This
section presents the ecological baseline information gathered from the
literature review and field surveys, which covered a period
of 6 months of both wet and dry seasons (February to July 2004) to establish
the baseline ecological conditions of the Study Area (covering the headland of
Black Point and up to 500 m from the Project boundary). Additional ecological surveys were conducted
in October 2005 to review and update the existing ecological profile.
This section also presents the results of an assessment of the
ecological importance of the terrestrial habitats and resources at Black Point
and the potential impacts from the construction and operation of the proposed
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) terminal. The assessment has been based on the
preliminary design of the Black Point terminal as discussed in the Project
Description (Part 3 – Section 3). Measures required to mitigate adverse impacts are recommended, where
appropriate.
8.2
Legislative
Requirements and Evaluation Criteria
Relevant
legislative requirements and evaluation criteria for the protection of species
and habitats of terrestrial ecological importance are summarized as follows:
1.
Country Parks Ordinance (Cap 208);
2.
Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap
96);
3.
Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap
170);
4.
Protection of Endangered
Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586);
5.
Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131);
6.
7.
The Technical Memorandum on Environmental
Impact Assessment Process under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance
(EIAO-TM);
8.
United Nations Convention on Biodiversity
(1992);
9.
Convention on Wetlands of International
Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar
Convention); and,
10.
PRC Regulations and Guidelines.
8.2.1
Country Parks Ordinance (Cap 208)
The
Country Parks Ordinance (Cap 208)
provides for the designation and management of
8.2.2
Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap 96)
The
Forests and Countryside Ordinance
(Cap 96) prohibits the felling, cutting, burning or destroying of trees and
growing plants in forests and plantations on Government land. The subsidiary Forestry Regulations prohibit the picking, felling or possession of
listed rare and protected plant species.
The list of protected species in
8.2.3
Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap
170)
Under
the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap
170), designated wild animals are protected from being hunted, whilst their
nests and eggs are protected from destruction and removal. All birds and most mammals, including all
cetaceans, are protected under this Ordinance, as well as certain reptiles,
amphibians and invertebrates. The Second Schedule of the Ordinance that
lists all the animals protected was last revised in June 1997.
8.2.4
Protection of Endangered
Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586);
The Protection of Endangered Species of
Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586) was enacted to align
8.2.5
Town Planning Ordinance (Cap 131)
The
recently amended Town Planning Ordinance
(Cap 131) provides for the designation of areas such as “Coastal Protection
Areas”, “Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)”, “Green Belt” and
"Conservation Areas” to promote conservation or protection or protect
significant habitat.
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 addresses the
issue of enforcement. The appendices
list the legislation and administrative controls for conservation, other
conservation related measures in
8.2.7
Technical Memorandum on Environmental
Impact Assessment Process under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance
(EIAOTM)
Annex 16
of the EIAOTM sets out the general
approach and methodology for assessment of ecological impacts arising from a
project or proposal, to allow a complete and objective identification,
prediction and evaluation of the potential ecological impacts. Annex 8
recommends the criteria that can be used for evaluating ecological impacts.
8.2.8
Other Relevant Legislation
The
Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC) is a Contracting Party to the United Nations Convention on Biological
Diversity of 1992. The Convention
requires signatories to make active efforts to protect and manage their
biodiversity resources. The Government
of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region has stated that it will be
“committed to meeting the environmental objectives” of the Convention.
The
Convention on Wetlands of International
Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar Convention) applies to the HKSAR.
The Convention requires parties to conserve and make wise use of wetland
areas, particularly those supporting waterfowl populations. Article
1 of the Convention defines wetlands as ‘areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent
or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt,
including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed
six meters.’. The Mai Po/Inner Deep Bay
wetland was declared a Wetland of International Importance (“Ramsar site”) under the Convention in 1995.
The PRC in 1988 ratified the Wild Animal Protection Law, which lays
down basic principles for protecting wild animals. The Law prohibits the killing of protected
animals, controls hunting, and protects the habitats of wild animals, both
protected and non-protected. The Law
also provides for the creation of lists of animals protected at the state
level, under Class I and Class II. There
are 96 animal species in Class I and 156 in Class II. Class I provides a higher level of protection
for animals considered to be more threatened.
The
Study Area for the ecological assessment is based on the footprint of the
proposed LNG terminal at Black Point and the surrounding land-based habitats
(500 m from the Project Area), which is approximately 120 ha. The
8.4
Terrestrial
Ecological Resources
This
section details the baseline conditions of terrestrial ecological resources at
Black Point.
8.4.1
Description and Historical Background of Black Point
The
northwest
Black
Point is the western most part of the
An
aerial photograph of Black Point (2003) is shown in Figure
8.2.
Methodology
A
preliminary desktop study and literature review has been conducted to determine
the existing conditions within the Study Area, which encompasses the area
within 500m of the proposed Project Area (Figure
8.1). The literature review included Government and
private sector reports, independent and Government published literature,
academic studies, vegetation maps, recent aerial photographs and land use
maps. These included, but not limited
to:
·
EIA
of the Proposed 6000 MW Thermal Power Station at Black Point: Initial
Assessment Report ([3]);
·
Aerial
photographs of Black Point ([4]);
·
Porcupine! ([5]);
·
The
Ecology and Biodiversity of
·
Hong
Kong Biodiversity. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department
Newsletters;
·
Annual
Report of the
·
Butterfly
Watching in
·
Field
Guide to Butterfly Watching in
·
Field
Guide to the Dragonflies of
·
Gymnosperms
and Angiosperms of
·
·
·
Orchidaceae
of
·
The
Avifauna of
Results
The
results of the literature review indicated that limited information was
available on the terrestrial ecological resources in the Study Area. This information is summarised in the
following sections.
Habitat
and Vegetation
Most
of the area surrounding Black Point exhibited signs of disturbance and appears
to contain no special communities or species ([15]). This is related to the high frequency of hill
fires, common in rural areas, which maintains a grassland habitat on the
hillsides ([16]). The habitat types recorded at Black Point
have been reported in a previous ERL study ([17]).
In
general, probably due to the relatively sheltered position and thicker top soil
on the north slopes, the headland has comparatively denser and taller shrub
cover on the north face than the south.
The latter is largely grassland with scattered barren boulders. This type of vegetation is an unpromising
habitat for mammals, other than the common hillside rat.
The
vegetation of Black Point consisted of a mosaic of grassland, fernland and shrubland
communities, with all possible intermediates.
The grassland was dominated by Ischaemum spp., Arundinella sp., Eulalia sp. and Cymbopogon sp.,
whereas the shrubland mainly consisted of Rhodomyrtus sp., Eurya sp. and Rhaphiolepis sp. The fernland
consisted of a pure stand of Discranopteris linearis, which is an indicator plant for habitat
frequently burned.
The
southern fringe of the headland is a levelled area which was once actively
cultivated. Most of the cultivated
fields have been converted to orchard and was under active management ([18]). There was no native woodland or shrubland and only a few planted trees were present, which
are mostly exotic. They did not
constitute a significant wooded area.
Land
that was not cultivated was covered in a varying mixture of native (eg Ischaemum
spp. and Cymbopogon sp.) and exotic weedy species (Agave sp. and Crassocephalum sp.), whereas at
the rear of the rocky shore along the coastline was a mixture of native coastal
species (Hibiscus sp. and Scaevola sp.).
The poor vegetation at Black Point contributed to the generally poor
ecological value of the site ([19]).
Birds
From the HKBWS Breeding Bird Survey ([20]), 27 species were recorded at Black Point, shown
in Table 8.1. The majority are common
and widespread in Hong Kong of which the Black Kite, Greater Coucal, Chinese Pond Heron, Bonelli’s
Eagle and
Table 8.1 Bird Species Recorded in Black Point in HKBWS
Breeding Bird Survey
Common Name |
Species Name |
Status |
Black Drongo |
Dicrurus macrocercus |
Widespread and common. |
Black Kite |
Milvus migrans |
Widespread and common in |
Black-collared Starling |
Sturnus nigricollis |
Widespread and common. |
Blue Magpie |
Urocissa erythrorhyncha |
Widespread and common. |
Bonelli’s Eagle |
Hieraaetus fasciatus |
Localised in |
Chinese Bulbul |
Pycnonotus sinensis |
Widespread and common. |
Chinese Francolin |
Francolinus pintadeanus |
Widespread and common. |
Chinese Pond Heron |
Ardeola bacchus |
Localised in |
Common Kingfisher |
Alcedo atthis |
Widespread and common. |
Common Koel |
Eudynamys scolopacea |
Widespread and common. |
Common Magpie |
Pica
pica |
Widespread and common. |
Common Tailorbird |
Orthotomus sutorius |
Widespread and common. |
Crested Myna |
Acridotheres cristatellus |
Widespread and common. |
Greater Coucal |
Centropus sinensis |
Localised in |
Hair-crested Drongo |
Dicrurus hottentottus |
Widespread and common. |
Little Egret |
Egretta garzetta |
Widespread and common. |
Long-tailed Shrike |
Lanius schach |
Widespread and common. |
Masked Laughingthrush |
Garrulax perspicillatus |
Widespread and common. |
Oriental Magpie Robin |
Copsychus saularis |
Widespread and common. |
Red-whiskered Bulbul |
Pycnonotus jocosus |
Widespread and common. |
Richard’s Pipit |
Anthus richardi |
Widespread and common. |
Sooty-headed Bulbul |
Pycnonotus aurigaster |
Widespread and common. |
Spotted Dove |
Streptopelia chinensis |
Widespread and common. |
White Wagtail |
Motacilla alba |
Widespread and common. |
White-bellied Sea Eagle |
Haliaeetus leucogaster |
Localised in |
White-throated Kingfisher |
Halcyon
smyrnensis |
Widespread and common. |
Yellow-bellied Prinia |
Prinia flaviventris |
Widespread and common. |
Mammals
The
literature review revealed that limited information on mammals was available
within the Study Area.
Herpetofauna
The
literature review revealed that limited information on herpetofauna
was available within the Study Area.
Invertebrates
Dragonfly
The
literature review revealed that limited information on dragonflies was
available within the Study Area.
Butterflies
The
literature review revealed that limited information on butterflies was
available within the Study Area.
Stream
Fauna
The
literature review revealed that limited information on stream fauna was
available within the Study Area.
8.4.3
Baseline Ecological Surveys
8.4.4
Methodology
Following
a literature review of available ecological information characterising the Study
Area, reconnaissance surveys were undertaken in February 2004 to update and
field check the validity of the information gathered in the review and to fill
information gaps. A number of more
focussed baseline field surveys were then carried out to characterise the
existing ecological conditions.
The
baseline surveys covered a period of six months during both dry (February to
March 2004) and wet (April to July 2004) seasons. Additional ecological surveys were conducted on 27 and 28 October 2005
to review and update the existing ecological profile of the Study Area.
The
following baseline surveys were identified as necessary and the details are
summarized in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2 Types and Dates of Baseline Surveys
Survey Type |
Methodology |
Date |
Habitat and Vegetation |
Habitat mapping and vegetation
identification through ground truthing in major
habitats. |
16 February, 19 and 29 March, 15 July
2004, 27 and 28 October 2005. |
Bird |
Quantitative (point count method) and qualitative
(recorded within Study Area) survey; including day and night surveys covering
both wet and dry season. |
22, 29 February, 6 and 13 March, 12
April, 23 May, 19 June and 15 July 2004.
Recent field verification was undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005. |
Mammal |
Quantitative (active searching along the
survey transect) and qualitative (recorded within Study Area); including day
and night surveys covering both wet and dry season. |
14, 16 and 29 February, 9 March, 19 April,
23 and 25 May and 9 July 2004. Recent
field verification was undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005. |
Herpetofauna
|
Quantitative (active searching along the
survey transect) and qualitative (recorded within Study Area); including day
and night surveys covering both wet and dry season. |
14, 16 and 29 February, 9 March, 19
April, 23 and 25 May and 9 July 2004.
Recent field verification was undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005. |
Butterfly |
Quantitative (point count method) and
qualitative (recorded within Study Area) survey; including only day surveys
covering both wet and dry season. |
14, 16 and 29 February, 9 March, 19
April, 23 and 25 May and 9 July 2004.
Recent field verification was undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005. |
Dragonfly |
Quantitative (point count method) and
qualitative (recorded within Study Area) survey; including only day surveys
covering both wet and dry season. |
14, 16 and 29 February, 9 March, 19
April, 23 and 25 May and 9 July 2004.
Recent field verification was undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005. |
Aquatic fauna |
Active searching in stream, including
only day surveys covering both wet and dry season. |
16 February and 25 May 2004. Recent field verification was undertaken on
27 and 28 October 2005. |
Habitats and Vegetation
Field
surveys focussing on the habitats and vegetation within the Study Area were
performed on 16 February, 19 and 29 March, 15 July 2004, 27 and 28 October
2005. The aim of the surveys was to
record and map habitat characteristics and distribution, as well as floral
composition within the Study Area, and to establish the ecological
profile. The methodologies of habitat
and vegetation survey made reference to those proposed in the Technical Guidance Notes 7/2002 and 10/2004 of the EIA Ordinance.
Habitats
were mapped based on recent government aerial photographs (year 2003) and field
ground truthing, and are presented in Figure
8.3. Representative areas of each habitat type
were surveyed on foot. Plant species of
each habitat type encountered and their relative abundance were recorded with
special attention to any rare or protected species. Nomenclature and conservation status of plant
species follow Xing et al (2000) ([21]),
Wu and Lee (2000) ([22])
and AFCD (2003) ([23]). The habitat mapping and vegetation surveys
were undertaken by an experienced vegetation specialist.
Birds
The
methodology for the bird surveys made reference to those proposed in the Technical Guidance Notes 7/2002 and 10/2004 of the EIA Ordinance. The
quantitative (point count method) bird surveys were undertaken in the major
habitat types (plantation, shrubland, shrubby
grassland, stream/channel, orchard and developed area) within the Study
Area. Locations of sampling points are
shown in Figure 8.4.
Bird
surveys were conducted on 22 and 29 February, 6 and 13 March, 12 April, 23 May,
19 June and 15 July 2004 covering both dry and wet seasons. Night surveys for birds were conducted on 29 February
and 19 June 2004. Qualitative surveys
were undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005 to update the ecological profile of
the Study Area.
For
the point count method, a total of ten minutes was spent counting birds at each
point for each visit. All birds seen or
heard within 30 m of each point were counted and identified to species where
possible. Relative abundance of birds
recorded within point count sites has been expressed as mean number of birds
per sampling point and per sampling time (total birds counted divided by total
number of point count sites surveyed and total number of visits). Species richness was expressed in terms of
mean number of species per sampling point and per sampling time.
All
the bird species encountered outside counting points but within the Study Area
were also recorded in order to produce a complete species list. Signs of breeding (e.g., recently fledged
juveniles and the presence of actively used nest) and the habitat utilisation
of different species was also recorded.
Ornithological nomenclature followed Carey et al (2001) ([24]).
Mammal
The
methodology for the mammal surveys made reference to those proposed in the Technical Guidance Notes 7/2002 and 10/2004 of the EIA Ordinance. As most
mammals occur at low densities, all sightings, tracks, and signs of mammals
were actively searched. Surveys were
focussed on areas within 10m either side of the survey transects (Figure
8.4).
Mammal
surveys were carried out on 14, 16 and 29 February, 9 March, 19 April, 23 and
25 May and 9 July 2004 covering both dry and wet seasons. A night survey for mammals was carried out on
25 May 2004. Qualitative surveys were
undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005 to update the ecological profile of the
Study Area. Nomenclature for mammals
follows Wilson and Reeder (1992) ([25]).
Herpetofauna
The
methodology for the herpetofauna surveys made
reference to those proposed in the Technical
Guidance Notes 7/2002 and 10/2004 of
the EIA Ordinance. All reptiles and amphibians were recorded by
direct observation and active searching in potential concealed locations such
as in leaf litter, under stones and logs.
Auditory detection of species-specific advertisement calls was used to
survey frogs and toads. Surveys were focussed
on areas within 10 m either side of the survey transects (Figure
8.4).
Herpetofauna
surveys were carried out on 14, 16 and 29 February, 9 March, 19 April, 23 and
25 May and 9 July 2004 through active searching within the Study Area covering
both dry and wet seasons. A night survey
for amphibians was carried out on 25 May 2004.
Qualitative surveys were undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005 to update
the ecological profile of the Study Area.
Nomenclature used in this report for reptiles follows Karsen et al
(1998) ([26])
while that for amphibians follows Lau and Dudgeon (1999) ([27])
and AFCD (2005) ([28]).
Invertebrate (Dragonflies and Butterflies)
The
methodology for the invertebrate surveys made reference to those proposed in
the Technical Guidance Notes 7/2002
and 10/2004 of the EIA Ordinance. Dragonflies and butterflies of different
habitats within the Study Area were surveyed on 14, 16 and 29 February, 9
March, 19 April, 23 and 25 May and 9 July 2004 using the transect count
method. Qualitative surveys were
undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005 to update the ecological profile of the
Study Area.
During
the transect count surveys, all of the dragonflies and butterflies found within
10 m either side of the transect (except for stream/channel) were identified
and counted. The locations
of the survey transects for dragonflies and butterflies are shown in Figure
8.4.
Stream
habitat within the Study Area was surveyed using the point count method, due to
the small size of this habitat. For the
point count method, a total of five minutes was spent counting butterflies and
dragonflies at each point for each visit.
All butterflies and dragonflies seen within 10 m of each point were
counted and identified to species where possible. Relative abundance of the dragonflies and
butterflies in each type of habitat were estimated. Dragonflies and butterflies encountered outside
survey transects and counting points but within the Study Area were also
recorded in order to produce a complete species list. Nomenclature for butterflies follows Walthew (1997) ([29])
and Yiu (2004) ([30])
and dragonfly nomenclature follows
Aquatic Fauna
The
methodology for the aquatic fauna surveys made reference to those proposed in
the Technical Guidance Notes 7/2002 and 10/2004 of the EIA Ordinance. Field
surveys were undertaken on 16 February and 25 May 2004 to identify the water bodies
and aquatic resources in the Study Area.
Qualitative surveys were undertaken on 27 and 28 October 2005 to update
the ecological profile of the Study Area.
The stream fauna were studied by direct observation and active
searching. The classification of the
stream fauna followed Chong and Dudgeon 1992 ([32]),
Nelson 1994 ([33])
and AFCD (2004) ([34])
while the conservation status of the stream fauna followed Fowler 1972 ([35]),
AFCD (2004) ([36]), Yue
and Chen 1998 ([37]).
The
information presented in the following sections is based on the findings of the
baseline surveys performed during the period February to July 2004 and October
2005. The baseline ecological conditions
have been evaluated based on the criteria laid out in Annexes 8 & 16 of the
EIAO-TM. The findings of the baseline surveys
undertaken at Black Point were also used to compare with other coastal areas in
the vicinity including North Lantau,
Results of Baseline Ecological Surveys
Existing
Habitat and Vegetation
Black
Point is the western most part of the
As
a result of the long history of deforestation, repeated hill fire and exposure
to strong wind, thin top soil and frequent erosion, the headland within the
Study Area is comprised of shrubland and shrubby
grassland, without any significant woodland area. Shrubland covers
the steep terrain, the gulley and the sheltered areas of the headland where
sufficient water supply is present.
Shrubby grassland with scattered barren rocks was found along the ridges
of the headland. Electricity
transmission lines, helipad and marine radar station are also present on the
headland.
A
total of 91 plant species were recorded (Table
1 of Annex 8) within the Study
Area. Two locally protected plant
species, Pitcher plant Nepenthes mirabilis and Bamboo Orchid Arundina graminifolia were
recorded within the Study Area. A
habitat map of the habitat types surveyed is presented in Figure
8.3. Table
8.3 lists the number of plant species recorded in each habitat type.
Table 8.3 Habitat
Types Recorded Within the Study Area
Habitat Type* |
Area (hectare)/ Length (Km) |
Number of Plant Species Recorded |
|
2.9
ha |
18 |
Shrubland
|
46.6
ha |
70 |
Shrubby Grassland |
18.2
ha |
25 |
Stream/Channel |
7.2
Km |
18 |
Orchard |
1.4
ha |
6 |
Developed Area |
43.6
ha |
7 |
Note: * Bare rocks, artificial shore and sandy
beach were grouped to marine ecological resources and will be discussed in
detail in Part 3 Section 9.
The
plantation was dominated by exotic plant species including Acacia confusa, Albizia
lebbeck, Melaleuca leucadendron, Lophostemon conferta and Cassia
surrattensis.
The plantation was young in age (less than 15 years) with a developed
canopy that reached heights of 10 to 12 m.
The understorey was open and sparsely
vegetated by native shrubs and climbers including Rhodomyrtus tomentosa, Melastoma
candidum, Melastoma sanguineum, Dalbergia benthami and Dalbergia millettii.
Eighteen plant species were recorded within the plantations and no
rare/protected species were found. The
floral diversity and structural complexity of the plantation were low.
It
can be seen from Table 2a of Annex 8 that plantations in most of the
areas in the vicinity selected for comparison were low in floristic diversity
and structural complexity and the dominant plant species are mostly exotic and
fast growing. In conclusion, the
ecological importance of plantation at Black Point is low.
Shrubland
Shrubland is defined as woody vegetation with a modal height of between 1 m
and 4 m and is in a transitional stage in the ecological
succession between grassland and woodland/forest ([39]). Shrubland was the
main habitat covering the headland and was also located in gulley. Photographic records of shrubland
within the Study Area are shown in Figure
8.6. The continuous patches of shrubland
at the northern and western parts of the Study Area, which were more sheltered
than that of the southern part, were densely vegetated with native shrubs and
climbers. The vegetation was well
developed and the canopy species reached a height of 2 to 3 metres.
Shrubland
at the southern part of the Study Area had a lower percentage cover of shrub
species than that of the west and north parts and was more subject to natural
erosion and human disturbance. A greater
amount of rocks were found in the shrubland at the
southern part.
Shrubland
was dominated by native plant species including Celtis sinensis, Aporusa dioica, Cassytha filiformis, Gordonia axillaries, Litsea rotundifolia, Sterculia lanceolata and Caesalpinia vernalis. A total of 70 plant species were recorded
within the shrubland and all of them are common or
very common in
The
shrubland at the northern and western parts were
largely untouched and the floristic diversity and structural complexity were medium. The floristic diversity and structural
complexity of the shrubland at the southern part was
low to moderate.
Shrubland
is one of the most extensive vegetation types, other than grassland and
secondary forest, in
The
plant species recorded in the shrubland of Black
Point are commonly found elsewhere on
Shrubby Grassland
Shrubby
grassland refers to the intermediate form of pure grassland and shrubland with grass species comprising over 60% of the
vegetation cover with the remainder comprising scattered shrubs ([41]). Shrubby grassland was found covering the
ridges of the headland, in the gulley and sheltered areas. Barren rocks were found within the shrubby
grassland due to the extensive erosion of the existing granitic
rocks. The thin topsoil has resulted
from extensive soil erosion and this has restricted the establishment of tall
shrub community on the ridges of the headland.
Evidence of hill fires was found at the shrubby grassland during the
site visits. Photographic records of the
shrubby grassland within the Study Area are shown in Figure
8.8.
The
dominant plant species included several grasses such as Ischaemum aristatum, Digitaria
sanquinalis and Rhynchelytrum repens growing to a height of 0.5 to 1.5
meters. Shrub species were scarcely
found within this habitat. Twenty five
plant species were found in shrubby grassland and neither rare nor protected
plant species were recorded. The
floristic diversity and structural complexity of the shrubby grassland were
low.
Shrubby
grassland or shrubland and grassland mosaic were
common in most of the coastal areas of North Lantau/West
New Territories (Dudgeon and Corelett 2004) ([42]). The
plant species composition of the habitat is simple with limited number of
species recorded, i.e., 25 plant species in Black Point, 33 plant species in Siu Ho Wan and 90 plant species in North Lantau. Natural
erosion and occurrence of hill fires restricts the further colonisation of
shrub species.
Shrubby
grassland habitat in
Stream/Channel
A
natural seasonal stream and two stormwater drainage
channels were found within the Study Area.
Photographic records of the streams and channels are shown in Figure 8.9. The natural seasonal stream was located at
the north of the headland running from the middle of the hill towards the power
station. A concrete channel was
constructed in between the Black Point Power Station and the headland running
from Yung Long Road to the sea. Another
short channel was located at the southeast of the headland running from the
plantation to the barging point and
fabrication yard for Shenzhen Western Corridor Project. The riparian vegetation of the natural
seasonal stream was integrated with the surrounding shrubland
with semi-open canopy, while the plant community of the channels mainly
consisted of exotics.
A
total of 18 plant species were found along the stream/channel habitat and no
rare/protected species were recorded.
The substratum of the natural seasonal stream was rocky and limited
water flow was recorded during the surveys.
Both of the channels were cemented and artificial. The channel in between the power station and
headland had limited water flow and the section next to the sea was brackish in
nature due to tidal intrusion. The
channel in the plantation was dry during the site visits.
A protected
snake species, the Burmese Python Python molurus was
found in the drainage channel next to the Black Point Power Station during the
additional ecological survey. The
location of Burmese Python is shown in Figure 8.7. The
floristic diversity and structural complexity of the natural stream are low
while those for the channels were negligible.
Permanent
natural stream habitat is not present at Black Point because of the steep
terrain of the headland. The seasonal
stream at Black Point was of a much smaller scale compared with the permanent
streams in other areas in the vicinity which show a higher abundance and
diversity of aquatic fauna (Table 2d of
Annex 8). Other than the Lesser
Spiny Frog (only one individual recorded during the surveys), which is a
recognized species of conservation interest, no aquatic fauna were found in the
stream, which indicated low to moderate ecological importance of the seasonal
stream found at Black Point.
Orchard
An
orchard lies within the Study Area located next to the barging point and fabrication yard for
Shenzhen Western Corridor Project at
the southern fringe of the headland. It
is fenced and under active management.
The orchard was dominated by Dimocarpus longan and Litchi
chinensis. The
fruit trees were in good condition and the understorey
was well maintained without any vegetation.
Photographic records of the orchard are shown in Figure
8.10. Six plant species were recorded in this
habitat and no rare/protected species were found. The orchard within the Study Area was highly
modified and was of low floristic importance.
The orchard is a man made habitat for the cultivation of fruit. The orchards in other areas in the vicinity
of Black Point and on
Developed Area
The
developed area was the second largest habitat within the Study Area. This habitat type consisted mainly of the
power station, a barging point and
fabrication yard for Shenzhen Western Corridor Project,
car parks, wasteland and roads.
Photographic records of the developed area are shown in Figure
8.11. Over 90% of the vegetation recorded within
this habitat type was planted for landscaping purposes and was dominated by Melaleuca leucadendron, Schefflera octophylla, Duranta repens, Cassia surattensis and Bauhinia
blackeana.
Similar to other developed areas in the vicinity, this habitat was
highly developed with limited ecological significance and only seven plant
species were found in this habitat, without any rare or protected species
recorded (Table 2f of Annex 8).
Due
to the disturbed nature of the habitat and lack of rare or protected species,
the ecological importance of the developed area at Black Point is negligible.
Wildlife
Birds
There
were a total of 51 species of birds recorded within the Study Area during the
surveys. Twelve species were recorded
only during the dry season and 17 recorded only during the wet season, and 22
species were recorded in both seasons.
Thirty one species were recorded at the sampling points during point
count surveys and an additional 22 species were recorded outside of the
sampling points but within the Study Area (Tables
3 and 4 of Annex 8).
The
details of the point count bird data are shown in Table 4 of Annex 8. Relative abundance and species richness in
each type of surveyed habitat, based on the results of the point count method,
are presented in Table 8.4. The highest mean number of individuals of
birds was recorded in orchard, shrubby grassland and shrubland.
Table 8.4 Abundance and Species Richness of
Birds Within the Study Area during the Point Count Surveys
|
Season |
P |
S |
SG |
ST |
OR |
D |
Total |
Number of sampling points covered an
area of ~ 0.28 ha) |
|
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
20 |
Number of survey days |
Dry |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|
Wet |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|
overall |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
Total number of individuals |
Dry |
23 |
44 |
35 |
22 |
12 |
13 |
149 |
Wet |
35 |
33 |
49 |
37 |
29 |
8 |
191 |
|
Overall |
58 |
77 |
84 |
59 |
41 |
21 |
340 |
|
Mean abundance (birds per hectare per
survey day) |
Dry |
5.10 |
9.75 |
7.76 |
4.88 |
5.32 |
5.76 |
6.60 |
Wet |
7.76 |
7.31 |
10.86 |
8.20 |
12.85 |
3.55 |
8.46 |
|
Overall |
6.41 |
8.51 |
9.29 |
6.52 |
4.53 |
4.64 |
7.52 |
|
Total number of species |
Dry |
7 |
8 |
7 |
7 |
8 |
5 |
24 |
Wet |
14 |
6 |
8 |
10 |
7 |
4 |
22 |
|
Overall |
17 |
9 |
9 |
13 |
12 |
7 |
31 |
|
Species Richness (mean no. of species
per sampling point) |
Dry |
0.44 |
0.50 |
0.44 |
0.44 |
1.00 |
0.63 |
0.53 |
Wet |
0.88 |
0.38 |
0.50 |
0.63 |
0.88 |
0.50 |
0.49 |
|
Overall |
1.06 |
0.56 |
0.56 |
0.81 |
1.50 |
0.88 |
0.69 |
Habitat: P = plantation; S = shrubland,
SG = Shrubby grassland, ST = stream/channel, OR = orchard, D = developed area.
Avifauna recorded at Black Point during the surveys
showed a limited degree of seasonal variation.
Abundance and species richness in the dry season were generally higher
than the wet season for developed area and shrubland,
while abundance and species richness in the wet season were generally higher
for orchard, plantation, stream/channel and shrubby grassland. For total species richness, there were 24
species recorded in the dry season and 22 species in the wet season.
Species recorded in the dry season were mainly
residents and winter visitors, with a few passage migrants. Species recorded in the wet season were
residents with summer visitors, passage migrants and a few winter
visitors. However, some of the residents
were only recorded in the wet season.
Since the wet season covered the breeding periods of many species, the
calls of some residents such as Chinese Francolin and Common Koel increased their detectabilities. Among the recorded species, there were 34
residents, six passage migrants, four summer visitors and 16 winter visitors (Table 3 of Annex 8).
Most of the bird species recorded are common and
widespread in
The Black Kite is a very widespread and common species
in
The
Greater Coucal is a Class 2 Protected Animal in the PRC ([44]). However, it occupies many types of habitats
in
The
Juveniles
of four bird species were recorded within the Study Area (Table 8.5): White Wagtail,
Red-whiskered Bulbul, Chinese Bulbul and Oriental Magpie Robin. All are common and widespread bird species in
Table 8.5 Juvenile
Bird Species Recorded Within the Study Area
Common
Name |
Habitat
Type Recorded |
Observation |
White Wagtail |
Channel |
Juveniles recorded |
Red-whiskered Bulbul |
|
Juveniles recorded |
Chinese Bulbul |
Stream, shrubby grassland and shrubland |
Juveniles recorded |
Oriental Magpie Robin |
Channel |
Juveniles recorded |
Overall, the
species diversity of birds at Black Point is moderate, when considering survey
effort (including the number of survey days and the duration of the survey
period) and the size of the surveyed areas, compared with other areas in the
vicinity and north Lantau (Table 5 of Annex 8).
Invertebrates
Butterflies
A
total of 37 species of butterfly were recorded in different habitats at Black
Point between February and July 2004 including both dry and wet seasons (Tables 6a – 6c of Annex 8) during the
point count survey. One additional
species, Great Orange Tip Hebomoia glaucippe, was recorded between sampling transects and
points within the Study Area. Two
uncommon (Yellow Pansy Junonia hierta, and
Tailed Sulphur Dercas verhuelli)
and two rare species (Spotted Sawtooth Prioneris thestylis and
Red Lacewing Cethosia biblis) were
recorded. Food plants of these species
are listed in Table 8.6. The locations of these species are shown in Figure
8.7.
Table8.6 Butterfly Species of
Conservation Concern at Black Point
Common Name |
Species Name |
Food Plant |
Habitat Found |
Yellow Pansy |
Junonia hierta |
Barleria cristata |
Shrubby grassland |
Tailed |
Dercas verhuelli |
Dalbergia benthami |
Shrubby grassland |
Spotted Sawtooth |
Prioneris thestylis |
Species of Capparaceae |
plantation |
Red Lacewing |
Cethosia biblis |
Passiflora cochinchinensis |
Shrubland |
The
Yellow Pansy prefers dry and open vegetated areas ([46]),
and is usually found near their larval food plant the Philippine Violet Barleria cristata ([47]),
and has been recorded in Lung Kwu Tan, Wong Lung
Hang, Peng Chau, Mount
Davis and Kadoorie Farm. The Yellow Pansy was found in the shrubby
grassland during the survey.
The
Tailed Sulphur inhabits woodland and well-vegetated areas ([48])
and has been recorded in Tai Po Kau, Hok Tau, Shing
Mun Reservoir, Fung Yuen and Sam A Tsuen. The Tailed
Sulphur was found in shrubby grassland within the Study Area.
Due
to the rarity and slow growth rate of their larval food plant the King Snake
Creeper Passiflora cochinchinensis,
the Red Lacewing is rare in Hong Kong ([49]). The biggest and most stable population of
this species is found at Lung Kwu Tan, San Tau, Mount Nicholson, Tong Fuk
and Pui O ([50]). It was found in shrubland during the survey.
The
Spotted Sawtooth is usually found in wooded areas ([51])
and has been recorded in Tai Po Kau, Kwun Yam Shan, Shan Liu, Ngau Ngak Shan and Cheung Chau. It was found in the plantation during the
survey.
Butterfly abundance in shrubland was considered low to medium, and low in
other habitats (Table 8.7). The Species richness of butterfly was
considered medium in shrubby grassland and low in other types of habitats. The generally low butterfly abundance and
species richness in the whole of the Black Point Study Area was related to the
disturbed nature of the habitats (e.g., hill-fires).
Table 8.7 Mean
Abundance of Butterfly Recorded at Black Point during the Transect/ Point Count
Surveys
|
Season |
|
Shrubland |
Shrubby Grassland |
Orchard |
Stream/ Channel |
Total |
No.
of individual per hectare |
Dry
|
2.0 |
12.1 |
1.6 |
6.8 |
0 |
22.5 |
Wet
|
8.8 |
35.5 |
11.7 |
11.3 |
0 |
67.3 |
|
No.
of species |
Dry |
5 |
7 |
8 |
3 |
0 |
16 |
Wet
|
16 |
14 |
24 |
8 |
0 |
31 |
|
No.
of uncommon/rare species |
Dry |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Wet |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
Overall |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
Both abundance and
species richness of butterflies at Black Point were higher in the wet season (Table 8.7). Abundance was three times higher in the wet
season than in the dry season. The
number of species of butterfly recorded during the wet and dry seasons surveys
was 31 and 16 respectively (Tables 6a
and 6b of Annex 8).
The number of butterfly
species in Black Point was moderate when compared with other areas in
consideration of the survey efforts (including the number of survey days and
the duration of survey period) (Table 7 of Annex 8). The presence of stream habitats and woodland,
which do not feature strongly at Black Point, would sustain more butterfly
species by providing suitable habitat.
Dragonfly
Five species of dragonfly were recorded in different habitats
at Black Point between February and July 2004 (Tables 8a and 8b of Annex 8). The diversity of dragonflies in the Study Area at Black Point was low, due to the lack of natural aquatic
habitats. All recorded species are
common and widespread in
Table
8.8 Mean Abundance of Dragonflies
Recorded at Black Point
|
Season |
|
Orchard |
Shrubland |
Shrubby
Grassland |
Stream/ Channel |
Total
|
No. of individual/ha |
Dry |
0 |
1.1 |
0.9 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Wet |
0.2 |
0 |
0 |
2.0 |
0.8 |
3 |
|
No. of species |
Dry |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Wet |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
Both
abundance and species richness of dragonflies in Black Point were higher in the
wet season (Table 8.8). Dragonfly abundance and species richness in
all sampled habitats in the Study Area was considered very low.
The species
diversity of dragonfly at Black Point and the other selected areas is
considered to be low (Table 9 of Annex 8).
Herpetofauna
The
diversity of amphibians in the Study Area at Black Point was low, due to the
lack of natural aquatic habitats.
Amphibian species recorded included the Asian Common Toad Bufo melanostictus,
Gunther’s Frog Rana guentheri and Lesser Spiny Frog Rana exilispinosa. The Asian Common Toad and Gunther’s
Frog are common and widespread in
A
protected snake species the Burmese Python Python
molurus was recorded within the drainage channel
next to the Black Point power station during the additional ecological
survey. The
Burmese Python can be
found in a variety of habitats, preferring well-developed shrubland,
woodland and edges of mangrove swamps.
It is widely distributed in the territory, including all major islands ([56]). The
locations of the Burmese Python and Lesser
Spiny Frog are as shown in Figure
8.7.
The
species diversity of herpetofauna at Black Point,
other areas in the vicinity and north Lantau is
considered low, taking into account the survey effort (including the number of
survey days and duration of survey period) and the size of surveyed areas (Table 10 of Annex 8).
Mammal
Two
species of mammal were recorded, a bat, the Japanese Pipistrelle
Pipistrellus abramus and
the Feral Dog Canis familiaris. The Japanese Pipistrelle
was observed flying around the lamps inside the power station. Protected by the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance, it is widespread and common in
The lack of large
mammal species at Black Point, is probably due to the poor quality of the
habitats and the extent of human disturbance in the area.
Aquatic Fauna
The seasonal stream was surveyed once in both the wet and dry
seasons and only limited water flow in between the boulders was
recorded. Other than the Lesser Spiny
Frog, no freshwater fish or other stream macro-fauna were recorded. The channel near to the power station has limited water flow and a protected snake
species, the Burmese Python Python molurus, was recorded in the channel
during the additional ecological survey.
Current Condition of the
Proposed Project Area
The
terrestrial habitats recorded in the Project Area were mainly shrubland (approximately 12.6 ha),
with small patches of shrubby grassland (approximately 2.4 ha), drainage channel
(approximately 940 m) and developed area (approximately 1.4 ha). The area within the Project Area that would
be directly affected by the development comprises 4.9 ha of shrubland,
1 ha of developed area and 135 m of drainage channel (Figure
8.12). The remaining area within the
Project Area would remain untouched.
The
continuous patch of shrubland at the northern and
western parts of the Study Area was densely vegetated with native shrubs and
climbers. The vegetation was well
developed and the canopy species reached a height of 2 to 3 metres. Shrubland was
dominated by native plant species including Celtis sinensis, Aporusa dioica, Cassytha filiformis, Gordonia axillaries, Litsea rotundifolia, Sterculia lanceolata and Caesalpinia vernalis. Two locally protected plant species, the
Pitcher Plant and the Bamboo Orchid, were recorded at the northwest part of the
shrubland (Figure
8.7). The shrubland was
largely undisturbed and the floristic diversity and structural complexity were
medium. The ecological importance of shrubland was
considered to be moderate.
8.5
Evaluation of the Ecological Importance of the Study
Area
In
this section the ecological importance of the terrestrial habitats and wildlife
identified within the Study Area are evaluated in accordance with the EIAO TM Annex 8 criteria.
·
Naturalness;
·
Size;
·
Diversity;
·
Rarity;
·
Re-creatability;
·
Ecological
Linkage;
·
Potential
value;
·
Nursery
Ground;
·
Age;
and,
·
Abundance.
The
evaluation is based upon the field survey information presented in Section 8.4.3 and the literature review
presented in Section 8.4.2.
8.5.1
Habitats
The
ecological importance of each habitat type within the Study Area is presented
in Tables 8.9 – 8.14.
The
exotic plantation was found along the fringe of the headland. The dominant species were several exotic
plant species, while the undergrowth was occupied by native shrubs and tall
grasses. The floristic diversity and
structural complexity of the plantation at Black Point were low. In conclusion, the ecological importance of
plantation at Black Point is low.
Table
8.9 Ecological Evaluation of
Criteria |
|
Naturalness |
Man-made, dominated by a few exotic
trees. |
Size |
The overall size was approximately 2.9
ha, the plantations were scattered within the Study Area as a thin strip
beside the headland. |
Diversity |
Low diversity of plant (18 species) and
structural complexity. Low in faunal
diversity. |
Rarity |
Rare butterfly species Spotted Sawtooth was recorded. |
Re-creatability |
Readily recreatable. |
Fragmentation |
Fragmented. |
Ecological Linkage |
Not linked to any ecologically
significant area. |
Potential Value |
Low with exotic plant species. |
Nursery/Breeding Ground |
No significant nursery or breeding
ground recorded during the survey. |
Age |
Young (10 years old) based on tree size,
structure and species composition. |
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife |
Low for avifauna, butterfly and dragonfly. |
Overall
Ecological Importance |
Low |
Shrubland
Shrubland
was the dominant habitat at Black Point.
The shrublands recorded at the northern and
western parts of the headland have higher floristic diversity and structural complexity
than those of the shrubland in the southern
part. All of the recorded plant species
are common or very common in
Table
8.10 Ecological Evaluation of Shrubland
Criteria |
Shrubland at Northern and Western Parts |
Shrubland at Southern Part |
Naturalness |
Secondary, semi-natural. |
Secondary, semi-natural. |
Size |
The overall size was approximately 35
ha, the shrubland was a large patch within the
Study Area and mainly located at steep terrains and valleys located at the
northern and western part of the headland. |
The overall size was approximately 11.6 ha,
the shrubland was located at the southern part of
the headland. |
Diversity |
Medium diversity of plant (70 species),
moderate structural complexity. Low to
moderate for faunal diversity. |
Medium diversity of plant (< 70 species),
low to moderate structural complexity.
Low to moderate for faunal diversity. |
Rarity |
Locally protected plant species Bamboo
Orchid and Pitcher Plant were recorded.
Faunal species of conservation interest included butterfly species Red
Lacewing and bird species Greater Coucal. |
Nil. |
Re-creatability |
Habitat characteristics and species
composition are not easy to create. It
will take approximately 10- 20 years for the shrubland
to be re-created to its existing status. |
Habitat characteristics are not easy to
recreate. It will take approximately
10 years for the shrubland to be re-created. |
Fragmentation |
Not fragmented. |
Not fragmented. |
Ecological Linkage |
Not linked to any ecologically
significant areas. |
Not linked to any ecologically
significant areas. |
Potential Value |
Moderate, may not be able to develop as
woodland as limited by strong wind, soil erosion and limited water storage
capacity of soil in this coastal area. |
Low to moderate, may not be able to
develop as woodland as limited by strong wind, soil erosion and limited water
storage capacity of soil in this coastal area. |
Nursery/Breeding Ground |
No significant nursery or breeding
ground recorded during the survey. |
No significant nursery or breeding
ground recorded during the survey. |
Age |
Young (around 20 years) based on tree
size, structure and species composition. |
Young (less than 20 years) based on tree
size, structure and species composition. |
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife |
Low to moderate for avifauna and
butterfly, low for dragonfly and other wildlife. |
Low to moderate for avifauna and
butterfly, low for dragonfly and other wildlife. |
Overall
Ecological Value |
Moderate
|
Low
to moderate |
Shrubby Grassland
Shrubby
grassland in
Table
8.11 Ecological Evaluation of Shrubby
Grassland
Criteria |
Shrubby Grassland |
Naturalness |
Semi-natured and disturbed by hill fire and
natural erosion. |
Size |
The overall size was approximately 18.2
ha, large patch located in the middle of the Study Area. |
Diversity |
Low diversity of plant (25 species) and
structural complexity. Low in faunal
diversity. |
Rarity |
Bird species of conservation interest
included Black-eared Kite and Greater Coucal. Two uncommon butterfly species, the Tailed
Sulphur and Yellow Pansy were recorded. |
Re-creatability |
Easy to recreate. |
Fragmentation |
Not fragmented. |
Ecological Linkage |
Not linked to any identified
ecologically significant area. |
Potential Value |
Low, may not be able to develop as shrubland as limited by frequent hill fires and limited
water storage capacity of soil in this coastal area. |
Nursery/Breeding Ground |
No significant nursery or breeding
ground recorded during the survey. |
Age |
Young (less than 5 years) based on tree
size, structure and species composition. |
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife |
Low. |
Overall
Ecological Importance |
Low |
Natural Seasonal Stream and Drainage
Channel
The
natural seasonal stream at Black Point was found within the shrubland
opposite to the Black Point Power Station.
The riparian vegetation community of the stream was integrated with the
surrounding shrubland. The substratum of the stream was rocky but
with very limited water flow even during the wet season. An amphibian species of conservation
interest, the Lesser Spiny Frog, was found in the stream during the
survey.
The
drainage channels had very limited water flow and a protected snake species Burmese Python Python
molurus was recorded during the additional
ecological survey. In
conclusion, the ecological importance of the stream at Black Point is low to
moderate and the ecological importance of the channels at Black Point is
negligible.
Table 8.12 Ecological
Evaluation of Stream/Channel
Criteria |
Seasonal Stream |
Channels |
Naturalness |
Natural. |
Man-made and highly disturbed. |
Size |
The total length was approximately 60
m. |
The total length was approximately 8.2
km. |
Diversity |
Low for plant and fauna. |
Low for plants and fauna. |
Rarity |
Species of conservation interest include
Greater Coucal and Lesser Spiny Frog were recorded. |
A
protected snake species Burmese Python Python
molurus was recorded. |
Re-creatability |
Stream habitats can be re-created with proper design,
such as |
Readily re-creatable. |
Fragmentation |
Not applicable. |
Not applicable. |
Ecological linkage |
Not functionally linked to any highly valued
habitat in close proximity. |
Not functionally linked to any highly
valued habitat in close proximity. |
Potential value |
Low due to the short length and limited
water flow. |
Low ecological potential. |
Nursery/breeding ground |
No significant nursery or breeding
ground recorded. |
No significant nursery or breeding
ground recorded. |
Age |
Not applicable. |
Not applicable. |
Abundance/ Richness of wildlife |
Low. |
Low. |
Overall
Ecological Importance |
Low
to Moderate |
Negligible |
Orchard
An orchard under active management was found at the southern fringe of
the headland and consisted mainly of fruit plants including Lychee
and Longan.
The understorey was bare and the floristic diversity
and structural complexity of the orchard were low. In conclusion, the ecological value of the
orchard was low.
Table
8.13 Ecological Evaluation of Orchard
Criteria |
Orchard |
Naturalness |
Man-made habitat with active management. |
Size |
The overall size was approximately 1.4
ha. |
Diversity |
Low for vegetation (total of nine
species for the whole area all fruit plants), moderate for bird and low for
butterfly, dragonfly and herpetofauna. |
Rarity |
None recorded. |
Re-creatability |
Readily re-creatable. |
Fragmentation |
Not fragmented. |
Ecological Linkage |
Not functionally linked to any highly
valued habitat in close proximity. |
Potential Value |
Low. |
Nursery/Breeding Ground |
No significant nursery or breeding ground
recorded. |
Age |
Not applicable. |
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife |
Low.
|
Overall
Ecological Importance |
Low |
Developed Area
The
developed area included the power station, barging point and fabrication yard for Shenzhen
Western Corridor Project, car parks,
wasteland, radar station and helipad.
All of the recorded plant species are common or very common in
Table
8.14 Ecological Evaluation of
Developed Areas
Criteria |
Developed Areas |
Naturalness |
Man-made habitat, consisted of power
station, barging
point and fabrication yard for Shenzhen Western Corridor Project,
helipad, radar station, car parks and roads. |
Size |
The overall size was approximately 43.5
ha. |
Diversity |
Low. |
Rarity |
Protected mammal Japanese Pipistrelle was recorded. |
Re-creatability |
Readily re-creatable. |
Fragmentation |
Not fragmented |
Ecological Linkage |
Not functionally linked to any highly
valued habitat in close proximity. |
Potential Value |
Low. |
Nursery/Breeding Ground |
None.
|
Age |
Not applicable. |
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife |
Low. |
Overall
Ecological Importance |
Negligible |
Project Area
The
ecological importance of the Project Area is evaluated in accordance with the EIAO-TM Annex 8 criteria (Table 8.15).
The
Project Area was approximately 16.4 ha comprising of shrubland
(12.6 ha), shrubby grassland (2.4 ha), developed area (1.4 ha) and drainage
channel (940 m). The habitat was
moderate for vegetation and low for fauna.
Two locally protected but common floral species including Pitcher Plant
and Bamboo Orchid were recorded within the Project Area whilst none of the
fauna species of conservation interest were recorded within the Project
Area. In conclusion, the ecological
importance of the Project Area is generally low to moderate.
Table
8.15 Ecological Evaluation of Project
Area (a)
Criteria |
Project Area |
Naturalness |
Disturbed
in part, i.e., construction of radar station and helipad within shrubby
grassland. |
Size |
Total:
16.4 ha. Approximately 12.6 ha of shrubland, 2.4 ha of shrubby grassland, 940 m long
drainage channel and 1.4 ha of developed area recorded within the Project
Area. |
Diversity |
Moderate
for vegetation and low for fauna. |
Rarity |
Two
locally protected but common floral species including Pitcher Plant and
Bamboo Orchid. No fauna species of
conservation interest were recorded within the Project Area. |
Re-creatability |
Shrubland
and shrubby grassland are re-creatable but would take time (i.e., 10 to 20
years) to reach maturity. Developed
areas and drainage channels are readily recreatable.
|
Fragmentation |
Not
applicable. |
Ecological Linkage |
Not functionally linked to any highly
valued habitat in close proximity. |
Potential Value |
Moderate. |
Nursery/Breeding Ground |
No
significant breeding ground recorded. |
Age |
Young. |
Abundance/Richness of Wildlife |
Abundance
of fauna was low. |
Overall Ecological Importance |
Moderate for Shrubland Low for Shrubby Grassland Negligible for Developed Area Negligible for Drainage Channel |
Note: (a) - Areas stated are approximate and
based on the layout prepared for the EIA which precedes the detailed
engineering design.
8.5.2
Flora and Fauna of Ecological Interest
There
were a number of floral and faunal species of conservation interest recorded
within the Study Area during the surveys:
·
Two
locally protected plant species, i.e., Pitcher Plant Nepenthes mirabilis and Bamboo Orchid Arundina graminifolia, were recorded in shrubland at the west of the headland.
·
Three
bird species of conservation interest, the Black Kite,
·
Two
uncommon (Yellow Pansy and Tailed Sulphur) and two rare (Spotted Sawtooth and Red Lacewing) butterfly species were recorded
within the Study Area. Yellow Pansy and
Tailed Sulphur were found in the shrubby grassland, Red Lacewing was found in
the shrubland and Spotted Sawtooth
was found in the plantation. None of
these butterfly species were sighted within habitats to be directly affected by
the Project.
·
A
Lesser Spiny Frog was found in the seasonal stream, which is a habitat that
would not be directly affected by the Project.
A protected snake species Burmese Python Python
molurus was recorded in the drainage channel next
to the power station area.
·
A
Japanese Pipistrelle, the most common bat species in
The list and evaluation of the floral and
faunal species of ecological interest recorded within the Study Area, according
to the EIAO TM, are given in Table 8.16.
Table
8.16 Evaluation of Floral and Faunal
Species with Ecological Interest within the Study Area
Species Name |
Location |
Protection Status |
Distribution |
Rarity in |
Plant |
|
|
|
|
Pitcher Plant Nepenthes mirabilis |
Shrubland
at the west of the headland |
Forests
and Countryside Ordinance (Cap 96); Appendix 2
of CITES |
|
Common |
Bamboo Orchid Arundina graminifolia, |
Shrubland
at the west of the headland |
Forests
and Countryside Ordinance (Cap 96) |
Grassland and streamside of various
locations in |
Common |
Bird |
|
|
|
|
Black Kite Milvus lineatus |
In various habitats of the Study Area; soaring |
Wild
Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170); Class
2 Protected Animal of PRC; Appendix
2 of CITES |
Found in many types of habitat; |
Common and widespread in |
White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster |
Above shrubland; flying passed |
Wild
Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170); Class
2 Protected Animal of PRC; Appendix
2 of CITES |
Found in coastal habitats and reservoirs
in |
Uncommon in |
Greater Coucal
Centropus sinensis |
In various habitats of the Study Area;
perching |
Wild
Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170); Class
2 Protected Animal of PRC |
Found in many types of habitats in |
Common and widespread in Very rare in |
Butterfly |
|
|
|
|
Yellow Pansy Junonia hierta |
Shrubby grassland |
Not protected |
Not widespread, found in a few scattered
localities |
Uncommon in |
Tailed |
Shrubby grassland |
Not protected |
Fairly widespread |
Uncommon in |
Spotted Sawtooth
Prioneris thestylis |
|
Not protected |
Not widespread |
Rare in |
Red Lacewing Cethosia biblis |
Shrubland |
Not protected |
Not widespread |
Rare in |
Herpetofauna |
|
|
|
|
Lesser Spiny Frog Rana exilispinosa |
Natural seasonal stream |
Not protected |
Widespread in swift-flowing hill and
mountain streams, particularly those with cascading water |
Fairly common in |
Burmese
Python Python molurus |
Channel |
Wild
Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170),
Appendix 2 of
CITES and Class 1 Protected Animal
of PRC |
Found in many types of habitats in |
Rare in |
Mammal |
|
|
|
|
Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus |
Developed area |
Wild
Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170) |
Widespread |
Common in |
8.6
Terrestrial Ecological
Assessment
8.6.1
Assessment Methodology
The
importance of potentially impacted ecological resources identified within the
Study Area was assessed using the approach specified in the EIAO-TM.
The potential impacts due to the construction and operation of the
proposed LNG terminal were then assessed (following the EIAO-TM Annex 16
guidelines) and the impacts evaluated (based on the criteria in EIAO-TM Annex 8).
8.6.2
Potential Sources of Impact
The
directly affected land area of the LNG terminal, covers the western tip of the
headland, is approximately 5.9 ha (impacts to rocky shore is excluded which
shall be discussed in detail in Part 3
Section 9 Marine Section). The
boundary of the Project Area (landside) perimeter will be secured during
construction and operation of the terminal for safety and security
reasons. The land take is mainly
restricted to the shrubland along the coast and most
of the upland habitats within the Project Area will not be disturbed. The Project involves excavation and
construction of the LNG terminal platform and accommodation of the LNG storage
tanks and associated facilities.
Potential ecological impacts that may arise during the construction
operational phases are detailed below.
Construction Phase
·
Direct
habitat and vegetation loss and habitat fragmentation resulting from land take
for the construction activities for the LNG terminal and associated facilities;
·
Direct
habitat and vegetation loss resulting from land take for the construction of a
temporary haul road at the fringe of the shrubland,
to allow heavy machinery to be mobilised and transported for the slope
stabilization works;
·
Direct
loss of inactive/less mobile/habitat-specific wildlife nesting/inhabiting the
affected area;
·
Associated
potential impacts to wildlife, including restriction of wildlife utilisation
(i.e., transit, feeding and roosting), degradation of habitat quality/
ecological function, as a result of temporary and permanent loss, isolation and
fragmentation of ecological habitat, and fencing around the Project Area; and,
·
Potential
impacts to the surrounding habitat and associated wildlife due to physical
disturbance of this habitat including noise, blasting, increased human activity
or hill fire.
Operational Phase
·
Potential
impacts to the surrounding natural habitat (mainly the hill at Black Point) and
associated wildlife due to increased human activity and disturbance (i.e.,
noise and light) associated with the operation of the LNG terminal;
·
Potential impacts to wildlife, in
particular avifauna, during operation of
the LNG terminal at Black Point due to the increase in noise, air
pollution, lighting, glare and physical barriers;
and,
·
Potential
impacts to the surrounding natural habitat (mainly the hill at Black Point) and
associated wildlife due to an accidental fire caused by a LNG spill.
8.6.3
Assessment of Ecological Impacts
Approximately
5.9 ha of the land area within the Project Area will be directly affected (Figure
8.12). The land works including site clearance,
excavation and blasting are expected to be completed in 18 months. The major impacts on the terrestrial
ecological resources will be direct habitat and vegetation loss.
Construction Phase
The
potential impacts during the construction phase will be:
Habitat Loss
·
Permanent
loss (approximately 4.2 ha) and temporary loss (approximately 0.7 ha) of shrubland due to the construction of the tanks of the LNG terminal
including a temporary haul road and slope stabilization (refer to Figure
8.12);
·
Permanent
loss of developed area (approximately 1 ha) due to the construction of the
administrative buildings (refer to Figure
8.12);
·
Permanent
loss of a length of drainage channel (approximately 135 m) due to the
construction of the LNG terminal platform (refer to Figure
8.12);
·
Relocation
and potential loss of floral species (Pitcher Plant and Bamboo Orchid) of
conservation interest; and,
·
Potential
loss of foraging and feeding areas for the associated wildlife. None of the faunal species of conservation
interest were recorded
as inhabiting the area to be directly affected by the works.
Habitat fragmentation and Isolation
Habitat
fragmentation and isolation are not expected as the affected habitats are
located at the western end of the headland and most of the upland habitats will
remain untouched. It should be noted
that the areas are generally steep and are expected to be mainly utilized by
birds and butterflies, which are less affected by such fragmentation and
isolation effects.
Other
Impacts
Secondary
impacts to the surrounding habitats (generally of low ecological importance)
and associated wildlife may arise from the potential for increased noise
impacts, blasting, human activities and disturbance and construction site
runoff. These impacts are expected to be
low, owing to the temporary nature and relatively small scale of the
construction works and given that good construction practice, environmental
controls and regular checks on the construction boundaries will be
conducted. Impacts are expected to be
acceptable.
Operational Phase
Operational phase impacts to terrestrial ecology may arise from
increased human activities in the area resulting in disturbance to the
surrounding habitats and associated wildlife, if uncontrolled. Given the generally low level of human
activity required to operate the terminal it is not expected that operational
phase impacts will occur. Vaporization of LNG will be a
potential risk provided that there is an ignition source in the vicinity. In the unlikely event of leakage of LNG, the fire prevention
system will be implemented (details are presented in Part 3 Section 13 Hazard
to Life Assessment), and consequently impacts to the terrestrial ecological
resources through the spread of fire will be prevented. The impacts associated with accidental spills
of LNG are discussed in Part 3 Section 13
Hazard to Life Assessment.
Where
possible, structures will utilise appropriate design to complement the
surrounding landscape. Materials and
finishes will be considered during detailed design. All of the major lighting sources will be
pointed inward and downwards to avoid disturbance to birds. Air quality and noise impacts on the birds
due to the operation of the terminal are expected to be low and not
significant.
Cumulative Impact
At
present, there are no planned projects at Black
Point that could create cumulative terrestrial
ecological impacts during the construction of the LNG terminal. Therefore, no cumulative impacts will arise.
8.6.4
Impact Evaluation
Habitat Loss
Potential
impacts have been evaluated according to Table
1 of Annex 8 of the EIAO-TM. Tables
8.18 to 8.20 present an evaluation of the habitat loss due to the Project.
The permanent and temporary habitat
loss of shrubland will be approximately 4.2 ha and
0.7 ha respectively. Two locally
protected plant species, the Pitcher Plant and Bamboo Orchid were recorded
within the Project Area. No faunal
species of conservation interest were recorded as inhabiting the Shrublands within the Project Area. In view of the availability of similar
habitat in the vicinity and the mitigation measures, it is considered that
impacts to wildlife and habitat are of low to moderate severity and acceptable.
Table
8.18 Overall Impact Evaluation for Shrubland within the Project Area
Evaluation Criteria |
Shrubland |
Habitat quality |
The habitat quality is moderate. |
Species |
Two locally protected plant species Pitcher Plant and
Bamboo Orchid were recorded within the Project Area. No faunal species of conservation
interest were recorded as inhabiting the Project Area. |
Size/Abundance |
Area lost permanently and temporarily
are approximately 4.2 ha and 0.7 ha respectively. |
Duration |
The impact will persist during the construction and
operational phases for the LNG storage tanks but will be temporary for the
haul road as it will be reinstated after completion of construction
work. |
Reversibility |
It is re-creatable but will take time for the habitat to
reach maturity. |
Magnitude |
The scale of the habitat loss is moderate in the context
of the surrounding similar habitats. |
Overall Impact Conclusion |
Low to moderate |
Approximately
1.0 ha of developed area will be lost. In view of the low occurrence of wildlife and
the negligible ecological importance of the habitat, it is believed that the
impact severity of this habitat loss is negligible.
Table
8.19 Overall Impact Evaluation for
Developed Area within the Project Area
Evaluation Criteria |
Developed Area |
Habitat quality |
The habitat quality is negligible. |
Species |
Nil. |
Size/Abundance |
Area lost permanently is approximately
1.0 ha. |
Duration |
The impact will persist during the construction and operational
phases. |
Reversibility |
It is readily re-creatable. |
Magnitude |
The scale of the habitat loss is small in the context of
the surrounding similar habitats. |
Overall Impact Conclusion |
Negligible |
Approximately
135 m of drainage channel will be lost.
In view of the low occurrence of general wildlife and the negligible
ecological importance of the habitat, it is believed that the severity of
habitat loss of drainage channel is negligible.
Table
8.20 Overall Impact Evaluation for
Drainage Channel within the Project Area
Evaluation Criteria |
Drainage Channel |
Habitat quality |
The habitat quality is negligible. |
Species |
Nil. |
Size/Abundance |
Approximately 135 m length will be
permanently lost. |
Duration |
The impact will persist during the construction and
operational phases. |
Reversibility |
It is readily re-creatable. |
Magnitude |
The scale of the habitat loss is small in the context of
the adjacent similar habitats. |
Overall Impact Conclusion |
Negligible |
In
conclusion, the direct ecological impact due to the construction of the LNG
terminal is expected to be low to moderate, and will not contribute to any
cumulative impacts.
Although,
the habitat loss due to the Project will reduce the areas of foraging and
feeding grounds of wildlife, the potential impacts are expected to be low to
moderate owing to the extensive area of unaffected natural habitat (shrubland) available in close proximity to the Project
Area. The temporary nature and
relatively small scale of the construction works, in combination with regular
checks on construction boundaries, render the habitat loss as acceptable. Potential impacts on the two protected plant
species, the Pitcher Plant and Bamboo Orchid, will be reduced through
transplantation prior to the commencement of the construction works.
Other
Associated Impacts
Habitat Fragmentation and Isolation –
Given that the LNG terminal will mainly be located along the coastline,
(whereas the shrublands are located on the physically
isolated headland) and the scale of the habitat loss is small in the context of
the surrounding similar habitats, the potential impacts of habitat
fragmentation and isolation are considered to be minimal.
Other Impacts –
Increased human activities and disturbance due to the Project during
construction and operation have the potential to affect the surrounding natural
habitats and the associated wildlife.
These potential impacts are expected to be low given good construction
practice, environmental management controls will be implemented, and that
regular checks on construction boundaries will be conducted. Impacts during the operational phase are expected
to be acceptable.
8.7
Summary of Mitigation
Measures
Annex 16
of the EIAO-TM states that the
general policy for mitigation of significant ecological impacts, in order of
priority, is:
Avoidance: Potential impacts should be avoided to the
maximum extent practicable by adopting suitable alternatives;
Minimisation: Unavoidable impacts should be minimised by
taking appropriate and practicable measures such as constraints on intensity of
works operations or timing of works operations; and
Compensation: The loss of important species and habitats may
be provided for elsewhere as compensation.
Enhancement and other conservation measures should always be considered
whenever possible.
8.7.1
Avoidance
As
part of the site selection process for the LNG terminal, a total of 27 sites,
have been analysed (see Part 1 Section 5
of this EIA). Two sites (Black Point and
·
Wild Animal Protection Areas;
·
Conservation Areas;
·
Coastal Protection Areas;
·
Registered Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSIs);
and,
·
Country Parks.
The Project Area at Black Point (mainly shrubland),
as well as the whole of the Study Area, are not considered to be of high
importance to wildlife. None of the
terrestrial habitats recorded in the Study Area at Black Point were of high
ecological importance, with most of the habitats recorded as moderate to low,
and two regarded as negligible in terms of their ecological importance. The
impacts from the LNG terminal
therefore are expected to be low with the adoption of appropriate
construction practices.
8.7.2
Minimisation
The
discussion in Section 8.6 has indicated
that the impacts on ecological resources due to the construction and operation
of the LNG terminal are generally expected to be low and acceptable. The following measures will be taken to
further reduce impacts to terrestrial ecological resources.
Habitat and Wildlife
·
According
to the site selection options for the terminal footprint in Black Point (detail
please refer to Part 3 Section 2),
this proposed option involves partially sea reclamation and partially land
formation by cutting on the existing headland.
It should be noted that this option can make a balance of cut and
fill. The disturbance of existing
headland shall comprise of 4.9 ha of shrubland
only. This is a win-win option to reduce
the disturbance through either full sea reclamation (disturbance to marine
habitat and mammals) or full excavation of land area (disturbance to
terrestrial habitat).
·
Structures
will utilise appropriate design to complement the surrounding landscape
wherever possible. Materials and
finishes will be considered during detailed design; and,
·
All
of the major lighting sources will be pointed inward and downwards to avoid
disturbance to birds.
Vegetation
Loss
The Pitcher
Plants and Bamboo Orchids (both < 10 individuals) recorded within the
Project Area will be transplanted to
a similar habitat, i.e., rocky shore with freshwater seepage or near to a small
stream, such as the undisturbed rocky shore of Black Point or the seasonal
stream recorded within the Study Area.
Pitcher Plants have been successfully transplanted in Hong Kong, for
example under the Environmental Permit requirements for the construction of the
Theme Park at Penny’s Bay ([58]) ([59]) ([60]).
A detailed vegetation survey on the Pitcher
Plants and Bamboo Orchids would be conducted within the impacted shrubland and Project Area by a suitably qualified
botanist/ ecologist to identify and record the affected individuals prior to
the commencement of site clearance works.
Feasibility and suitability of transplanting the affected plant species
of conservation interest would be carefully studied and suitable receptor sites
would be identified. Detailed
transplantation proposal providing information of transplantation methodology,
recipient site, implementation programme, watering requirement, post-transplanting
monitoring and personal involved shall be submitted to and approved by EPD and
AFCD. Transplantation would be undertaken
and supervised by a suitably qualified botanist/ horticulturist. After transplantation, monitoring will be
undertaken to check the performance and health conditions of the transplanted
individuals on a weekly basis in the first
month after transplantation and monthly basis for additional eleven months.
Remedial actions will be discussed with AFCD in the event of
unsuccessful transplantation.
Appropriate Construction Practice
·
Erect
fences along the boundary of the works area before the commencement of works to
prevent vehicle movements, and encroachment of personnel, onto adjacent areas;
and,
·
Avoid
damage and disturbance to the remaining and surrounding natural habitats.
8.7.3
Compensation
To
compensate for the permanent and temporary loss of 4.9 ha of shrubland for the construction of the terminal, haul road
and storage tanks on the existing shrubland, at least
0.7 ha of shrubland will be planted at the temporary
haul road and newly formed slope within the Project Area to provide shrubland habitat at the temporary haul road. Species used for planting will take reference
from the species identified in the surrounding area and/or Section 8.4, and be native to Hong Kong and the
The loss
of 4.2 ha tall shrubland habitat will be compensated
by enhancement planting at the existing shrubland
located to the south of the headland.
Six hectare of the existing shrubland, which
has relatively lower species diversity and low vegetation coverage, will be
enhanced through native tall shrubs planting.
Increase of the structural complexity and species diversity would
enhance the ecological value of the existing shrubland.
An Enhancement Planting Plan with
plant species to be used, their size and detail planting matrix is required to
be prepared by qualified ecologist and landscape architect. Planting shrubs should make reference to the
plant species recorded in the affected shrubland. Enhancement planting is preferable to
minimise the impacts of the existing shrubs with good conditions. Detailed
enhancement
planting proposal providing information of planting
methodology, recipient site, implementation programme, watering requirement,
post-planting monitoring and personal involved shall be submitted to and
approved by EPD and AFCD. Enhancement planting would be
supervised by a suitably qualified botanist/ landscape architect prior to the
commencement of site clearance works. After enhancement planting, monitoring will
be undertaken to check the performance and health conditions of the planted
individuals on a monthly basis for 12 months.
8.8
Residual
Environmental Impacts
The
Project will involve the permanent loss of approximately 4.2 ha of shrubland. The
affected habitats are considered to be of moderate ecological value. No significant residual impact due to the
construction and operation of the LNG terminal is expected in view of reduction
of land excavation and disturbance to the existing shrubland
(during layout option selection process), extensive similar habitat in the
vicinity, and the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures including
provision of 0.7 ha of compensatory planting of shrubland,
6 ha of enhancement planting and transplantation of Pitcher Plants and Bamboo
Orchids. It should be noted that this
option, partially sea reclamation and partially land formation by cutting on
the existing headland, can make a balance of cut and fill. This is a win-win option to reduce the
disturbance through either full sea reclamation (disturbance to marine habitat
and mammals) or full excavation of land area (disturbance to terrestrial
habitat).
8.9
Environmental
Monitoring and Audit
The
implementation of the ecological mitigation measures described in Section 8.7 will be checked as part of
the Environmental Monitoring and Audit procedures during the construction
period.
The
terrestrial ecological resources recorded within the Study Area include
plantation, shrubland, shrubby grassland,
stream/channel, orchard and developed areas, with their associated
wildlife. Of these habitats, shrubland located at the western part of the headland is of
moderate ecological importance, shrubland located at
the southern part of the headland and the stream are low to moderate in
ecological importance, while the remaining habitats are of low or negligible
ecological importance.
The
impact on natural habitats within the Project Area is considered to be low to
moderate, and no adverse residual impact is expected after the implementation
of the proposed mitigation measures, comprising appropriate construction
practices, reinstatement of affected areas of shrubland
(temporary haul road), transplantation of Pitcher Plants and Bamboo Orchids and
compensatory planting of shrubland and enhancement
planting will reduce potential disturbance to the
surrounding environment. Environmental
monitoring and audit measures in the form of regular checks will be undertaken.
During
the operation phase of the LNG terminal at Black Point adverse impacts to
terrestrial ecological resources are not expected to occur.