation would include a maximum of 16 slow moving barges entering and leaving Junk Bay each day. The increase in disturbance from marine traffic is considered minor in the context of the existing high levels (400 vessel movements in daylight hours) of marine traffic in the busy Tathong Channel.

8.7.19 In summary, owing to the lack of sightings of Black Finless Porpoises from Junk Bay and adjacent areas based on monitoring records, a relatively low increase in large, slow moving vessels and general construction phase activities would not be expected to adversely affect the porpoises, which appear not to frequent these waters.

Table 8.14 Overall Impact Evaluation for Marine Mammal Habitat

Evaluation Criteria	Marine Mammal Habitat
Habitat quality	Low
Species	Black Finless Porpoise, Neophocaena phocanoides
Size/Abundance	No Finless Porpoise have been sighted within or in the immediate vicinity of Junk Bay.
Duration	Disturbance from vessel movements and noise may occur in the construction phase
Reversibility	Impacts would occur during the construction period
Magnitude	Low
Overall impact conclusion	Very Low

8.8 Mitigation of Adverse Environmental Impacts

8.8.1 Following EIAO-TM Annex 16 guidelines, mitigation measures are discussed in this section to avoid, minimise and compensate for identified ecological impacts.

Avoid

8.8.2 The proposed alignment of the WCR has been substantially revised, with consequent large reductions in potential impacts to terrestrial and marine ecological sensitive receivers. Under the previously proposed alignment (as presented in the Western Coast Road EIA Report), the WCR within Junk Bay would have been constructed largely on reclaimed land from Tseung Kwan O to Lei Yue Mun Headland, impacting 2.5ha area of very high abundance of soft and gorgonian corals located close to Lei Yue Mun at the southwest corner of Junk Bay. The revised WCR alignment presented in this EIA Report would avoid impacts to this area of corals.

Minimise

8.8.3 Recent surveys of hard substrata subtidal habitats directly affected by WCR reclamation reveal very low coverage by corals (typically, hard coral coverage was less than 1%, and octo-coral from 0 – 15%), with only common species recorded, and these habitats were considered of low ecological value. Nevertheless, it is recommended however that the feasibility of transplanting potentially impacted hard corals from the reclamation area to suitable nearby habitats is investigated during the detailed design stage of the Project. To achieve this aim, surveys of the proposed reclamation area should be conducted during the detailed design stage, at least 8 months prior to the start of the construction phase. These surveys should focus on identifying and mapping hard corals that would be suitable for transplantation (i.e., corals encrusting small boulders of a manageable size that can be moved by divers with lifting aids). If corals suitable for transplantation are identified during these surveys, a detailed transplantation methodology (including monitoring of transplanted corals) should be drafted during the detailed design stage of the Project.

8.8.4 During construction phase for Phase I reclamation, mitigation measures used to control water quality (e.g. deployment of a silt curtain and reduced dredging rate as presented in Section 5) would serve to protect corals in proximity to the reclamation to acceptable levels. Construction methods for reclamation would involve filling within enclosed areas behind seawalls with no dredging required for Phase II and Phase III of the WCR reclamation. These construction methods are expected to result in no substantial water quality or marine ecological impacts. Nevertheless, silt curtains would be deployed and other measures implemented to minimise any potential water quality impacts during these works (sections 5.8.20-5.8.23 refer).

8.8.5 Mitigation is recommended to prevent potentially lethal direct impacts of construction activities on individual Grassy Puffers, if found stranded in rock pools within the works area. It is recommended that the rock pool is visited after each spring tide (i.e. about every 2 weeks) during the construction phase of the WCR reclamation until the shore is no longer available due to filling associated with the Project. Any puffers present in the pool should be captured and transferred to a temporary holding tank. Captured fish should be returned to the sea outside the project works boundary. Owing to their defence mechanism of self-inflating, particular care should be employed when capturing and releasing the puffer fish (i.e. keeping the fish submerged in water at all times to prevent gulping of air, which could be lethal). Details of mitigation plans to rescue stranded puffers should be drafted at the detailed design stage.

Compensate

8.8.6 The design of the Project has undergone a detailed evaluation of different alignments and form of structures for the WCR and the CBL, as well as alternative land use proposals for TCS and PSK to arrive at the optimum planning, engineering and environmental solutions which fit together in a coherent manner (as detailed in Section 2.3). With the preferred option, direct impacts to marine habitats due to the Project have been minimised to the largest possible extent within the constraints imposed by engineering and other environmental considerations. Further reduction in impacts to intertidal habitats could be achieved were the proposed portal and associated reclamation of WCR to be shifted further north (see Figure 2.10). However, it was concluded that such a scheme was not preferred to the selected option because:

· The alternative option would require more reclamation extending further (approximately 100m) into Junk Bay

· The alternative option would cause substantial adverse visual impact to existing and planned residential areas.

· The alternative option would cause more reduction in flushing capacity within inner Junk Bay and would likely cause more adverse water quality impact.

· The alternative option would cause greater air quality and noise impacts on the existing and planned sensitive uses in TCS.

Given these constraints, further mitigation of impacts to intertidal habitats through avoidance and minimisation was not considered feasible (a full discussion and comparison of WCR alignment options is provided in Section 2.3.15 to 2.3.31 of the report). In addition, as stated in Section 2.2.10, WCR is necessary to relieve the traffic congestion envisaged at the existing TKO Tunnel and Wan Po Road due to the continual development of TKO. Compensation has therefore been adopted to mitigate for unavoidable impacts where possible.

8.8.7 As described in Section 8.7.3 natural rocky shore and hard subtidal substrata loss would largely be compensated for through the construction of a 1.05km long sloping rubble mound seawall (the 30 piers of the proposed Cross-bay Link would also provide compensatory hard substrata for colonisation). Elsewhere in Hong Kong, seawall habitat has been found to be suitable to support coral growth. For instance, the rubble mound seawall of the Lamma Power Station ash lagoon was found to support an abundance of gorgonian corals as well as soft corals (Oceanway 2000), while artificial substrate concrete dollos sea defence wall at the Sai Kung High Island dam are known to support abundant hard corals (e.g. Wilson 2002). Moreover, the coral site located at the Southwest Junk Bay was established by colonisation of rubble dumped in a disused spoil ground. The rubble mound seawall consisting of haphazardly arranged boulders is expected to provide a large amount of hard substrata and large surface area for settlement and recruitment of coral assemblages similar to those previously recorded from this coast.

8.9 Evaluation of Residual Impacts

8.9.1 With the effective implementation of mitigation measures proposed in Section 8.8, residual impacts to marine ecology are expected to be relatively minor. The loss of rocky shore and hard sub-tidal substrata would be largely compensated for through the provision of the rubble mound sloping seawall, which would provide suitable conditions for recolonisation by intertidal and subtidal communities. The transplantation/translocation of corals and Grassy Puffers would minimise impacts to species of conservation interest potentially affected by the proposed works. As Junk Bay is not a key habitat for marine mammals, no substantial residual impacts to Finless Porpoise are expected. The most substantial residual impact would therefore be the loss of sandy shore and soft subtidal habitats, which would be unavoidable. However, neither of these habitats were considered of particular ecological value, and the affected areas are relatively small. Residual impacts resulting from the proposed works are therefore considered relatively minor and acceptable.

8.10 Environmental Monitoring and Audit

8.10.1 The marine construction activities include constraints which act as appropriate mitigation measures to control environmental impacts to within acceptable levels (see Section 5). Actual impacts of construction activities would be monitored through impacts to water quality (see Section 5). EM&A activities designed to detect and mitigate any unacceptable impacts to water quality will serve to proactively protect against unacceptable impacts to marine ecological resources. The water quality monitoring programme will provide management actions and supplemental mitigation measures to be employed should impacts arise, thereby ensuring the environmental acceptability of the project. Site audits will be carried out to ensure strict implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. In this way, mitigation measures to safeguard water quality during the construction phase would also serve the purpose of protecting marine ecological resources.

8.10.2 It is recommended that the feasibility of transplanting potentially impacted hard corals from the reclamation area to suitable nearby habitats be investigated during the detailed design stage of the Project. If corals suitable for transplantation are identified during these surveys, a detailed transplantation methodology (including monitoring of transplanted corals) should be drafted during the detailed design stage of the Project.

8.10.3 No unacceptable adverse impact on the medium value coral sites within Junk Bay are anticipated. Nevertheless, EM&A for these coral sites during dredging works for Phase I of the WCR reclamation is recommended. Details of EM&A requirements are provided in the EM&A Manual which includes parameters for monitoring the health and condition of corals during dredging works of the Project and management actions and supplemental mitigation measures should impacts arise. Overall, EM&A would serve the purpose of protecting coral sites in Junk Bay and ensuring the environmental acceptability of the Project.

8.10.4 In order to mitigate for the direct loss of existing hard substrata subtidal habitat that supports mainly octo- and soft corals, the seawall was recommended to be of rubble mound design. This seawall design was considered to provide suitable substrata for coral colonisation. As the effectiveness of this mitigation measure may require a long period to establish, EM&A to track recolonisation processes once the seawall is completed is recommended. The details are provided in the accompanying EM&A Manual.

References

Ang. P (2002) Conservation of corals in Hong Kong. In: Proceedings of IUCN/WCPA-EA-4 Taipei Conference. (Tsai, H.M. ed.). Organizing Committee for the Fourth Conference of the Protected Areas in East Asia, Taipei, Taiwan. pp. 277-295.

Clark T.H. (1997). The distribution of ahermatypic corals at Cape d’Aguilar Marine Reserve, Hong Kong. In: The Marine Flora and Fauna of Hong Kong and Southern China IV (ed. B. Morton) pp219-233.

Clark. T.H. (1998) The distribution of hermatypic scleractinian corals at Cape d’Aguilar, Hong Kong. In: The Marine Biology of the South China Sea III (ed. B. Morton) pp 151-164

DeVantier, L.M., G. De’ath, T.J. Done & Turak, E. (1998). Ecological Assessment of a Complex Natural System: A Case Study from the Great Barrier Reef. Ecological Applications 8:480-496.

Diaz J.R. & Rosenberg R. (1995) Marine benthic hypoxia: a review of its ecological effects and the behavioural responses of benthic macrofauna. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 33 :245-303

Dolmon S., Owen D., Parsons E.C.M., Simmonds M.P., Swift R., Weilgart L (2004) Oceans of Noise 2004. A WDSC Science Report. Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society.<www.wdcs.org>

Fellowes, J.R., Lau, M.W.N., Dudgeon, D., Reels, G.T., Ades, G.W.J., Carey, G.J., Chan, B.P.L., Kendrick, R.C., Lee, K.S., Leven, M.R., Wilson, K.D.P. & Yu, Y.T. (2002) Wild animals to watch: Terrestrial and freshwater fauna of conservation concern in Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 25: 123-159.

Jefferson TA (2000) Conservation Biology of the Finless Porpoises (Neophocaena phocaenoides) in Hong Kong Waters. Final Report Submitted to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, December 2000.

Lee V.L.F., Lam S.K.S., Ng F.K.Y., Chan T.K.T. and Young M.L.C. (2004) Field Guide to Freshwater Fishes of Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Friends of the Country Parks and Cosmos Books Ltd.

Morton B. (1992) A case study for marine conservation: Hong Kong’s scleractinian coral communities. In: The Marine Flora and Fauna of Hong Kong and Southern China III (ed. B. Morton) pp3-13.

Morton B. (1998) Hong Kong’s Marine Parks Ordinance and designation of the first Marine Parks and Marine Reserve: Where next? In: The Marine Biology of the South China Sea III (Ed. B. Morton). HKU Press.

Morton B. (2003) Marine Protected Areas in Hong Kong: Progress towards coastal zone management (1977-2002). In: Perspectives on Marine Environment Change in Hong Kong and Southern China, 1977-2001 (ed. B. Morton). pp797-824. HKU Press.

Morton B. & Morton J. (1983) The Seashore Ecology of Hong Kong. HKU Press.

Morton B., Williams, G.A. and Lee S. Y. (1995). Hong Kong’s benthic marine environment: A dwindling heritage. In: Proceedings of a Symposium on the Hydraulics of Hong Kong Waters, Hong Kong. pp 233-267.

Morton B. & Harper E. (1997). An undescribed macrofaunal assemblage from shallow subtidal sands at the Cape d’Aguilar Marine Reserve, Hong Kong. In: The Marine Flora and Fauna of Hong Kong and Southern China IV (ed. B. Morton). pp249-261.

Oceanway (2000). Baseline Marine Ecological Monitoring for Lamma Power Station Extension. In: Appendix K, Lamma Power Station Extension - Baseline Monitoring Report. The Hongkong Electric Co. Ltd. <http://lammaextension.hec.com.hk>

Parsons E.C. & Jefferson T. (2000) Post-mortem investigations on stranded dolphins and porpoises from Hong Kong waters. Journal of Wildlife Diseases 36: 342-356.

Reeves, R.R., Wang, J.Y. and Leatherwood, S. (1997) The Finless Porpoise, Neophocaena phocaenoides (G. Cuvier 1829): a summary of current knowledge and recommendations for conservation action. Asian Marine Biology 14: 111–143.

Roberts, C. 1996. Takifugu niphobles. In: IUCN 2004. 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. <www.redlist.org>

Sadovy Y. & Cornish A. (2000) Reef fishes of Hong Kong. HKU Press.

United Nations Environment Programme and Global Environment Facility (2003). Preliminary List of Threatened and Near Threatened Species for the South China Sea. In: Reversing Environmental Degradation Trends in the South China Sea and Gulf of Thailand. Annex 5. Reports of the Third Meeting of the Regional Working Group for Seagrasses. UNEP/GEF South China Sea Project. (UNEP/GEF/SCS/RWG-SG.3/3) <http://www.unepscs.org>

Wilson K. (2002) New reef fish from High Island dam dollos. Porcupine! 26. Newsletter of the Department of Ecology & Biodiversity. HKU. < http://www.hku.hk/ecology/porcupine>

Wilson K. (2003) Artificial Reefs and Reef Fish in Hong Kong. Friends of the Country Parks. Cosmos Books Ltd.

Wong E.C.K. (1990) The fauna of wave-exposed sand beaches in Hong Kong. Asian Marine Biology 7:147-159

Wűrsig, B, Greene, C.R., Jefferson, T.A. (2000) Development of an air bubble curtain to reduce underwater noise of percussive piling Marine Environmental Research 49: 79-93

Yamahira K. (1997a) Proximate factors influencing spawning site specificity of the puffer fish Takifugu niphobles. Marine Ecology Progress Series 147:11-19

Yamahira K. (1997b) Hatching success affects the timing of spawning by the intertidally spawning puffer Takifugu niphobles. Marine Ecology Progress Series 155:239-248

Yip. S.S.Y.(1979) The Ecology of Coastal Reclamation in Hong Kong. Unpublished M.Phil Thesis. HKU.

Yu, C.F. and Yu, P.H.F. (2002) The annual toxicological profiles of two common puffer fish, Takifugu niphobles (Jordan and Syder) and Takifugu alboplumbeus (Richardson), collected along Hong Kong coastal waters. Toxicon, 40(3), 313-316.

* Recently, Siphonaria sirrius and Siphonaria atra were recognised to be growth forms (ecomorphs) of the same species – Siphonaria laciniosa.

^([1]) Studies that have adopted the sedimentation criterion of 0.1 kg m^-2 per day include:

Civil Engineering Department (1997) Sand dredging and backfilling of Borrow Pits at the potential Eastern Waters Marine Borrow Area EIA Report;

Civil Engineering Department (2001) Focused cumulative water quality impact assessment of sand dredging at the West Po Toi Marine Borrow Area Final Report.

8. Marine ecology

8.1 Introduction

8.1.1 This section of the Report identifies and evaluates the nature and extent of potential impacts arising from the Project, including reclamation for the proposed West Coast Road (WCR) and construction of the cross bay bridge, on the marine ecological resources within the Assessment Area.

8.2 Environmental Legislation, Policies, Plans, Standards and Criteria

8.2.1 This Section makes reference to the following guidelines, standards, documents and the HKSAR Government ordinances and regulations when identifying habitats and species of ecological importance and evaluating ecological impacts:

8.2.8 EIAO Guidance Note No. 6/2002 clarifies the requirements of ecological assessments under the EIAO.

8.2.9 EIAO Guidance Note No. 7/2002 provides general guidelines for conducting ecological baseline surveys in order to fulfil requirements stipulated in the TM-EIA.

8.2.10 Furthermore, the assessment undertaken also makes reference to the following international conventions and conservation treatises.

8.2.14 The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is a voluntary international agreement to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. PRC became a Party to the agreement in 1981.

8.2.15 The Key Protected Wildlife Species List details Category I and Category II protected animal species under Mainland Chinese Legislation.

8.3 Assessment Methodology

8.3.1 The ecological characteristics of the Assessment Area were elucidated via a review of the literature. This review collated ecological information from various reports and publications that included:

8.4 Description of the Environment

8.4.4 The baseline marine ecological conditions of the assessment area are described in the sections below. Locations of key marine ecological resources in the assessment area are shown in Figure 8.1.

Areas of Conservation Interest

8.4.6 The Shek O Headland SSSI is located about 8km south of Junk Bay. This exposed rocky shore habitat was designated a SSSI in February 1998 because it is among the areas with the richest assemblages of macroalgae (seaweed) in Hong Kong.

Representative Habitats

8.4.8 Representative marine habitat of the assessment area is illustrated in Figure 8.2. Baseline information giving the ecological profile of each habitat type within the assessment area is provided below.

Rocky Shore

Artificial Seawall

Sandy Shore

Hard Substrata Subtidal Habitat

8.4.37 Coral information from the literature on the areas closest to proposed development at Tseung Kwan O are presented in the following sections, including at Chiu Keng Wan, which is the area that would be directly lost due to the proposed WCR tunnel toll plaza reclamation.

Chiu Keng Wan (northwest Junk Bay)

8.4.38 Information on the ecological condition of subtidal habitats at Chiu Keng Wan that may be subject to reclamation under the project are presented in 3 separate reports; namely the Road P2 EIA Report, the Area 131 Further Ecological Study Report and the HATS Dive Survey Report.

Southwest coast of Junk Bay (south of Chiu Keng Wan)

Junk Island

8.4.52 In summary, recent surveys at Junk Island in 1999 and 2003 indicated that this coastal stretch harboured very few hard corals in terms of abundance and the number of species present. Nevertheless, soft corals and gorgonians were frequent and occurred in moderate abundance.

Tathong Channel

Dive survey of Chiu Keng Wan

8.4.65 A summary of the coral species recorded in Junk Bay is provided in Table 8.4.

Soft Substrata Benthic Habitat

8.4.76 In total, 51 species of benthic fauna were found in the samples. In terms of diversity, the sampled benthic community off Chiu Keng Wan was considered to be of moderate diversity (average H’ = 2.49) in comparison to other benthic communities in Hong Kong.

8.4.77 In summary, survey results indicated that the soft substrata seabed off Chiu Keng Wan supported a disturbed benthic community of moderate diversity and of low abundance. No species of conservation interest were identified.

Marine Mammal Habitat

8.4.82 Based on the available records, waters within and adjacent to Junk Bay do not appear to be utilised by Finless Porpoises and are considered not important for this species.

8.5 Ecological Value

8.5.1 In accordance with the EIAO TM Annex 8 criteria, the ecological importance of recorded habitats has been evaluated in Tables 8.7a to 8.7c below.

8.5.2 Based on the ecological conditions presented in the above sections, the ecological value of marine habitats in the assessment area was considered to be as follows.

8.5.3 Artificial seawall was considered to be of low ecological value given that it is the most extensive intertidal habitat type in the Assessment Area and supports common and widespread biota with no significant species records.

8.5.6 Soft substratum subtidal habitat supported low abundance of common and widespread species dominated by the polychaetes. This habitat was considered to be of low ecological value

8.5.8 Since records of live sightings of Finless Porpoises only occur at the southeast margin of the Assessment Area not within Junk Bay, it was considered that these marine waters were of low ecological value as marine mammal habitat.

8.5.9 In accordance with the TM-EIA Annex 8 criteria, the species of conservation interest are evaluated in Table 8.8 below.

8.6 Identification of Environmental Impacts

8.6.1 The scope and extent of the Project works are described in detail in Section 2 of this Report. Potential marine ecological impacts resulting from construction and operation phase activities have been identified, and are outlined in the following sections.

Construction Phase

Direct Impacts

8.6.2 Potential direct impacts on marine ecology arising from the proposed construction activities would include:

Indirect Impacts

8.6.3 Potential indirect construction phase impacts would include:

Water Quality Impacts – Suspended Sediments

8.6.7 Since potential impacts on corals may arise through increased turbidity (i.e. elevation in SS) and excessive sediment deposition, the magnitude of impacts on corals was assessed based on both of these water quality parameters.

8.6.10 With reference to the above criteria, the sedimentation rate of not exceeding 100 mg cm-2 per day (or 0.1 kg m-2 per day) which has been adopted in previous EIAs([1]) in Hong Kong, is also considered as suitable for use in this study.

8.6.10 With reference to the above criteria, the sedimentation rate of not exceeding 100 mg cm^-2 per day (or 0.1 kg m^-2 per day) which has been adopted in previous EIAs⁽[1]⁾ in Hong Kong, is also considered as suitable for use in this study.