10.1
The following section presents the terrestrial ecological
assessment of potential impacts resulting from the Project. A literature review
and reconnaissance visits were undertaken to establish
terrestrial ecological baseline conditions and evaluate the ecological
importance of habitats/species potentially affected by proposed works. The
duration and scale of possible terrestrial ecological impacts resulting from
the proposed works was assessed and necessary mitigation measures were
identified. Residual ecological impacts were assessed, and ecological
monitoring and audit requirements were identified.
10.2
The assessment follows the
criteria and guidelines as stated in Annexes 8 and 16 of the Technical
Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO TM) and the EIA
Study Brief No. ESB-129/2005.
10.3
Guidelines, standards, documents and HKSAR Government
ordinances and regulations listed in the following were referred to during the
course of the ecological impact assessment.
10.4
The Country Parks
Ordinance (Cap. 208) provides for the designation and management of country
parks and special areas. Country parks are designated for the purpose of nature
conservation, countryside recreation and outdoor education. Special Areas are
created mainly for the purpose of nature conservation.
10.5
The Forests and
Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96) prohibits felling, cutting, burning or
destroying of trees and growing plants in forests and plantations on Government
land. Related subsidiary Regulations
prohibit the selling or possession of listed restricted and protected plant
species. The list of protected species
in
10.6
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 birds and
most mammals, including marine cetaceans, are protected under this Ordinance.
The Second Schedule of the Ordinance, which lists all the animals protected was
last revised in June 1992.
10.7
The Protection of
Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586) restricts the import and
export of scheduled species. The Ordinance is primarily related to controlling
trade in threatened and endangered species and restricting the local possession
of them.
10.8
The amended Town
Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131) provides for the designation of coastal
protection areas, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), Conservation Area,
10.9
Chapter 10 of the Hong Kong
Planning Standards and Guidelines (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. The appendices list the legislation and
administrative controls for conservation, other conservation related measures
in
10.10
Annex 16 of the EIAO TM 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.
10.11
EIAO Guidance Note No.
6/2002
clarifies the requirements of ecological assessments under the EIAO.
EIAO Guidance Note No. 7/2002 provides general guidelines for conducting
ecological baseline surveys in order to fulfil requirements stipulated in the EIAO TM.
10.12
List of Wild Animals
Under State Protection details Category I and Category
II protected animal species under Mainland Chinese Legislation.
10.13
List of Wild Plants Under
State Protection details Category I and Category
II and Class III protected plant species under Mainland Chinese Legislation.
10.14
The International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List of Threatened
Species provides taxonomic, conservation status and
distribution information on taxa that have been evaluated using the IUCN Red List
Categories and Criteria. This system is designed to determine the
relative risk of extinction, and the main purpose of the IUCN Red List is to
catalogue and highlight those taxa that are facing a higher risk of global
extinction. The IUCN Red List also includes information on taxa that are either
close to meeting the threatened thresholds or that would be threatened were it
not for an ongoing taxon-specific conservation programme.
10.15
Previous assessment studies and
other relevant ecological information were reviewed, which
include the following:
·
Environmental Impact Assessment
for Agreement No. CE 92/1997 Infrastructural Works for Housing Development at
Telegraph Bay – Engineering Feasibility Study (Enviros Hong Kong, 1999)
·
Environmental Impact Assessment for Agreement No. CE25/2002
(DS) Drainage Improvement in Northern
·
Tree Survey Report for the HATS
Stage
·
Reports on Egretry Counts in
·
The Avifauna of
·
A Field Guide to the Amphibians of
·
·
Composition
and Distribution of
·
A Field Guide to the Terrestrial Mammals of
·
Camera Trap Survey of
·
Survey on
the Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx) in the Urban Areas of Hong
Kong (Chan & Shek, 2006)
·
The
Species Composition, Distribution and Population Size of
10.16
Under HATS Stage
10.17
Following the clause
10.18
Areas visited
covered
10.19
Habitat checkings were undertaken to determine the
types, sizes and locations of habitats in the Assessment Areas. The habitat checkings were conducted via a
desktop review of aerial photographs, base-maps and other relevant maps and
plans followed by site ground truthing. Representative
photographs of habitat types in the Assessment Areas were taken and
presented in Appendix 10.1.
10.20
Presence of key
floral species and its relative abundance from different habitat types
in all nine Assessment Areas were
also recorded.
The location of any plant species of conservation interest was recorded
and representative photograph was taken, if possible. Identification of species
and distribution status in
10.21
Daytime visits on avifauna, herpetofauna,
mammal and terrestrial insect (e.g. butterfly and odonate) were conducted in each nine Assessment Area,
covering all the identified habitat types. Detailed
methodologies on each fauna groups are discussed below:
Avifauna
10.22
Visits on avifauna comprising general
walk-transect within all nine Assessment Areas were undertaken with
species presence and number of species in different habitat types
recorded. Birds were recorded visually
and aurally. The location of bird species
of conservation interest was recorded, along with any notable behaviour (e.g.,
breeding behaviour such as nesting and presence of recently fledged juveniles,
roosting, feeding activities) and representative photograph was taken if possible.
Species was
identified with reference to Viney et al. 2005.
10.23
Species presence and abundance of adult butterflies,
dragonflies and damselflies were recorded by direct observation in different
habitats identified in each Assessment Area. Species was identified
based on references from Wilson et al. 2003
and Lo 2005.
10.24
Reptiles, amphibians and terrestrial mammals were recorded
by direct
sighting / hearing and active searching in potential microhabitats
within the Assessment Areas. Signs of terrestrial mammals including footprints, dungs,
burrows and feeding activities were also noticed during the visits. Species was identified
with reference to several ecological publications (Karsen et al. 1998; Chan et
al. 2005 and Shek 2006).
10.25
Potential ecological impacts arising from the Project were
assessed following EIAO TM Annex 16
guidelines and the impacts were evaluated based on criteria in EIAO TM Annex 8.
10.26
Only two sites of conservation
importance, the existing Pok Fu Lam Country Park and the
coincided Pok
Fu Lam Reservoir Catchment Area Site of Special
Scientific Interest (SSSI), falls partly within the
Assessment Area at
10.27
Pok Fu Lam Country Park is in foothills of
10.28
Pok Fu Lam Reservoir Catchment Area SSSI
coincides with the boundary of the Pok Fu Lam Country Park. It was designated in
1979, with an area of
10.29
A habitat map of the Assessment Areas is given in Figures 10.1a to 10.1j.
Representative photographs of habitats and a
list of floral species recorded in recent visits are given in Appendix 10.1
and Appendix
10.2, respectively. More detailed descriptions of habitats and vegetation
communities in the Assessment Areas are presented
in the
following paragraphs.
10.30
Terrestrial habitats found within the Assessment Areas include developed
area, wasteland, woodland, plantation, shrubland, grassland and
watercourse.
Most
of the Assessment Areas, particularly the areas to be directly affected by the
Project, are developed areas and wasteland. Totally
83 plant species was recorded from the seven habitats within the Assessment
Areas but no rare or protected plant species
was recorded during the recent visits. Table 10.1
lists the size of various habitat types within the Assessment Areas.
Table 10.1 Area
of Various Habitat Types within the
Assessment Areas
|
Habitat Type |
Size |
|
Developed Area |
|
|
|
|
|
Wasteland |
|
|
|
|
|
Shrubland |
|
|
Grassland |
|
|
Watercourse |
|
10.31
A total of
10.32
Meanwhile, it also supported some native tree species,
including Elephant’s Ear (Macaranga
tanarius), Camphor Tree (Cinnamomum camphora) and Chinese Banyan (Ficus microcarpa). These plant species are native and widespread in
10.33
Wasteland recorded in the Assessment Areas included vacant lands,
storage area
and works areas for other construction activities. This type of habitat
supports little or no vegetation. Only 10 floral species was
recorded and included mainly common species, such as Chinese Banyan (Ficus microcarpa), Elephant’s Ear (Macaranga
tanarius), Flame Tree (Delonix
regia), Taiwan Acacia (Acacia confusa) and White Popinac (Leucaena leucocephala). Burma-reed (Neyraudia reynaudiana) and Mile-a-minute
Weed (Mikania micrantha) were also
commonly found in this habitat, whilst no rare or protected
plant
species was recorded. This habitat is highly disturbed in nature with limited
ecological interest.
10.34
Woodland habitat mainly comprised of secondary woodland at hillsides areas
within the Assessment Areas. The patches of woodland habitats in the Assessment Areas are likely experienced similar
establishing periods. Hence, patches of natural woodland consist of similar
characteristics such as age, height and habitat structure. Natural woodland supports a relatively diverse and
native floral composition (totally 33 plant species recorded) when compared
with other terrestrial habitats, the recorded plants included tree species
Lance-leaved Sterculia
(Sterculia lanceolata) and Turn-in-the-wind (Mallotus
paniculatus); shrub species such as Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense),
Common Melastoma (Melastoma candidum),
Pop-gun Seed (Bridelia tomentosa) and
Wax Tree (Rhus succedanea).
10.35
In a
previous EIA study on Infrastructural Works for Housing
Development at
10.36
10.37
Four areas of shrubland were recorded
from the Assessment Areas. One distributed on hillside areas
to the north of the proposed works area (ALC-i) and Ap Lei Chau
PTW while the other was recorded at hillsides of the Mount Davis to the northeast
of the proposed works area (SB-i), shaft site (SB-PS) and Sandy Bay
PTW.
Another shrubland was also found near the
10.38
Two areas of grassland were recorded
from the Assessment Areas. The two grassland areas were
recorded in Ap Lei Chau, one was recorded at hillside to the northeast of the
proposed works area (ALC-i) and the Ap Lei Chau PTW, and another one
was found on
headlands to the east of the proposed works area (ALC-iii). Plant species diversity
in this habitat was generally low (10
species). It
was mostly dominated by Burma-reed (Neyraudia
reynaudiana) and Chinese Scaleseed Sedge (Lepidosperma chinense), with Wedelia (Wedelia trilobata) and Billygoat-weed (Ageratum conyzoides) commonly found. Occasionally, tree species
such as Pine (Pinus sp.) and shrub
Wax Tree (Rhus succedanea) were also
recorded. No rare or protected plant species was recorded.
10.39
Watercourses were recorded mainly in
woodland habitats at North Point,
10.40
In
10.41
In woodland habitat, birds recorded were also common and
widespread species with low conservation importance, including Spotted Dove (Streptopelia
chinensis), Masked Laughingthrush (Garrulax perspicillatus), Oriental Magpie Robin (Copsychus saularis) and Crested Myna (Acridotheres
cristatellus).
10.42
In watercourse habitat, bird
species commonly found near water such as White Wagtail (Motacilla alba) and Grey Wagtail (M. cinerea) were recorded from the channel bank / bed while Spotted Dove (Streptopelia
chinensis), Oriental Magpie Robin
(Copsychus saularis) and
Yellow-browed Warbler (Phylloscopus inornatus) were found from the
nearby riparian vegetation. All the recorded species
from this habitat are common and widespread in
10.43
Meanwhile, only two species of conservation
interest (Black Kite and Common Buzzard) were recorded within the Assessment
Areas during recent visits undertaken by this study in April 2007. Black Kite (Milvus
migrans) was recorded in flight above the woodland at North Point, Cyberport,
Ap Lei Chau and
10.44
Black Kite is regarded as the most common
raptor in
10.45
The Common Buzzard is a common winter visitor and widely
distributed in
10.46
Previous baseline studies for Hong
Kong West Drainage Tunnel (Black & Veatch, 2005) recorded
a total of
15 bird species in woodland near
10.47
From another EIA study for infrastructural works for
Telegraph Bay Development (Enviros Hong Kong, 1999), 12 species of
birds recorded in the woodland habitat in Cyberport were mainly urban birds in
Hong Kong, such as Eurasian Tree Sparrow (Passer
montanus), Oriental Magpie Robin
(Copsychus saularis), Japanese White-eye (Zosterops
japonicus) and Crested Myna (Acridotheres cristatellus). The Black Kite (Milvus
migrans) was also observed in flight around the Assessment Area
near Cyberport.
10.48
A few individuals of White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster) and a nest were
also recorded at Stonecutters Island by the Kite Research Group of Hong Kong
Bird watching Society (HKBWS) in 2003 (Tsim et
al., 2003). As
10.49
Egretry Counts conducted in 2002 (Anon, 2002)
recorded an
active egretry in woodland habitat at
10.50
The large, fairly secure populations of Little Egret that
occur in Hong Kong are considered important in a regional context while
the Black-crowned Night Heron
is considered to have local
conservation interest due to its restricted breeding and
roosting sites in Hong Kong
(Fellowes et
al., 2002).
Chinese Pond
Heron is considered of conservation importance due to its locally declining
populations. Despite the reduced numbers of this species in
10.51
During the recent visits
under this EIA study, no herpetofauna, including amphibian and reptile, was recorded in the
Assessment Areas. However, intensive amphibian surveys on
10.52
An intensive amphibian survey was carried out from 1991 to
1996 covering all terrestrial and aquatic habitats throughout
10.53
Short-legged Toad is common and widely distributed in upland
forest streams on
10.54
Lesser Spiny Frog is
common and widely distributed in
10.55
Both protected herpetofauna
species were previously recorded in natural woodland habitats and hill streams.
These potential habitats found in the Assessment Areas were excluded from the
Project sites and proposed works areas under this Project.
10.56
Only one species of mammal, Pallas’s
Squirrel (Callosciurus erythraeus) was recorded in the Assessment Area
in the recent visits under
this EIA.
This individual was recorded at tree crown of a tree in the natural woodland at
North Point, approximately
10.57
Pallas’s Squirrel (Callosciurus erythraeus) is a common
and introduced species in
10.58
Referring to the previous survey on the Short-nosed Fruit
Bat (Cynopterus sphinx) in urban
areas in
10.59
Another bat survey (Ades, 1999) also confirmed the
distribution of Short-nosed Fruit Bat in northern
10.60
Although Short-nosed Fruit Bats are widespread in
10.61
During the recent visits under this EIA, one odonate species,
Wandering Glider (Pantala flavescens)
and five butterfly species, including Blue
Tiger (Tirumala limniace), Common
Bluebottle (Graphium sarpedon),
Great Orange Tip (Hebomoia glaucippe) and Red-base Jezebel (Delias pasithoe) were recorded in the woodland and
plantation habitats, while only one butterfly species, Indian Cabbage White (Pieris canidia), was recorded from developed area. All recorded
species are common and widespread in
10.62
All the watercourse habitats
identified within the assessment areas were man-made for drainage purposes. The
channel bed was observed to be mostly concrete-lined and dry during the recent visits
under this EIA. No freshwater fish, tadpole or other aquatic
macro-invertebrates (e.g. shrimp) was found in the watercourse habitats by
visual observation during the same visits.
10.63
In accordance with the EIAO
TM Annex 8 criteria, the ecological importance of recorded habitats has
been evaluated in Tables
Table
|
Criteria |
Developed Area |
Wasteland |
|
Naturalness |
Man-made habitat. |
Man-made habitat. |
|
Size |
Large area of this
habitat within Assessment Areas is approximately |
Medium area of this habitat within
Assessment Areas is approximately |
|
Diversity |
Moderate floral and
faunal diversity, low structural complexity. |
Low floral and faunal diversity,
low structural complexity. |
|
Rarity |
No floral and faunal
species of conservation interest recorded from this
habitat during recent visits. |
No floral and faunal species of
conservation interest recorded from this habitat during recent visits. |
|
Recreatability |
Readily re-creatable. |
Readily re-creatable. |
|
Fragmentation |
Not applicable. |
Not applicable. |
|
Ecological linkage |
Habitat is not
structurally or functionally linked to any high ecological value resources. |
Habitat is not structurally or
functionally linked to any high ecological value resources. |
|
Potential Value |
Low. |
Low. |
|
Nursery Ground |
No record of
significant nursery or breeding ground. |
No record of
significant nursery or breeding ground. |
|
Age |
Not applicable. |
Not applicable. |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Low. |
Low. |
|
Ecological
Value |
Very Low. |
Very Low. |
Table 10.2b Ecological
Value of
|
Criteria |
|
|
|
Naturalness |
Natural, secondary.woodland |
Man-made habitat. |
|
Size |
Medium area of this habitat within
the Assessment
Areas is approximately |
Small area of this habitat within the Assessment
Areas is approximately |
|
Diversity |
Moderate floral and
faunal diversity, moderate structural complexity. |
Low floral and faunal diversity, simple structure complexity. |
|
Rarity |
Three
faunal species of conservation interest including Pallas’s squirrel, Black Kite and Common Buzzard
were
recorded during the recent visits for this EIA study. |
No floral and faunal species of
conservation interest recorded from this habitat during recent visits. |
|
Recreatability |
Moderate. It will take
40-50 years for the natural woodlands to develop. |
Readily re-creatable. |
|
Fragmentation |
Woodlands in Assessment Areas at North Point, Sandy Bay, Cyberport, Ap
Lei Chau and Wah Fu sites are mostly scattered and isolated habitats, while
that at Aberdeen and Stonecutter Island sites are mostly unfragmented. |
Fragmented by urban developments
and foot paths. |
|
Ecological linkage |
Woodland habitat at the |
Habitat is not structurally or
functionally linked to any high ecological value resources. |
|
Potential Value |
Moderate. |
Low. |
|
Nursery Ground |
No sighting of nursery or breeding ground was
observed in recent visits under this Project. An
active egretry supporting breeding population of Little Egret, Black-crowned
Night Heron and Chinese pond heron was previously reported at woodland
habitat in |
No record of
significant nursery or breeding ground. |
|
Age |
About 50-60 years,
vegetation naturally restored after World War II. |
Not applicable. |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Moderate. |
Low. |
|
Ecological
Value |
North Point, Sandy Bay,
Cyberport, Ap Lei Chau and Wah Fu – moderate |
Low. |
Table
|
Criteria |
Shrubland |
Grassland |
|
Naturalness |
Secondary natural. |
Natural habitat. |
|
Size |
Small area of this habitat within
Assessment Area is approximately |
Small area of this habitat within
Assessment Area is approximately |
|
Diversity |
Low floral and faunal diversity. |
Low floral and faunal diversity. |
|
Rarity |
No floral and faunal species of
conservation interest recorded from this habitat. |
No floral and faunal species of
conservation interest recorded from this habitat. |
|
Recreatability |
Moderate. |
Readily re-creatable. |
|
Fragmentation |
Habitat is fragmented. |
Unfragmented. |
|
Ecological linkage |
Habitat is structurally and
functionally linked to Pok Fu Lam Country Park at |
Habitat is not structurally or
functionally linked to any high ecological value resources. |
|
Potential Value |
Low. |
Low. |
|
Nursery Ground |
No record of
significant nursery or breeding ground. |
No record of
significant nursery or breeding ground. |
|
Age |
Young. |
Young. |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Low. |
Low. |
|
Ecological
Value |
Low. |
Low. |
Table 10.2d Ecological Value of Watercourse in the
Assessment Areas
|
Criteria |
Watercourse |
|
Naturalness |
Man-made habitat. |
|
Size |
The total length of stream is
about |
|
Diversity |
Low floral diversity and no aquatic fauna recorded from this habitat type during recent
visits under this EIA. |
|
Rarity |
No faunal and floral species of
conservation interest recorded from this habitat type
in literature review. |
|
Recreatability |
Readily re-creatable. |
|
Fragmentation |
Fragmented by urban facilities. |
|
Ecological linkage |
Habitat is not structurally or
functionally linked to any high ecological value resources. |
|
Potential Value |
Low. |
|
Nursery Ground |
No record of
significant nursery or breeding ground was found during the surveys. |
|
Age |
Not applicable. |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Low. |
|
Ecological
Value |
Very Low. |
10.64
Both developed areas and wasteland were
highly modified habitats. Developed areas supported moderate diversity
but low
abundance of plants and animals while low species diversity and floral /
fauna abundance
were recorded in wasteland habitats. Most of the species identified are common, widespread
and typical of such habitats in
10.65
All woodland habitats within the Assessment Areas
(except
those at
10.66
10.67
Shrubland and grassland habitats were considered of low
ecological value, because of low floral and faunal diversity and most of the
species identified are common, widespread and typical of such habitats in
10.68
Watercourse in the Assessment Area was generally small in
nature. They are all man-made channels and mainly purposed for
drainage use. This habitat was considered of very low ecological value.
10.69
In accordance with the EIAO
TM Annex 8 criteria, the species of conservation interest are evaluated in Tables
10.3.
Table 10.3 Evaluation
of Faunal Species of Conservation Interest Recorded Within Assessment Area during the Recent Visits under
this EIA Study
|
Common
Name |
Scientific
Name |
Conservation
Status[1] |
Protection
Status |
Distribution |
|
Avifauna |
||||
|
Black Kite |
Milvus
migrans |
(RC) |
Listed in Cap 170[2]
and Cap 586[3]; Category II[4]. |
Common |
|
Common Buzzard |
Buteo
buteo |
- |
Listed in Cap 170[2]
and Cap 586[3]; Category II[4]. |
Common |
|
Mammal |
||||
|
Pallas’s Squirrel |
Callosciurus erythraeus |
- |
Listed in Cap 170[3]. |
Common |
Note:
[1] RC – Regional Concern (Habitat loss/damage in
Hong Kong would pose significant threat to regional survival); PGC – Potential
Global Concern (Large, secure populations in
[2]
Protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap.170)
[3] Listed under Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap.
586)
[4] List of Wild Animals under State Protection
10.70
Under the HATS Stage
i)
Upgrading works of eight existing PTWs at North Point, Wan Chai
East, Central,
ii)
Extension of the deep tunnel network
(including construction of above-ground portals and shafts of the tunnel
network at the PTW / SCISTW sites and proposed works areas) to collect and transfer
sewage from the above PTW to SCISTW for treatment and
disposal;
iii)
Expansion of the existing Chemical Enhanced Preliminary
Treatment
(CEPT)
capacity at SCISTW from the present design level sewage flow to the ultimate
development scenario sewage flow (other ancillary processes, including sludge
dewatering, handling and disposal, odour control, and chemical storage and
dosing facilities at SCISTW would also be expanded to cope with the increased
flow); and
iv)
Provision of disinfection
facilities
to all HATS effluent at the
10.71
The major construction activities of
above-ground works involved would include:
·
Site clearance;
·
Site formation & site establishment;
·
Excavation and backfilling;
·
Piling works;
·
Fabrication of steelwork; and
·
Installation of equipment.
10.72
Potential terrestrial ecological impacts resulting from
construction and operation phase activities have been identified, and are
outlined in the following paragraphs.
10.73
Potential impact resulting from the proposed works would be
the direct impact to habitats (i.e. developed area and
wasteland) in the existing PTW / SCISTW sites and proposed
work areas for permanent associated facilities (e.g. portal, shaft,
disinfection facility) at Sai Ying Pun, Sandy Bay and Stonecutter Island as
well as proposed temporary works areas at North Point, Wan Chai East, Central,
Sai Ying Pun, Sandy Bay, Cyberport, Aberdeen, Ap Lei Chau and Stonecutter
Island (see Figure 10.1a – 10.1j
for locations). The areas to be directly affected are approximately
10.74
A tree
survey was carried out under this
HATS Stage
10.75
The tree survey revealed
that a total of 376
trees, mainly consisted of the Chinese Banyan (Ficus
microcarpa), Elephant’s Ear (Macaranga tanarius), White Popinac (Leucaena leucocephala) and Taiwan Acacia (Acacia confusa), were
recorded within the footprints of proposed construction activities at all the
PTWs / SCISTW (except Wah Fu PTW) and temporary / permanent works areas at Wan
Chai East (WCE-i), Sandy Bay (SB-I &
SB-PS), Aberdeen (Abd-iii) and Ap Lei Chau (ALC-iv). These individual
trees would be directly affected by the Project and removal
(transplantation or felling) of these affected trees would be required.
Details of the number and locations of the affected trees are given in the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Section
(Section 13).
10.76
No rare, protected or plant species of conservation interest was recorded in the PTW
/ SCISTW sites and proposed works area and therefore there would be no direct impact,
resulting from the construction works on any flora species of conservation interest under this Project.
10.77
Two sites of conservation
importance, the existing Pok Fu Lam Country Park and the coincided
Pok Fu Lam
Reservoir Catchment Area Site of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSI), falls partly within the Assessment
Area at
10.78
Noise, generated during excavation, demolition, piling and
other construction works, would cause disturbance to the wildlife inhabiting
surrounding areas and areas within the proposed works area.
10.79
Potential impacts arising from the construction stage would
include the generation of construction dust. It is anticipated that dust would
be generated mainly from excavation, demolition, materials handling, wind
erosion from the site and general construction works for upgrading of the
existing PTWs and the disinfection facilities/expansion of SCISTW. Dusts covering leaves
could lead to lethal/non-lethal impacts due to a reduction in photosynthetic
rates, abrasion and blocking of stomata.
10.80
Indirect impacts to habitats and associated fauna adjacent
to proposed project areas could also result from increased
human activities/disturbance. General increase in human activity could disturb
wildlife utilising habitats close to the project
areas.
Potential disturbance effects may include the avoidance of areas adjacent to
the works area, and reductions in wildlife density close to sources of
disturbance.
10.81
Associated impacts to wildlife would arise, 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.
Habitats adjacent to the proposed project areas could also be disturbed
as a result of improper storage or dumping of construction materials.
10.82
There are a number of concurrent
projects in the vicinity of
the Project boundaries which could have potential cumulative impacts
on terrestrial ecological resources during the construction period
(refer to Section
2.32, Table 2.3). Cumulative disturbance impact to the terrestrial habitats and the associate wildlife could be resulted from the
increased level of human activities and noise during the construction
phase. Taking into account that the concurrent projects are confined to
developed area and the existing high level of disturbance in the vicinity of those conflict Project sites and proposed work areas, no adverse and unacceptable cumulative impact on terrestrial ecology is
anticipated.
10.83
No direct and indirect impacts on terrestrial habitats and
the associated flora and fauna would be resulted from the
operation of
the upgraded PTWs and disinfection as well as other
associated facilities
at SCISTW.
10.84
Potential terrestrial ecological impacts on habitats and
the associated wildlife in the Assessment Areas resulting from the
proposed works have been evaluated according to Table 1 of Annex 8 of the EIAO TM. Table 10.4 summarises
the potential terrestrial ecological impact on the habitats including
developed
areas and wasteland, which are directly affected by the Project.
Table 10.4 Overall Impact Evaluation of Developed Area and Wasteland
|
Evaluation Criteria |
Developed Area |
Wasteland |
|
Habitat quality |
Low. |
Low. |
|
Species |
No significant records. |
No significant records. |
|
Size/Abundance |
Direct impact to approximately |
Direct impact to approximately |
|
Duration |
Direct impact would be
permanent. Indirect impact to the
adjacent habitats would be short-term. |
Direct impact would be
permanent. Indirect impact to the
adjacent habitats would be short-term. |
|
Reversibility |
Direct impact would be
irreversible. Indirect impact to the
adjacent habitats would be
reversible and temporary. |
Direct impact would be
irreversible. Indirect impact to the
adjacent habitats would be
reversible and temporary. |
|
Magnitude |
Moderate. |
Moderate. |
|
Overall
Impact Conclusion |
Very Low. |
Very Low. |
Direct Impacts to Habitats
10.85
The proposed construction works would be conducted in
the developed area and wasteland which are considered of very low
ecological value. No floral and faunal species of conservation interest was recorded from the
PTW / SCISTW sites and proposed works areas, thus, the direct impact to the developed
area and wasteland arsing from the proposed works are considered very low.
10.86
One site of conservation importance, the existing Pok Fu Lam
Country Park, falls partly within the Assessment Area at
Direct Impacts to Vegetation
10.87
A total of 376 trees mainly of Ficus microcarpa and Macaranga
tanarius, scattering at the seven PTWs (North Point PTW, Wan Chai East PTW,
Central PTW, Sandy Bay PTW, Cyberport PTW, Aberdeen PTW and Ap Lei Chau PTW),
SCISTW and five proposed works areas at Wan Chai East (WCE-i), Sandy Bay (SB-I
& SB-PS), Aberdeen (Abd-iii) and Ap
Lei Chau (ALC-iv), was found fall within the footprints of the proposed
construction works and would be directly impacted. Although removal of trees
would be unavoidable, all of the affected species are common and widespread in
Indirect Disturbance Impact
10.88
Patches of woodland habitat of
ecological importance (including part of the Pok Fu Lam Country Park
at
10.89
Indirect impacts to the
nearby habitats
and associated communities adjacent to the proposed works areas,
particularly the woodland habitats locate closely to the PTWs at Sandy Bay, Cyberport
and Aberdeen
as well as the SCISTW, would be resulted from
the increased
human activities / noise disturbance during the construction
phase. Such impacts could be arisen from noise-generating
machinery during excavation, demolition and construction works and general
increases in human activity. With the implementation of effective noise
control
measures and standard good site practices, construction phase noise
and human disturbance
to these adjacent habitats and the inhabiting wildlife
would be
relatively minor in scale. In view of the existing high
level of background disturbance in the Assessment Areas, wildlife in
the affected
habitats (including the Black Kite population in woodland
at
10.90
Indirect impacts resulting from improper dumping of
construction materials / wastes and deposition of
dust on vegetation adjacent to the Project sites and proposed works areas would
be avoided and
minimized to acceptable levels through the implementation of standard good site
practice. No adverse impact to the nearby habitats and
vegetation would be expected under this Project.
10.91
No direct or indirect impacts on terrestrial habitats
and the inhabiting wildlife would be resulted from the
operation of
the Project.
10.92
Following EIAO-TM Annex 16 guidelines, mitigation
measures are discussed in this section to avoid, minimise and compensate for
identified ecological impacts.
10.93
Under this Project, all the proposed construction activities
would be confined to developed areas and wasteland of very low ecological
value, and there would have no direct impact to other natural
habitats (e.g. woodland) within the Assessment Areas.
10.94
With the implementation of effective noise mitigation
measures, the disturbance impact, mainly due to site formation & site
establishment, piling, excavation and backfilling, erection of formwork, reinforcement
and concreting, to habitats and the associated wild animals within and adjacent to
the Project sites and proposed project areas would be minimised.
Detailed mitigation measures of noise impact are shown in the
Airborne Noise
Impact Assessment Section (Section 4).
10.95
Good site practices should be incorporated into the contract
clauses to minimize construction dust impact to the vegetation within and in
vicinity of the Project sites and proposed project areas. A number of practical
measures would be implemented, comprising the use of regular watering, with
complete coverage of any aggregate or dusty material storage piles, and
re-schedule of dusty activities if high-wind conditions are encountered.
Detailed mitigation measures of construction dust impact are
shown in Air Quality Impact Assessment Section (Section 3).
10.96
Fences/hoardings would be erected and
installed along the boundary of the works areas before the commencement of
works in order to minimise disturbance, by preventing tipping, vehicle movements
and encroachment of personnel onto the adjacent areas.
10.97
Standard good site practice measures would be implemented
and would include:
·
Placement of equipment in designated works areas and access
routes selected on existing disturbed land to minimise disturbance to adjacent
natural
habitats.
·
Construction activities would be restricted to the PTW
/ SCISTW sites and proposed works area that would be clearly demarcated.
·
The temporary proposed works area would
be reinstated immediately after completion of the works.
·
Open burning on proposed works sites is illegal, and will be
strictly enforced.
·
Waste skips would be provided to collect general refuse and
construction wastes. The wastes would be disposed of timely and properly
off-site.
·
Any soil contamination with fuel leaked from construction
plants should be removed off-site.
10.98
Mitigation measures would be implemented to minimise the
indirect impacts to the nearby water course by controlling construction site
runoff and drainage from the project sites and proposed works areas,
thus, prevent any runoff and drainage water with high levels of suspended
solids from entering the nearby water-bodies. Site runoff would be directed
towards regularly cleaned and maintained sand traps, silt traps and where
appropriate, oil/grease separators to minimise risk of sedimentation and
pollution to the nearby stream course and drainage culvert. Debris and rubbish
generated on-site would be collected, handled and disposed of properly.
10.99
As far as possible, it is
recommended that implementation of compensatory planting of similar composition
of native tree species should be of a ratio not less than 1:1 ratio in terms of
quality and quantity within the project
site and proposed works
areas after the construction works. Details of compensatory planting are given in the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Section
(Section 13).
10.100
With the proposed mitigation measures in place, no adverse
residual impact on terrestrial ecology resulting from the construction
and operation works of the project is expected. The only
residual impact arising from this Project would be loss of scattered patches of
developed areas and wasteland which are considered of highly disturbed in
nature and ranked as very low in ecological values.
10.101
As only minor impacts on terrestrial ecology are identified
in this assessment, no monitoring programme specific for terrestrial ecology
are required under this Project. However, all the recommended mitigation
measures should be incorporated into the EM&A programme for implementation
during the construction phase and the implementation should be subjected to
regular audit. An Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) programme is
recommended to be established to check compliance with legislative
requirements. Details are presented in a stand-alone EM&A
Manual.
10.102
Literature
review and recent reconnaissance visits on terrestrial ecological resources
identified seven habitat types within the Assessment Areas of this Project,
including developed area, wasteland, woodland, plantation, shrubland, grassland
and watercourse. The identified natural woodland habitat were found to have moderate / moderate to high ecological value while all other
habitats, plantation woodland, shrubland and grassland of low value, and
developed area, wasteland and watercourse of very low value.
10.103
Two sites of conservation
importance, the existing Pok Fu Lam Country Park
and the coincided Pok Fu Lam Reservoir Catchment Area Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), fall partly within the
Assessment Area at
10.104
Three faunal
species of conservation interest, including Black Kite, Common Buzzard and
Pallas’s Squirrel, were recorded in the Assessment Areas during the recent
visits of the Project. As all the three fauna of conservation interest are not recorded within
the project site / works areas boundary, there would be no direct
impact resulting from construction works
on these species of conservation interest. Hence, adverse
impact on these species of conservation interest was not
expected.
10.105
The key direct ecological impacts
of the Project would be the habitat loss on
10.106
Other impact of the Project would be the removal (to be
transplanted / fell) of 376 trees
located within the footprint of the proposed project works. However, as
all of the affected trees are common and widespread species of low ecological
importance, potential impact to the vegetation was considered low. No protected
species or other flora of conservation interest would be affected under this
Project. Compensatory planting would
be provided in a ratio not less than 1:
10.107
With the proposed mitigation measures in place, including noise
mitigation measures and good site practice, indirect disturbance to adjacent
habitats and associated wildlife resulting from the construction noise and
human activities during the construction phase of the Project would be
mitigated to acceptable and minor level. No adverse indirect impact on those
habitat / species of conservation interest adjacent to the Project sites and
proposed works areas would be expected under this Project.
Ades,
G.W.J. (1999): The Species Composition, Distribution and Population Size of
Anon. (2004): Egretry Counts in Hong Kong with
particular reference to the
Anon. (2005): Summer
2005 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong
Kong with particular reference to the
Anon. (2007): Summer
2007 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong
Kong with particular reference to the
Black & Veatch (2005): Environmental Impact Assessment for Agreement No.
CE25/2002 (DS) Drainage Improvement in Northern
Carey, G.J., Chalmers,
M.L., Diskin, D.A., Kennerley, P.R., Leader, P.J., Leven, M.R., Lewthwaite,
R.W., Melville, D.S., Turnbull, M., & Young, L. (2001): The Avifauna of
Corlett, R.T., Xing, F.,
Ng, S.C., Chau, L.K.C. & Wong, L.M.Y. (2000):
Chan, S.K.F., Cheung, K.S.,
Ho, C.Y., Lam, F.N., Tang, W.S., Lau, M.W.N. & Bogadek, A. (2005): A
Field Guide to the Amphibians of
Chan, S.M. & Shek, C.T.
(2006). Survey on the Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx) in the Urban Areas of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Biodiversity 11: 8-10.
Chow,
K.L. (2003). Raptors of
Enviros
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 Herbarium
(2004): Check List of
Hu,
Q.M., Wu, T.L.,
Karsen,
S.K., Lau, M.W.N. & Bogadek A. (1998):
Lau, M.W.N. &
Baorong, G. (2004): Rana exilispinosa. In: IUCN 2006. 2006
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. <www.iucnredlist.org>.
Lau, M.W.N. &
Dudgeon, D. (1999): Composition and Distribution of
Lau, M.W.N., Ermi, Z.,
Ohler, A. & van Dijk, P.P. (2004): Xenophrys brachykolos. In: IUCN
2006. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. <www.iucnredlist.org>.
Lo,
P.Y.F. (2005):
Shek, C.T. (2006): A
Field Guide to the Terrestrial Mammals of
Sun, W. (1998): Aquilaria
sinensis. In: IUCN 2004. 2004 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
<www.redlist.org>.
Tsim, S.T. (2002):
Egretry Survey in Hong Kong 2002. Hong
Kong Biodiversity 1: 9-12.
Tsim, S.T., Lee, W.H.,
Cheung, C.S., Chow, K.L., Ma, Y.N., Liu, K.Y. (2003): The Population and Breeding
Ecology of White-bellied Sea-eagles in
Wang, S. (1999):
Viney,
C, Philipps, K. & Lam, C.Y. (2005): The Birds of Hong Kong and
Zheng, G.M. & Wang, Q.S. (1998):