6 Ecological IMPACT ASSESSMENT

6.1 Introduction

6.1.1.1 This section of the report presents the results of the assessment of potential impacts from the construction and operation of the Project on terrestrial and freshwater (aquatic) ecological resources in the Study Area. The key objectives of the ecological assessment are:

· to establish an updated ecological profile for the Study Area, focusing on identifying key areas and key species present. This is undertaken by reviewing the findings of relevant studies and surveys, and plugging any identified data gap with appropriate ecological surveys;

· to evaluate ecological impacts based on the best and latest information available during the course of the EIA study, using quantitative approach as far as practicable and covering construction and operation phases of the Project as well as the subsequent management and maintenance requirement of the Project;

· to assess the ecological impacts of the Project according to Table 1 of the TM-EIAO, based upon an impact significance grading on scale of insignificant, minor, moderate and high;

· to develop feasible and effective mitigation measures for significant impacts to minimize pollution, environmental disturbance and nuisance during construction and operation of the projects;

· to investigate the feasibility, effectiveness and implications of the proposed measures to mitigate these impacts and definition of the scope, type, location, implementation arrangement, resources requirement, subsequent management and maintenance of such measures;

· to identify, predict and evaluate the residual environmental impacts and the cumulative effects expected to arise during the construction and operation phase of the project;

· to review whether there is any potential impact on environmental mitigation measures proposed under the Tung Chung Cable Car Project - Diversion of the Ngong Ping Stream as detailed in the Project Profile (Register No. PP-193/2003) and the environmental permit (Register No. EP-192/2004);

· to identify, assess and specify methods, measures and standards to mitigate these residual environmental impacts and cumulative effects and reduce them to acceptable levels; and

· to review the need for and recommendation on any ecological monitoring programme required.

6.1.1.2 A description of the project can be found in Section 2 of this report including the drainage design elements, alignments, construction methodologies and operation maintenance of the drainage system.

6.1.1.3 In accordance with the EIA study brief, the Study Area for the ecology impact assessment shall include all areas within 500m from the project site boundary (i.e., Project Area). The Study Area and recognised sites of conservation importance (as per Annex 16 of EIAO-TM) in the area is shown in Figure 6.1.

6.1.1.4 An ecological profile of the Study Area has been determined via a combination of literature review and ecological survey to cover any data gaps and provide more recent and project specific data on the existing ecological conditions in the study area for the ecological impact assessment. An ecological baseline survey for the Project was undertaken between September 2011 and March 2012. The baseline survey focused on the areas of terrestrial habitat with 500m of the proposed works boundary.

6.1.1.5 The habitat losses associated with the selected alignment have been calculated based on the layout of the project and associated works areas presented in Table 6.17. The losses include both the footprint of the permanent works and any temporary losses associated with all works areas and working space required for the project, as relevant.

6.2 Environmental Legislation, Standards and Guidelines

6.2.1.1 A number of international and local regulations, legislation and guidelines provide the framework for the protection of species and habitats of ecological importance and these include:

· Country Parks Ordinance (Cap. 208) which 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;

· Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96) which 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;

· Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170) which protects wild animals from being hunted, whilst their nests and eggs are protected from injury, destruction and removal. All birds and most mammals are protected under this Ordinance;

· Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586) which gives effect to CITES in Hong Kong. The Ordinance requires a licence to be obtained in advance from the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) for the import, export, re-export, and possession of specimens of scheduled species;

· Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131) which provides for the designation of coastal protection areas, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), Conservation Area, Country Park, Green Belt or other specified uses that promote conservation or protection of the environment;

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

· Technical Memorandum for the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO-TM). Annexes 8 and 16 of the Technical Memorandum EIAO (Cap. 499) 1997 which sets out general criteria for evaluating the ecological importance of and hence the significance of potential ecological impacts and guidance for ecological assessment, respectively;

· EIAO Guidance Notes (GN). The EIAO GN No. 3/2010 provides general guidelines for assessing the recommended environmental mitigation measures in Environmental Impact Assessment reports. The EIAO GN No. 6/2010 clarifies the requirements of ecological assessments under the EIAO while the EIAO GN No. 7/2010 provides general guidelines for conducting ecological baseline surveys in order to fulfil requirements stipulated in the EIAO-TM. The EIAO GN No. 10/2010 introduces general methodologies for conducting terrestrial and freshwater ecological baseline surveys;

· Environment, Transport and Works Bureau (ETWB) Technical Circular (Works) No. 5/2005 “Protection of natural streams/rivers from adverse impacts arising from construction works”, which protects Hong Kong’s natural streams/rivers from adverse impacts arising from construction works;

· Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES). The import, export and possession of the listed species are regulated by Cap 586;

· United Nations Convention on Biodiversity (1992) which requires signatories to make active efforts to protect and manage their biodiversity resources. Hong Kong Government has stated that it will be 'committed to meeting the environmental objectives' of the Convention (PELB 1996);

· World Conservation Union (IUCN) Data Books (and Red List) is an inventory of the global conservation status of plants and animals. It uses a set of criteria to evaluate the extinction risk of species. These criteria are relevant to all species and regions of the world;

· The Key Protected Wildlife Species List details Category I and Category II protected animal species under the PRC’s Wild Animal Protection Law.

6.3 Key Ecological Sensitive Receivers

6.3.1.1 Within the Study Area, the recognised terrestrial sites of conservation importance (as outlined in Appendix A of Annex 16 of EIAO-TM) include the following which are, also, shown in Figure 6.1:

· Lantau North Country Park (LNCP) – the proposed new underground flood relief drain pipe at the western side of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal is within the LNCP. However, it should be noted that, the Columbarium area is not within the LNCP and part of the segment of the drain pipe immediately to the north of the Columbarium area is within the LNCP;

· Lantau South Country Park (LSCP) – none of the proposed works infringed into the LSCP. The alignment section closest to the LSCP is about 400m away from the boundary;

· Ngong Ping Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) – none of the proposed works infringed into the SSSI. The alignment section closest to the SSSI is about 220m apart. The proposed works is downstream of the SSSI;

· Ngong Ping Stream - The upper section of the Ngong Ping Stream (to the south east of the proposed alignment), located within the Ngong Ping SSSI, is natural and listed as an Ecologically Important Streams/Rivers (EIS) under the ETWB TC (W) No. 5/2005. The EIS specification requires enhanced protection and works to be restrained to minimise possible disturbance to the water course. The proposed works are downstream of the EIS section of the Ngong Ping Stream; and

· Conservation Area – A large portion of the areas between the country parks and the existing development are zoned as the Conservation Area under the Ngong Ping OZP (S/I-NP/6). A small part of works area falls within the conservation area.

6.3.1.2 In addition, the Ngong Ping Stream discharges into the Sham Wat Stream before entering marine waters at the north Lantau coast. The Sham Wat Stream is another EIS listed under ETWB TC(W) No. 5/2005. Nonetheless, the Sham Wat Stream is not within the Study Area, and, in particular, the EIS section of the Sham Wat Stream is some distance from the proposed works, approximately 1.5km by straight line distance, and would unlikely be affected by the proposed works with good site management. The Sham Wat Stream is, therefore, not further discussed in this EIA Report.

6.3.1.3 Ngong Ping is known to support the largest population of the protected and endemic amphibian species Romer’s Tree Frog (Liuixalus romeri, previously reported as Philautus romeri). The breeding habitats for Romer’s Tree Frog include the wooded area and natural stream within the Ngong Ping SSSI (Figure 6.1), which was designated in 1999 for this reason. There are, also, recordings of larger mammals on Lantau including the Red Muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak), Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) and the Small Indian Civet (Viverricula indica) and scats of the Ferret Badger (Melogale moschata). The exact locations of these recordings are not known, although it is possible that these species may occur within the current Study Area. None of these species, however, were recorded in the project specific ecology surveys.

6.3.1.4 A number of species of conservation interests have been recorded within the Study Area at Ngong Ping and the nearby areas in previous literature and reports. These include the rare sedge Carex nexa, subshrubby herb Chamaecrista nictitans and herb Rungia pectinata found in montane forests, and the very rare climber Bauhinia corymbosa which was identified in the forest margins. The locally protected Chinese New Year Flower (Enkianthus quinqueflorus), Farrer's Azalea (Rhododendron farrerae) and Orchids Arundina graminifolia, Spathoglottis pubescens, Camellia sinensis and Camellia euryoides have all been recorded in recent EIA studies. Some of these species were, also, recorded in the Study Area during the project specific ecology surveys.

6.4 Literature Review

6.4.1 Background

6.4.1.1 The purpose of the literature review is to identify existing information on the habitats and species present within the Study Area. Various reports and studies have been consulted to extract relevant data on the flora and fauna present in the Study Area. Relevant books and scientific papers have, also, been consulted and these have been cited where appropriate, although the most recent reports have generally been relied upon to provide contemporary information of the ecological characteristics of the Study Area.

6.4.1.2 Relevant scientific publications and EIA reports have been reviewed, as follows:

· DSD. (2002). Agreement No. CE 29/2001 Outlying Islands Sewerage Stage 1, Phase 1 – Ngong Ping Sewage Treatment Works and Sewerage Investigation, Design and Construction: Final EIA Study Report (Volume I) (Register No.: AEIAR-074/2003);

· MTRC. (2003). Document No. 203842/01/A: Tung Chung Cable Car Project Environmental Impact Assessment (Final) (Register No.: AEIAR-065/2002);

· AFCD. (2006a). AFCD Website. Romer’s Tree Frog – Conservation. (http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_fau/con_fau_rom/con_fau_rom_con/con_fau_rom_con.html. Accessed on Jan 2012);

· Carey, G. (1996). Hong Kong Bird Report 1995. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong;

· Carey, G. (1998). Hong Kong Bird Report 1996. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong;

· Carey, G. and Tai, S.L. (1999). Hong Kong Bird Report 1997. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong;

· GLA. (1998). A Conservation Strategy for Lantau. Green Lantau Association, The Conservancy Association, Friends of the Earth, Green Power, HK Marine Conservation Society, World Wide Fund for Nature HK;

· Hill, D.S. and Phillips, K. (1981). A Colour Guide to Hong Kong Animals. Hong Kong Government Printer. History Society. 23:5-20;

· AFCD. (2004). Check List of Hong Kong Plants. Hong Kong Herbarium, AFCD;

· Hu Q., Wu T., Xia N., Xing F., Lai P.C.C., Yip K. (2003). Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong (2^nd revision). AFCD, Friends of Country Park and Cosmos Books Ltd., Hong Kong;

· Karsen, S.J., Lau M.W.N. and Bogadek, A. (1998). Hong Kong Amphibians and Reptiles. Urban Council, Hong Kong;

· Virginia L.F. Lee, Samuel K.S.Lam, Franco K. Y.Ng, Tony K.T.Chan and Maria L.C.Young. (2004) Freshwater Fish in Hong Kong. AFCD, Friends of Country Park and Cosmos Books Ltd., Hong Kong; Lau, M.W.N and Dudgeon, D. (1999). Composition and Distribution of Hong Kong Amphibian Fauna. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 22: 1-80;

· Shek, C.T. (2006). A Field Guide to the Terrestrial Mammals of Hong Kong. AFCD;

· Turnbull M., Ma K.W. (Ed) (2003). Hong Kong Bird Report 1999 & 2000. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong;

· Wong, C.H. (1999). HKLS Events and Activities: Po Lin Monastery to Tung Chung, Lantau Island – Field Trip on 5th September 1999 for Watching the Troides species. (http://www.hkls.org/fieldtr/plm-tc001.htm - Accessed on 30th January 2012);

· Wong, C.H. (2000). HKLS Events and Activities: Po Lin Monastery for Museum of History – Field Trip on 17th September 2000 (http://www.hkls.org/fieldtr/PoLin_WCH/PoLin.htm - Accessed on 30th January 2012);

· Xing, F.W., Ng, S.C., and Chau, L.K.C. (2000). Gymnosperms and angiosperms of Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 23: 21-136; and

· Young, J.J. and Reels, G.T. (1998). A brief note on the distribution and conservation of Birdwing butterflies in Hong Kong. Porcupine! 17, August 1998.

6.4.1.3 Existing literature has, also, provided a good baseline for species assessments of vascular plants (Siu, 2000; Wu and Lee, 2000; Xing et al., 2000) and AFCD publications (2004, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011) presents an updated list of the Hong Kong flora.

6.4.1.4 References for major floral and faunal groups which are the subject of the present study include: Shek (2006) for mammals; Karsen et al. (1998) and Lau and Dudgeon (1999) for herpetofauna; Virginia et al (2004) for freshwater fish; Wilson (2004) for odonates; Walthew (1997), Young and Reels (1998), Yiu (2004) for butterflies; and Turnbull et al (2003), Carey et al. (1996-2001) and Viney et al. (1995) for avifauna.

6.4.1.5 An attempt to provide information on the conservation status of certain local fauna has been made by Fellowes et al. (2002). This paper is designed to facilitate objective ecological evaluations based on faunal species of conservation concern and can assist in assessments conducted in accordance with the EIAO-TM. The paper examines the local (Hong Kong), regional (southern China) and global restrictedness of native fauna species occurring in a wild state in Hong Kong, combined with an assessment of the vulnerability of populations, using the most reliable and up to date information available, and assigns a rating to each species accordingly. Thus, a species of ‘Local Concern’ may not be particularly threatened globally or regionally, but is rare or restricted in Hong Kong. A species of ‘Regional Concern’ may not be particularly threatened globally, but is rare or restricted in the region, while a species of ‘Global Concern’ is globally restricted to Hong Kong and southern China. Some species are regarded as being of ‘Potential Regional Concern’ or ‘Potential Global Concern’. The paper has been adopted in the present study in order to complement the species evaluations derived from the other published literature.

6.4.2 Habitats and Vegetation

6.4.2.1 A checklist of the Hong Kong Vascular Plant was published by Hong Kong Herbarium (AFCD 2001) and provides comprehensive information on species found locally. The conservation status of each plant species recorded has been derived primarily from the comprehensive studies by Xing et al. (2000) and AFCD (2003, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011).

6.4.2.2 Results of habitat and vegetation surveys from two previous important development projects (DSD 2002, MTRC 2003) that include the current study area show that the areas around Ngong Ping comprise several habitats including developed areas, plantation, grassland, shrubland, woodland and small pieces of abandoned agricultural land.

6.4.2.3 A number of rare plant species have been recorded at Ngong Ping and the nearby areas in previous literature and reports. These include the rare sedge Carex nexa (Shaw 2001), subshrubby herb Chamaecrista nictitans and herb Rungia pectinata which were found in montane forests, and the very rare climber Bauhinia corymbosa which were found in the forest margins (Xing et al. 2000). The rare plant species Spiraea chinensis, Quercus liteoides and Loxogramma lanceolata has been reported to be found at Ngong Ping (GLA 1998).

6.4.2.4 There were, also, several plant species found near Ngong Ping which area locally protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A), including the Chinese New Year Flower Enkianthus quinqueflorus and Farrer's Azalea Rhododendron farrerae in shrubland, and two Orchids Arundina graminifolia and Spathoglottis pubescens in grassland near Ngong Ping Road (DSD 2002). Although these plants are protected, they are actually common in their recorded habitats in Hong Kong (Siu 2000, Xing et al. 2000). Two species of the locally protected genus Camellia (Camellia sinensis) (DSD 2002, MTRC
2003) and Camellia euryoides (MTRC 2003) were, also, found in the low shrub and plantation areas. Camellia sinensis has been commonly planted in Ngong Ping (DSD 2002, MTRC 2003) but was reported to be rare within the territory (Xing et al. 2000). Camellia euryoides was reported to have a restricted distribution in Hong Kong (Xing et al. 2000).

6.4.3 Terrestrial Mammals

6.4.3.1 Previous sightings of rodents including the Spiny-haired Rat (Niviventer fulvescens), Sladen’s Rat (Rattus sikkimensis) and Ryukyu Mouse (Mus caroli) in Ngong Ping have been reported (DSD 2002). There have, also, been records of larger mammals on Lantau, with Hill and Phillipps (1981) reporting the Chinese Muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi), although it has been noted that all sightings of muntjacs in Hong Kong should be Red Muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak) (Shek 2006), Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) and the Small Indian Civet (Viverricula indica) on Lantau. Scats of the Ferret Badger (Melogale moschata) were, also, found in low shrub areas during the ecological survey of Tung Chung Cable Car Project (MTRC 2003). Although the exact locations of these sightings are not known, it is possible that these species may occur within the current Study Area.

6.4.4 Avifauna (Birds)

6.4.4.1 Available bird records specifically from the Ngong Ping area are scarce. The Hong Kong Bird Report of 1999 & 2000 states a record of Bonelli’s Eagle (Aquila fasciata) near Ngong Ping in 1999 (Turnbull & Ma 2003). This species is listed as rare in the China Red List and is a Class II protected animal of national importance in China. The Common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) was, also, recorded by Turnbull & Ma and is included in CITIES Appendix II. Other records of species of interest include the Brown-headed Thrush (Turdus chrysolaus), Manchurian Bush Warbler (Cettia canturians), Brown-flanked Bush warbler (Cettia fortipes), Mugimaki Flycatcher (Ficedula mugimaki), Brown Shrike (Lanius cristatus) and Tristrams’s Bunting (Emberiza tristrami) (Carey 1996, 1998, Carey and Tai 1999).

6.4.5 Herpetofauna (Reptiles and Amphibians)

6.4.5.1 The Ngong Ping SSSI, located in the south-eastern part of the current Study Area, was designated in 1999 as an area supporting the largest known population of Romer’s Tree Frog (Liuixalus romeri) and the area includes both the breeding and non-breeding habitats for the species (Lau & Dudgeon 1999, AFCD 2006a). The Romer’s Tree Frog is listed as “Endangered” on the IUCN Red List and is protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170) in Hong Kong. During the ecological survey for the EIA of the “Ngong Ping Sewage Treatment Works and Sewerage Investigation, Design and Construction Project”, many tadpoles of the Romer’s Tree Frog were found in a stream in Ngong Ping (DSD 2002). It is believed that the area is still a potential breeding site for the species.

6.4.5.2 Notable records of reptiles in Ngong Ping include the Red Mountain Racer (Elaphe porphyracea), Mountain Wolf Snake (Lycodon ruhstrati), Mountanin Pit Viper (Trimeresurus monticola), Striped Stream Snake (Opisthotropis kuatunensis) (GLA, 1998), Chinese Cobra (Naja atra), listed as “Vulnerable” in the China Red List, Copperhead Racer (Elaphe radiate) and the Indo-Chinese Rat Snake (Ptyas korros), both listed as “Endangered” in the China Red List (DSD 2002). The uncommon Golden Kukri Snake has, also, been recorded (DSD 2002). During the EIA ecological survey of the “Tung Chung Cable Car Project”, sloughed skin of a King Cobra (Ophiophagus Hannah) was found on a rocky outcrop near the grassland areas near Nei Lak Shan (MTRC 2003). This species, like the above snake species, is not protected by law in Hong Kong, yet it is listed as “Critically Endangered” on the China Red List. It is possible that this uncommon species would utilise the suitable habitats within or around the Study Area.

6.4.6 Insects (Dragonflies, Damselflies and Butterflies)

6.4.6.1 Sightings of the locally protected butterfly Common Birdwing (Troides Helena) around Ngong Ping have been reported (Young 1998). It is an uncommon species but the unprotected counterpart Golden Birdwing (Troides aeacus) was, also, observed on the path from Ngong Ping to Tung Chung (Wong 1999, 2000). The larvae of another uncommon butterfly species, Common Rose Butterfly (Pachliopta aristolochiae), was recorded feeding on its food plant Aristolochia fordiana along the above footpath (Young 1998). The locally uncommon White Dragontail (Lamproptera curius) (MTRC 2003) and the rare Red Lacewing (Cethosia bibles) (DSD 2002) were recorded in the two previous EIA studies, respectively.

6.4.6.2 Young and Reels (1998) reported the sighting of the uncommon dragonfly Blue-spotted Dusk-hawker (Gynacantha japonica) in Ngong Ping. The sighting of the uncommon damselfly Yellow-spotted Shadowdamsel (Sinosticta ogatai) was, also, noted in the “Tung Chung Cable Car Project” EIA report (MTRC 2003).

6.4.7 Freshwater Fish

6.4.7.1 No relevant records of freshwater fish around the Study Area were available for review in the existing literature.

6.4.8 Freshwater Macroinvertebrate

6.4.8.1 Several macroinvertebrates have been recorded in streams around the Study Area, including the endemic freshwater crab Somanniathelphusa zanklon, also, listed as “Endangered” on the IUCN Red List, which was found in Ngong Ping (DSD 2002), the diptera larvae (suspected to be Chironomus / Polypedilum sp.), the common freshwater prawn Macrobrachium hainanense and the common freshwater snail Physa acuta (MTRC 2003). The latter three species were reported to have been found in Sham Wat Stream, of which its headwaters drain the north-eastern part of the Ngong Ping plateau.

6.5 Field Survey Methodology

6.5.1 Background

6.5.1.1 While findings of the literature review provide useful information, it was considered that more project specific information would be required. As such, ecological surveys covering a period of 7 months were undertaken in the Study Area to supplement the existing data and provide sufficient details on which to establish the baseline ecological conditions of the Study Area.

6.5.1.2 The purpose of the ecological surveys was to focus on the optimal census technique and survey period when each animal group was likely to be encountered. The overall quality of the study is dependent on selecting the correct survey period and survey technique. The survey effort, also, focussed on those areas mostly likely to be impacted by the Project as well as the more ecological sensitive areas such as the Conservation Area and Ngong Ping SSSI. The following ecological surveys were undertaken:

· Habitats and Vegetation.

· Terrestrial Mammals;

· Avifauna;

· Herpetofauna (Reptiles and Amphibians);

· Insects (Dragonfly and Butterfly); and

· Freshwater Acquatic Fauna (fish and marcoinvertebrates).

6.5.1.3 The methodologies for each of the surveys are detailed in the sections below. The location of sampling transects and sampling points were presented in Figure 6.2.

6.5.2 Survey Methodologies and Programme

6.5.2.1 Ecology surveys were undertaken over a period of seven months between September 2011 and March 2012 to cover both wet and dry seasons. The details of the surveys are provided in the sections below and Appendix E.

Habitats and Vegetation

6.5.2.2 Habitat and vegetation (including trees) surveys within the Study Area were conducted at representative locations in both the wet season and in the dry season to establish a general terrestrial ecological profile of the Study Area. Habitat maps at 1:5000 scale have been prepared (see Figures 6.3 and 6.4) based on the latest available aerial photographs obtained from Lands Department in late 2011 and supplemented by ground-truthing.

6.5.2.3 Plant species encountered within each habitat type and their relative abundance were recorded and special attention paid to the rare and protected species. The nomenclature and conservation status of each plant species follows Xing et al. (2000), Wu and Lee (2000), Siu (2000) and AFCD (2003, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2011).

Terrestrial Mammals

6.5.2.4 Mammal surveys did not include any element of trapping since this is an intrusive and a potentially harmful technique and the main conservation interest lies in larger mammals that appear to be scarce on Lantau (Goodyer, 1992; Reels, 1996; Mouchel, 2002a). Day-time searches for mammal activity (prints, burrows and scats) were used, in addition to night-time spot-lighting or auditory detection of larger mammals (most of which are primarily nocturnal).

6.5.2.5 The day and night-time terrestrial mammal surveys were conducted in the wet and dry seasons. As most mammals occur in low densities, all sightings, tracks and signs of mammals (including droppings, scats, footprints, etc.) were actively searched for along the survey transects (see Figure 6.2). Special attention was paid to observing or looking for evidence of bats and Chinese Muntjac. Active searching of potential roosting, commuting, foraging and drinking sites of bats was, also, preformed and the bats were counted when observed. Ultrasonic bat detectors (Petterson D200) were, also, used for acquiring bat acoustic information for species identification as well as for estimating numbers in the Study Area during surveys. The nomenclature for the identified species follows Shek (2006).

Avifauna (Birds)

6.5.2.6 Day-time avifaunal surveys were conducted in the wet and dry seasons. In addition, night surveys were conducted at the same periods, in order to assess the activity of nocturnal species. The surveys of this faunal group were conducted within each type of habitat within Study Area and point count and transect count methods were adopted. The locations of the point count and transects are presented in Figure 6.2.

6.5.2.7 The survey locations were selected to cover all representative habitats recorded within the Study Area, including the full Project Area. Bird species present in each habitat were identified and recorded, together with their abundance. In respect of the point count method, birds were counted at each point for fifteen minutes. All birds seen or heard within 30m of each point were counted and identified whenever possible. Bird species encountered outside the counting points but within the Study Area were, also, identified and recorded. Any signs of breeding, that is presence of nests, recently fledged juveniles etc., within the Study Area were noted.

6.5.2.8 Observations were made using binoculars and photographic records were taken, when possible. Special attention was paid to any wetland (stream) dependent species identified. Ornithological nomenclature follows the official Hong Kong Bird list (HKBWS 2012).

Herpetofauna (Reptiles and Amphibians)

6.5.2.9 Day and night-time herpetofaunal surveys were conducted in the wet and dry seasons. Reptiles and amphibians were surveyed through direct observation and active searching in all habitat types along the survey transects shown in Figure 6.2, together with microhabitats (e.g. leaf litter, inside holes, under stones and logs) within the Study Area.

6.5.2.10 Particular attention was given to streams and watercourses and auditory detection of species-specific calls was, also, used to survey frogs and toads. During the surveys, all reptiles and amphibians sighted and heard were recorded. The nomenclature and status used for reptile species has followed Karen et al. (1998) and AFCD (2006b), while that for amphibians has followed AFCD (2005).

Insects (Butterflies and Odonates)

6.5.2.11 Butterfly and odonate surveys were conducted in wet season and dry season. Daytime surveys for these faunal groups were conducted using the transect methodology during suitable weather when the species were expected to be active. Butterflies and odonates sighted along the transects and at the point count locations (see Figure 6.2) were identified and recorded. In addition, any sightings within 10m from either side of the transects, or within 30m of each point count location, were, also, identified and counted and their relative abundance was estimated. Any butterflies and odonates encountered outside the transects and point count locations but within the Study Area were, also, included in order to produce a complete species list. The nomenclature for butterflies has followed Walthew (1997) and Yiu (2004) and odonate nomenclature has followed Wilson (2004).

Freshwater Aquatic Assemblages

6.5.2.12 Surveys for freshwater aquatic assemblages were conducted in the wet season and the dry season and undertaken when the stream was not in spate. Streams (both perennial and seasonal) identified within the Study Area were visited and the locations of the point count and sampling areas are shown in Figure 6.2.

6.5.2.13 Freshwater fish and marcoinvertebrates were surveyed by direct observation and active searching by hand nets and standard field sampling techniques (e.g. kick sampling). Active sampling was carried out for all point count locations in the water. All organisms, including fish and aquatic macro-invertebrates (e.g. freshwater crabs and shrimps, freshwater molluscs and aquatic insect larvae) were recorded and identified and their abundance were recorded and the species of individuals were identified and counted. The nomenclature for freshwater fish follows Chong & Dudgeon (1992) and Lam (2004) and macroinvertebrates nomenclature has followed Dudgeon (1999).

6.6 Baseline Ecological Conditions

6.6.1 Habitats and Vegetation

Background

6.6.1.1 Habitats within the Study Area have been mapped on a scale of 1:5,000 based on the latest basemaps obtained from the Lands Department in late 2011 and ground-truthed during the vegetation surveys. The habitat maps are presented in Figures 6.3 and 6.4.

6.6.1.2 A summary of the size of each habitat type recorded within the Project Area, which is defined by the proposed works boundary, and the wider Study Area covering a 500m envelope from the boundary of the Project Area, are shown in Table 6.1 below and representative photographs of major habitat types present within the Study Area are shown in Figure 6.6. For habitats present within the Project Area, Table 6.1 also indicates their approximately location in relation to the works sections and specific use, if defined.

Table 6.1 Area of the Different Habitat Types within the Study Area

Habitat Type	Project Area^(1)		Study Area^(3) Size (ha)
	Works Section (Specific Use)^(2)	Total Size (ha)
Agricultural Land	WA5 (SA3)	0.03	0.41
Developed Area	All sections (JP1, RP2, RP3 and SO)	1.17	22.30
Grassland	-	-	22.99
Plantation Woodand	WS2, WS3 (SA2), WS4 (SA2), WS5, WA6 (JP2 and SA4)	0.36	1.95
Secondary Woodland	WS5 (SA3)	0.21	79.65
Shrubland	WS6 (RP4 and WA4) and (JP2 and SA4)	0.25	51.74
Stream	WS1 (Intake A), WS6 (RP4, WA4 and Outfall B)	0.03	1.72
Channelised Watercourse	WS4 (Intake B), WS5 (RP3, WA3 and Outfall A)	0.17	0.69
	Total:	2.22	181.45

Notes:

(1) The Project Area is the area inside the proposed works boundary as indicated in Figures 2.9a-2.9g. However not all of the project area is proposed to be active works area and includes areas that will not be required by the construction works

(2) The Project Area can be divided into six Works Sections (WS1 – WS6; see Section 2.7) and some smaller areas, namely Works Areas (WA), Stockpiling Areas (SA), Jacking Pits (JP), Receiving Pits (RP) and Site Office (SO), are also designated for specific usage. Some of the areas will have multiple specific usages, for example, jacking pit areas are generally within the WA or SAs and trenches and SAs are generally adjacent to excavation trenches.

(3) The Study Area is the Project Area and areas within a 500m envelope of the Project Area.

6.6.1.3 The locations of the locally rare and protected floral and faunal species recorded during the course of the surveys are presented in Figure 6.5 and representative photographs of some of these species are presented in Figure 6.7.

6.6.1.4 The Study Area comprises eight habitat types as listed in Table 6.2 above. A total of 439 plant species were identified within the Study Area during the wet and dry season surveys. It was noted that the secondary woodland (198 species), shrubland (197 species) and developed area (193 species) habitats supported higher plant species diversities than the other habitats in the Study Area. The vegetation species recorded within the Study Area are presented in Appendix E1.

Agricultural Land

6.6.1.5 Active dry agricultural land was identified during the habitat surveys. Agricultural land is the smallest habitat type identified in the Study Area. About 0.03ha of the agricultural land, in the form of a local village cultivation area, is present within SA4 in Works Section 5 within the Project Area. In addition, a few small areas of agricultural land are located to the north and east of the “Walking with Buddha” tourist’s attraction in the theme village, adjacent to Works Sections 4 and 5. A tea plantation is located in the south-eastern part of the Study Area but far from the Project Area. A total of 72 plant species were identified during the survey. The farmland was dominated by fruit trees Dimocarpus longan, Clausena lansium and Litchi chinensis, and climber Ipomoea batatas.

Developed Area

6.6.1.6 Developed areas within the Study Area are comprised of the village area, tourist attractions and public utilities. A total of 193 common plant species were identified in the developed area within the Study Area and 90 species can be found within the Project Area. The tree species Acacia confusa was commonly found in this habitat. A planted fruit tree Mangifera indica and various ornamental shrubs such as Bougainvillea spectabilis, Camellia sasanqua, Hibiscus rosa-sinensis and Rhododendron spp. were, also, common in this habitat. In addition, three planted individuals of small Camellia sinensis were found at the roadside, north of the “Walking with Buddha” attraction within the boundary of Works Section 5. While all Camellia and Rhododendron species are protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap 96A), the regulation is intended to protect the natural population rather than the planted individual and, therefore, the planted Camellia and Rhododendron found in the developed area are not considered as species of conservation interest.

6.6.1.7 The only floral species of conservation interest found in the developed area was an Ehretia acuminate found beside a village house to the west of the bus terminal. While Ehretia acuminate is not a protected species, it is considered as very rare by Xing et al (2000). Faunal diversity of the habitat is, also, low, although two common bat species (Shek, 2006) were detected, the Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat (Hipposideros armiger) at the water tank area in Works Section 1 and the Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus) at the Ngong Ping Sewerage Treatment Works. However, these species were likely to use a series of other habitats in the area as well. All bats are locally protected under Cap 170 Wild Animals Protection Ordinance.

Grassland

6.6.1.8 Grassland within the Study Area is mainly located on the upper slopes of surrounding hills. A total of 53 plant species were identified in the grassland habitat. Grasses Bidens alba and Ageratum conyzoides, creeper Wedelia chinensis, and shrub species such as Baeckea frutescens, Breynia fruticosa and Wikstroemia indica were commonly found in the grassland. There is no grassland in the Project Area and no floral or faunal species of conservation interest were recorded in the grassland habitat.

Plantation Woodland

6.6.1.9 Plantation woodland is located near the developed area and is dominated by exotic plantation species. A total of 127 plant species were identified in this habitat, with 61 plant species were recorded within the Project Area. This habitat was found to be dominated by exotic plantation species Acacia confusa and planted Bambusa spp.. Common native species, such as trees Litsea cubeba and Machilus chekiangensis and the shrub Ligustrum sinense, were also recorded in this habitat.

6.6.1.10 Three floral species of conservation interest, namely Aquilaria sinensis (Cap 96A and Cap 586), Ehretia acuminata and Gleditsia australis were identified within the plantation woodland habitat located within the Project Area. The protected Pavetta hongkongensis (Cap 96A) was, also, recorded in the plantation habitat but outside the Project Area. In particular, a quantity of young Aquilaria sinensis was noted scattered throughout the plantation / shrubland areas near the Columbarium, close to Works Section 6 and the SA4 location. The protected Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus) was, also, recorded in the plantation woodland in the Ngong Ping SSSI but some distance from the Project Area.

Secondary Woodland

6.6.1.11 Secondary woodland is the largest habitat found within the Study Area (Table 6.1), although only a small fraction was found within the Project Area. About 14Ha of the secondary woodland to the east and southeast of the Tian Tan Buddha Statue is designated as the Ngong Ping SSSI. A total of 198 plant species were identified during the ecology surveys in the wider Study Area, but only 45 plant species were recorded in the woodland habitat within the Project Area. The native tree species of Machilus genus including Machilus breviflora, Machilus chekiangensis, Machilus thunbergii and Machilus velutina were commonly found in the secondary woodland. Other native tree species commonly found include Litsea rotundifolia var. oblongifolia, Schefflera heptaphylla, Schima superba, Symplocos lancifolia, Zanthoxylum avicennae, etc., which are, also, commonly found in woodland across Hong Kong. The exotic tree, Acacia confuse, and fruit tree, Litchi chinensis, were both common in the portion of secondary woodland within the Project Area.

6.6.1.12 A significant number of small trees and seedlings of a protected plant Camellia sinensis (Cap 96A) were, also, identified along the fringe of the secondary woodland to the south and south-east of the Study Area. In additional to Camellia sinensis, three other floral species of conservation interest, Aquilaria sinensis (Cap 96A and Cap 586), Cibotium barometz (Cap 586) and Rungia pectinata, were recorded in the Study Area and the former two are protected species. These were all recorded at the south and east of the Study Area and none were recorded in the woodland habitats found within the Project Area (see Figure 6.5). In terms of fauna, the species diversity detected was not high. The most diverse group was avifauna with 30 species recorded in the secondary woodland habitat. A Black Kite (Milvus migrans) was recorded flying overhead the shrubland and secondary woodland and this is the only protected fauna species recorded in this habitat type.

Shrubland

6.6.1.13 Shrubland found within the Study Area is mainly located on the hillsides. A total of 197 plant species were identified during the ecological surveys including 83 species in the Project Area. Shrubland was dominated by common tree species Polyspora axillaris and Rhaphiolepis indica, and common shrub/herb species Dicranopteris pedata, Melastoma malabathricum, Melastoma sanguineum, Melinis repens, Miscanthus floridulus, Miscanthus sinensis, Neyraudia reynaudiana, Rhodomyrtus tomentosa, Rubus reflexus and Smilax china.

6.6.1.14 Eleven flora species of conservation interest were recorded in the shrubland, namely Aquilaria sinensis (Cap 96A and Cap 586), Orchid Bulbophyllum ambrosia (Cap 96A and Cap 586), Camellia euryoides (Cap 96A), Camellia sinensis (Cap 96A), Cibotium barometz (Cap 586), Ehretia acuminata, Enkianthus quinqueflorus (Cap 586), Geodorum densiflorum (Cap 96A and Cap 586), Orchid Coelogyne fimbriata (Cap 96A and Cap 586), Lilium brownie (Cap 96) and Rhododendron farrerae (Cap 96A) and ten of these are locally protected. While Ehretia acuminate is not a protected species, it is considered as very rare by Xing et al (2000). It is notable that scattered individuals of Enkianthus quinqueflorus were recorded in the shrubland habitat along the cable car alignment within the Study Area. In addition, an amount of young Aquilaria sinensis was noted scattered throughout the plantation / shrubland areas near the Columbarium, close to the proposed Works Section 6. Four flora species of conservation interest were located in shrubland in the Project Area and these included Camellia euryoides, Enkianthus quinqueflorus, Rhododendron farrerae and Ehretia acuminate, and they were, also, located near the Columbarium.

6.6.1.15 In terms of fauna, the species diversity was not high. The most diverse group was avifauna with 32 species recorded in the shrubland habitat. A Black Kite (Milvus migrans), was recorded flying overhead the shrubland and secondary woodland. A Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) and White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster) were, also, observed flying over the shrubland habitat. These three are the only protected faunal species recorded in the area.

Stream

6.6.1.16 Ngong Ping Stream is the main natural stream in the Study Area. As discussed above, it is disturbed, with some sections having been replaced with artificial channels in the developed area. The 820m long Portion C upstream section of the Ngong Ping Stream (see Figure 2.1 for the existing drainage system) was designated as the Ngong Ping SSSI (Figure 6.1) in 1999 and a 690m long section of the Ngong Ping Steam was designated an Ecologically Important Stream/River (EIS) in 2005 under ETWB TC (W) No. 5/2005.

6.6.1.17 The downstream section of the Ngong Ping Stream starts at the Y-junction near of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal and discharges downhill at the cliff fall next to the Columbarium. In between, there is, also, a small section (about 120m) of the remaining Ngong Ping Stream (Portion E) connecting the upstream open channel and downstream gabion channel. Apart from the Ngong Ping Stream, there are a few upstream tributaries to the north-west of the Study Area where the sampling points R1, W1 and W2 were located.

6.6.1.18 The natural streams are seasonal and sections (e.g., sampling point R4) was noted to be dry during both the wet and dry season surveys. During the dry season surveys, more sections were, also, noted to be dry. The section downstream of W8 was the only section of the main Ngong Ping Stream containing water flows and the quality was noted to be good in this area as there appears to be a constant flow in this section of stream. Upstream sections were generally dry though some water had ponded in sections close to sample point R2.

6.6.1.19 Generally, these natural sections of the Ngong Ping Stream have tree-lined banks. The stream down from W8 has a much wider, open channel than upstream sections, which tend to be more shaded through dense tree cover. A total of 105 riparian plant species were identified in these sections of natural stream habitat within the Study Area and 61 species can be found in the Project Area. The grass species Microstegium ciliatum and shrub Rhaphiolepis indica were the common plants recorded in this habitat.

6.6.1.20 Four floral species of conservation interest were recorded at the side of the stream and all were located close to the Columbarium. These include two protected orchid species Bulbophyllum ambrosia (Cap 96A and Cap 586) and Coelogyne fimbriata (Cap 96A and Cap 586) located in the shrubland at the stream-side cliff face and a tea plant Camellia euryoides (Cap 96A) and Rhododendron farrerae being located to the west and south-east of the Columbarium.

6.6.1.21 Three faunal species of conservation interest were recorded in the natural stream including a turtle species Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii, recorded at sampling point W8, a frog species, the Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa),recorded at sampling points R2, W1 and W2) and a freshwater stream crab species Somanniathelphusa zanklon, (recorded at sampling points R1, R2, R6, W2 and W8).

Channelised Watercourse

6.6.1.22 The Ngong Ping Stream transverses through the Study Area, flowing from east (upstream) to west (downstream). The section of Ngong Ping Stream in the Ngong Ping development is highly modified, with a section having been replaced by an underground drainage pipe, that is, the 1650mm diameter twin-pipe in Portion D, see Figure 2.1 for the existing drainage system. Approximately 60m of the stream to the right of the Lin Ping Drive, the upstream section of Portion E, has been modified as an open U channel. The stretch around the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal (Portion F) (approximately 420m) has been modified as a gabion channel for the development of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal. Smaller drainage U channels are, also, scattered in the Study Area. The watercourse has an artificial bottom with either gabion walls or hard edge walls on both banks.

6.6.1.23 The water level of the channel was noted to be generally low during the surveys. In particular, during the dry season, there was almost no flowing water recorded in the channelised section of the stream, but in areas where the stream bed is uneven, water had ponded and created areas of standing water. Generally, the water quality in these areas was poor, a result of lack of water movement and localised pollution from domestic and commercial effluent. Scum had formed on the surface of the water and a malodious smell was typical in these locations.

6.6.1.24 A total of 65 plant species were identified along the banks of the channels, and most of these can be found within the Project Area (52 species). Polygonum glabrum, Bidens alba, Microstegium ciliatum and Wedelia trilobata were common species in this habitat. An orchid species Geodorum densiflorum, which is protected under Cap 96A and 586, was identified on the bank of the southern channel, close to the sampling point W7.

6.6.1.25 The fauna diversity is low, however, and unlike its natural counterpart, there were no aquatic species of conservation interest recorded in the channelised water courses. Nonetheless, an Eastern Cattle Egret (Bubulcus coromandus) was observed foraging at the gabion channel to the north of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal near cables during the wet season survey.

6.6.2 Terrestrial Mammals

6.6.2.1 The terrestrial and aquatic fauna surveys were conducted in the 7 month period covering the wet and dry seasons. The survey schedule and the detailed survey results are presented in Appendices E2 to E7. The faunal species of conservation interest recorded during the surveys are presented in Figure 6.5. The fauna species recorded during the surveys are described below.

6.6.2.2 Five species of terrestrial mammal were recorded during the surveys (Table 6.2). The more prominent mammals noted were domestic cat, dog and ox, which are not considered of conservation interest. Two bat species, the Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat (Hipposideros armiger) and the Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus) were found in close vicinity to the Project Area. Hipposideros armiger was recorded at the water storage tank area in the developed area, while the Pipistrellus abramus was recorded at the plantation area to the north of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal (Figure 6.5). All wild bat species are protected under Cap 170 Wild Animals Protection Ordinance, although all the recorded species are considered as locally common (Shek 2006). Hipposideros armiger and Pipistrellus abramus are considered of Local Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002, IUCN 2011).

Table 6.2 Summary of the Mammal Species Recorded During Baseline Surveys

Species	Location	Local Status* and Level of Conservation Interest**
Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat Hipposideros armiger	Developed Area near the water storage tank	Common (Shek 2006); Cap 170 protected; (LC) (Fellowes et al 2002); LC (IUCN 2011)
Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus	Plantation near the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal and Ngong Ping SSSI, developed area near Ngong Ping STW.	Common (Shek 2006); Cap 170 protected; LC (IUCN 2011)
Domestic Dog Canis lupus familiaris	Village areas and developed area	Common (Shek 2006)
Domestic Cat Felis catus	Village areas and developed area	Common (Shek 2006)
Domestic Ox Bos Taurus	Village areas and developed area	Common (Shek 2006)

* Local status refers to the status of the species made by Shek (2006).

** The level of conservation interest makes reference to Fellowes et al. (2002) or as indicated.

Key of level of conservation interest: LC = Local Concern; Letters in brackets represent the restrictedness in breeding and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

6.6.3 Avifauna (Birds)

6.6.3.1 A total of 41 bird species were recorded during the surveys (Table 6.3) and 24 species out of these were recorded within the Project Area. Most of the recorded species are resident or regular visitor/migrant in Hong Kong (Carey et al. 2001). Four species are considered of conservation interest by Fellowes (2002), including the Eastern Cattle Egret (Bubulcus coromandus) (Local Concern), Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) (Regional Concern), Black Kite (Milvus migrans) (Regional Concern) and White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster) (Regional Concern). The Eastern Cattle Egret was observed near the gabion channel close to the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal and the other three species were recorded far from the Project Area (Figure 6.5). All wild bird species are protected under Cap 170 Wild Animals Protection Ordinance.

Table 6.3 Summary of the Avifauna Species Recorded During Baseline Surveys

Species	Location	Local Status* and Conservation Interest**
Eastern Cattle Egret Bubulcus coromandus	Channelised watercourse (north of Ngong Ping 360 Terminal)	Present all year (Carey et al. 2001) (LC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster	Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001) (RC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Eastern Buzzard Buteo japonicus	Developed area; Grassland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Black Kite Milvus migrans	Shrubland and secondary woodland	Winter Visitor/ Resident (Carey et al. 2001); RC (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Collared Scops Owl Otus lettia	Secondary woodland; Stream	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Common Kingfisher Alcedo atthis	Channelised Watercourse	Present all year/Autumn Migrant (Carey et al. 2001)
Long-tailed Shrike Lanius schach	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
White-breasted Waterhen Amaurornis phoenicurus	Project Area; Channelised watercourse; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Yellow-browed Warbler Phylloscopus inornatus	Grassland; Plantation woodland; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Black-collared Starling Sturnus nigricollis	Plantation woodland; Secondary woodland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Scaly-breasted Munia Lonchura punctulata	Project Area; Plantation woodland; Secondary woodland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Spotted Dove Spilopelia chinensis	Project Area; Channelised watercourse; Developed area; Plantation woodland; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo	Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001); RC (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis	Project Area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Black-winged Cuckooshrike Coracina melaschistos	Developed area	Autumn Migrant/Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Red-billed Blue Magpie Urocissa erythroryncha	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Eurasian Magpie Pica pica	Developed area; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Cinereous Tit Parus cinereous	Project Area; Channelised watercourse; Developed area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Red-whiskered Bulbul Pycnonotus jocosus	Project Area; Developed area; Plantation woodland; Secondary woodland; Shrubland; Stream	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Chinese Bulbul Pycnonotus sinensis	Project Area; Developed Area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Spring Migrant/ Summer Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Brown-flanked Bush Warbler Cettia fortipes	Secondary woodland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Asian Stubtail Urosphena squameiceps	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Dusky Warbler Phylloscopus fuscatus	Developed area	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Pallas’s Leaf Warbler Phylloscopus proregulus	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Yellow-browed Warbler Phylloscopus inornatus	Project Area; Channelised watercourse; Developed area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland; Stream	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Russet Bush Warbler Bradypterus mandelli	Shrubland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Yellow-bellied Prinia Prinia flaviventris	Project Area; Grassland; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Common Tailorbird Orthotomus sutorius	Project Area; Developed area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland; Stream	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Masked Laughingthrush Garrulax perspicillatus	Project Area; Developed area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Chinese Hwamei Garrulax canorus	Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Japanese White-eye Zosterops japonicus	Project Area; Developed area; Plantation woodland; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Crested Myna Acridotheres cristatellus	Developed area; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Blue Whistling Thrush Myophonus caeruleus	Project Area; Developed area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Grey-backed Thrush Turdus hortulorum	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Common Blackbird Turdus merula	Project Area; Developed area; Shrubland	Winter Visitor/Migrant (Carey et al. 2001)
Siberian Rubythroat Luscinia calliope	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Red-flanked Bluetail Tarsiger cyanurus	Secondary woodland	Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)
Rufous-tailed Robin Luscinia sibilans	Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Winter Visitor/Spring Migrant (Carey et al. 2001)
Oriental Magpie Robin Copsychus saularis	Project Area; Developed area; Secondary woodland; Shrubland	Resident (Carey et al. 2001)
Asian Brown Flycatcher Muscicapa dauurica	Secondary woodland	Migrant/ Winter Visitor (Carey et al. 2001)

# All wild birds are protected under Cap 170 Wild Animals Protection Ordinance.

* Local status refers to the status of the species made by Carey et al. (2001).

** The level of conservation interest makes reference to Fellowes et al. (2002).

Key of level of conservation interest: LC = Local Concern; RC = Region Concern. Letters in brackets represent the restrictedness in breeding and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

6.6.4 Herpetofauna (Reptiles and Amphibians)

6.6.4.1 Five amphibian and 3 reptile species were recorded in the surveys (Table 6.4) and these were mostly recorded along the natural streams in the eastern and western parts of the Study Area. All the recorded herpetofauna are considered locally common (Karsen et al. 1998). However, the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) is considered to be of Global Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002) and is listed as Endangered by IUCN (2011). This species is protected locally under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170). The Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) is also considered to be of Potential Global Concern by Fellowes et al. 2002 and on IUCN Red List as Vulnerable (IUCN 2011). The Reeves’ Terrapin was recorded once at the natural section of the Ngong Ping Stream at sampling point W8. Some Lesser Spiny Frog were recorded at the natural streams near sampling points R2 (including tadpoles), W1 and W2 (Figure 6.5). None of these species are locally protected.

Table 6.4 Summary of the Herpetofauna Species Recorded During Baseline Surveys

Group / Species	Location	Local Status* and Conservation Interest**
Amphibians
Asian Common Toad Bufo melanostictus	Streams outside but close to the Project Area at sampling point W8 and at the secondary woodland to the southwest of the Study Area	Common (Karsen et al. 1998)
Paddy Frog Fejervarya limnocharis	Plantation woodland outside Project Area and in the plantation woodland habitat to the southwest of the Study Area	Common (Karsen et al. 1998)
Brown Tree Frog Polypedates megacephalus	Streams outside but close the Project Area at sampling points R1and W10	Common (Karsen et al. 1998)
Lesser Spiny Frog Quasipaa exilispinosa	Streams outside but close to the Project Area at sampling points R2, W1 and W2	Common (Karsen et al. 1998); PGC (Fellowes et al. 2002); Vulnerable (IUCN, 2011)
Gunther's Frog Rana guentheri	Streams outside but close to the Project Area at sampling points R2, R6, W1 and W2	Common (Karsen et al. 1998)
Reptiles
Chinese Gecko Gekko chinensis	Developed area outside the Project Area	Common (Karsen et al. 1998)
Reeves' Terrapin Mauremys reevesii	Streams outside but closed to the Project Area at sampling point W8	Common (Karsen et al. 1998); Cap 170 protected; GC (Fellowes et al. 2002); Endangered (IUCN, 2011)
Red-eared Slider Trachemys scripta	Streams outside the Project Area at sampling point W8	Common (Karsen et al. 1998)

* Local status refers to the status of the species made by Karsen et al. (1998).

** The level of conservation interest makes reference to Fellowes et al. (2002).

Key of level of conservation interest: PGC = Potentially Global Concern; GC= Global Concern. Letters in brackets represent the restrictedness in breeding and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

6.6.5 Insects (Dragonflies, Damselflies and Butterflies)

Odonates (Dragonflies and Damselflies)

6.6.5.1 A total of 8 odonate species were recorded. All of the recorded species are common species and abundant in Hong Kong (Tam et al. 2011). None of the species are protected or considered of conservation interest (see Appendix E5).

Butterflies

6.6.5.2 A total of 27 butterfly species were recorded and the full list is provided in Appendix E6. Four out of the 27 species are considered as relatively uncommon in Hong Kong (Young and Yiu, 2002), including the Magpie Flat (Abraximorpha davidii), the Bevan’s Swift (Borbo bevani), the Yellow Orange Tip (Ixias pyrene) and the Lemon Pansy (Junonia lemonias). None of the species are protected or considered of conservation interest (see Appendix E6).

6.6.6 Aquatic Assemblages

Freshwater Fish

6.6.6.1 Only 3 fish species, namely the Mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis), the Flat-headed Loach (Oreonectes platycephalus) and the Striped Loach (Schistura fasciolata) were recorded in the surveys. They are all common in Hong Kong (Lam 2004). The loaches were recorded in the cleaner upstream natural streams including at sampling locations R2, W1 and W2. The Mosquito fish was abundant in the downstream sections wherever the stream held water, notably at W5, W6, W7, W8, W9 and W12. This is a common species introduced as a mosquito-control agent and is now widespread in many local freshwater bodies. None of the species are protected or considered of conservation interest (see Appendix E7).

Freshwater Macroinvertebrate

6.6.6.2 A total of 11 macroinvertebrates were recorded in the watercourses sampling. These included six insects, four gastropods and one crab species. The six insect species included Chironomus sp., Gerris sp., Notonecta sp., Ophiogomphus sinicus, Orthetrum sp., and Orthorcladinae sp. which were mostly recorded in the downstream area at W6,W7, W8, W9 and W12, but, also, in the upstream R2, W1 and W2 stations. Similarly, the four gastropod species, the Ram’s horn snail (Gyraulus sp.), the Red-rimmed Melania (Melanoides tuberculata), the Pond Snail (Physella acuta) and the Apple Snail (Pomecea lineate) were mostly recorded in the downstream area at stations W6,W7, W8, W9 and W12. The Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) was recorded in the natural stream including at stations W2, W8, R1, R2 and R6 but absent in the man-made channel.

6.6.6.3 All the macroinvertebrates recorded are common in Hong Kong and none of the species are protected (see Appendix E7). While common in Hong Kong, the Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa. zanklon) is, however, considered to be of Global Concern by Fellowes et al. (2002) and listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2011). Somanniathelphusa. zanklon is a freshwater crab typical of lowland habitats in Hong Kong and South China (Dudgeon and Corlett 1994). They forage in rice fields, irrigation ditches, flooded furrows and slow-flowing stream and rivers.

6.7 Species of Conservation Interest

6.7.1 Background

6.7.1.1 Annex 8 of the EIAO-TM specifies three criteria by which a species’ conservation significance may be measured: protection status (local, Chinese or international), with legally protected species afforded higher conservation value; geographical distribution, with higher conservation value afforded to species with more restricted geographical ranges; and rarity, with higher conservation value afforded to species which are internationally rare than to species which are only regionally or locally rare.

6.7.2 Flora

6.7.2.1 A total of 14 floral species of conservation interest have been identified within the Study Area and these are summarised in Table 6.5 below. It is notable that 8 of the floral species of conservation interest can be found in the riparian shrubland (Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Camellia euryoides, Coelogyne fimbriata, Ehretia acuminate, Enkianthus quinqueflorus, and Rhododendron farrerae) and plantation woodland (Aquilaria sinensis, Gleditsia australis, Ehretia acuminate) habitats near the Columbarium in the western part of the study area near Works Section 6.

6.7.2.2 All the Incense Trees (Aquilaria sinensis) recorded were young or just seedlings. A major cluster was identified approximately 2-4m away from the access road adjacent to the plantation and shrubland, close to the Columbarium area within the Project Area in Works Area 6 (WA4, RP4) (Figure 6.5). Due to the potential threat of habitat destruction and over-exploitation in China, this tree species is regarded as “Near Threatened” in the China Plant Red Data Book and the Illustrations of Rare & Endangered Plants in Guangdong Province. It is listed as a Category II nationally protected species in China (CSIS 2012; AFCD 2003). This species is, however, common in lowland forests and Feng Shui woodlands in Hong Kong (Xing et al. 2000), but protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586). The species is, also, CITES listed and internationally protected.

6.7.2.3 A large patch of scattered individuals of the shrub Chinese New Year Flower (Enkianthus quinqueflorus) was recorded in the shrubland underneath the cable car alignment, with a few individuals, also, near the Columbarium (Figures 6.5). This species is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A) but common in the local forest and shrubland (Xing et al. 2000).

6.7.2.4 Several patches of Camellia sinensis were recorded during the surveys and the largest cluster, including seedlings, were recorded along the fringe of the secondary woodland to the south and southeast of the Study Area (Figure 6.5). Three shrubs of Camellia sinensis were identified and located next to the agricultural land within the Project Area. A tea plantation of Camellia sinensis, which is managed by the villagers, was found in the south-eastern part of the Study Area, and a few individuals recorded in the shrubland and developed area. This species belongs to the genus of Camellia of which its wild population is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A). The wild population is regarded as rare and has only been found on Sunset Peak and at Tai Mo Shan in the study by Xing et al. (2000). It is, also, commonly planted in the territory (Xing et al. 2000). It is believed that the recorded tea plantation (habitat type regarded as agricultural land) and most of the individuals of Camellia sinensis identified in the current study have been planted by the villagers for economic and ornamental purposes.

6.7.2.5 Three shrubs of Camellia euryoides were identified near the stream in the shrubland in the north-western part of the Project Area (Figures 6.5). Similar to Camellia sinensis, this species is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A). The distribution of Camellia euryoides is identified as restricted by Xing et al (2000).

6.7.2.6 Two patches of orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata were found on the cliff rock surface near the natural stream located in the north-western part of the Project Area (Figure 6.5) close to the Columbarium and Works Section 6. These two species belong to the Family Orchidaceae in which all wild native orchid species are protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586) and the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A) in Hong Kong. Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata are regarded as “Vulnerable” and “Near Threatened” respectively in the China Plant Red Data Book. These species are, however, very common in forests and at the side of streams in the local territory (Xing et al. 2000).

6.7.2.7 Four orchid individuals (Geodorum densiflorum) were recorded in a hydroseeded area close to the channelised watercourse within the Project Area (Figure 6.5), while another individual was found adjacent to the fringe of the shrubland to the north-west of the Study Area (Figure 6.5). Being member of the Family Orchidaceae, Geodorum densiflorum is, also, protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586) and the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A) in Hong Kong. This species is regarded as “Vulnerable” in the China Plant Red Data Book and has restricted distribution in the territory (Xing et al. 2000).

6.7.2.8 Seven groups of the shrub Rhododendron farrerae, with two to four individuals in each group, were recorded in the shrubland habitat located to the north-west of the Project Area (Figure 6.5) during both the wet and dry seasons. The wild population of this species is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96), but it is common in shrubland areas in Hong Kong (Xing et al. 2000).

6.7.2.9 Seven individuals of small tree Ehretia acuminata were recorded 2-4m away from the footpath alongside the plantation and shrubland close to the Columbarium (Figure 6.5). It is listed as “Very Rare” by Xing et al. (2000) but not protected by law locally, nationally or internationally.

6.7.2.10 Three individuals of Gleditsia australis were recorded approximately 2-4m away from the footpath alongside the plantation woodland habitat to the west of the Project Area (Figure 6.5). This species is regarded as “Rare” and could only be found in restricted locations (Xing et al. 2000). This species is not protected by law locally, nationally or internationally, however.

6.7.2.11 One small individual of tree Pavetta hongkongensis was recorded inside the plantation woodland habitat located in the central part of the Study Area near Works Section 4 (Figure 6.5). This species is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96) but common in the local fung shui woods and lowland forest (Xing et al. 2000).

6.7.2.12 At least 10 clumps of fern Cibotium barometz were identified approximately 2-5m from the fringe of the secondary woodland, located to the south and south-east of the Study Area, and shrubland (located to the northeast and northwest of the Study Area) (Figure 6.5). This species has been extensively collected in the Mainland China for medicinal uses. It is regarded as “Vulnerable” in the China Plant Red Data Book and is listed as a Category II nationally protected species in China (CSIS 2012; AFCD 2003). This species is, however, very common in forests and shrublands in Hong Kong (Xing et al. 2000), and protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586).

6.7.2.13 The herb Lilium brownie was recorded in the shrubland to the east of the Study Area. It is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A) and has restricted distribution in the territory (Xing et al. 2000).

6.7.2.14 A small patch of the herb Rungia pectinata was recorded close to a riparian area within the secondary woodland located to the south-east of the Study Area Figure 6.5). This species is regarded as “Rare” and could be only found in restricted locations, including Ngong Ping (Xing et al. 2000), Clear Water Bay, Sai Kung, Tseng Kwan O and Lantau Island (AFCD, 2009). This species is not protected by law locally, nationally or internationally.

Table 6.5 Summary of the Floral Species of Conservation Interest Recorded During Baseline Surveys

Species / Group	Growth Form	Protection Status	Locations Recorded	Rarity
Incense Tree Aquilaria sinensis	Tree	Cap. 586; Cap. 96A;Near Threatened**; Class II Protected*	Plantation woodland#, secondary woodland and shrubland#	Common (Xing et al. 2000)
Ambrosia Orchid Bulbophyllum ambrosia	Herb	Cap. 586; Cap. 96A; Vulnerable **	Riparian shrubland#	Very common (Xing et al. 2000)
Eurya-leaved Camellia Camellia euryoides	Shrub / Small tree	Cap. 96A	Riparian shrubland# and secondary woodland	Restricted (Xing et al. 2000)
Tea Camellia sinensis	Shrub / Small tree	Cap. 96A	Agricultural land, developed area#, secondary woodland and shrubland	Rare (Xing et al. 2000)
Lamb of Tartary Cibotium barometz	Large herb	Cap. 586;	Secondary woodland and shrubland	Very common (Xing et al. 2000)
Brown Rock-orchid Coelogyne fimbriata	Epiphytic herb	Cap. 586; Cap. 96A; Near Threatened **	Riparian shrubland#	Very common (Xing et al. 2000)
Heliotrope Ehretia Ehretia acuminate	Small tree	-	Developed area, plantation woodland# and shrubland#	Very rare (Xing et al. 2000)
Chinese New Year Flower Enkianthus quinqueflorus	Shrub	Cap. 96A	Shrubland#	Common (Xing et al. 2000)
Walking-stick Orchid Geodorum densiflorum	Herb	Cap. 586; Cap. 96A; Vulnerable**	Channelised Wateroucrse# and Shrubland	Restricted (Xing et al. 2000)
Small-fruited Honeylocust Gleditsia australis	Tree	-	Plantation#	Rare (Xing et al. 2000)
Chinese Lily Lilium brownii	Herb	Cap. 96A	Shrubland	Restricted (Xing et al. 2000)
Hong Kong Pavetta Pavetta hongkongensis	Tree	Cap. 96A	Plantation woodland	Common (Xing et al. 2000)
Mrs. Farrer’s Rhododendron Rhododendron farrerae;	Shrub	Cap. 96A	Riparian plantation woodland and shrubland#	Common (Xing et al. 2000)
Rungia pectinata	Herb	-	Secondary woodland	Rare (Xing et al. 2000)

Notes:

Cap 96A = Forestry Regulations under Forests and Countryside Ordinance; Cap 586 = Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance

* CSIS 2012;

** www.sepa.gov.cn 2012

# indicates the species was recorded in the corresponding habitat in the Project Area

Conservation status: LC = Local Concern; RC = Region Concern; PGC = Potential Global Concern. Letters in brackets represent the restrictedness in breeding and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

6.7.3 Fauna

6.7.3.1 A total of 9 faunal species of conservation interest have been identified within the Study Area. This include three mammalian species, four birds, one reptile, one amphibian and one freshwater crab species as summarised in Table 6.6 below. It should be noted that none of the fauna species of conservation interest were recorded in the Project Area during the surveys.

Table 6.6 Summary of the Fauna Species of Conservation Interest Recorded During Baseline Surveys

Species / Group	Protection Status	Locations Recorded	Rarity
Mammals#
Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat Hipposideros armiger	Cap. 170	Developed area near the water storage tank	Least Concern (IUCN, 2011); (LC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus	Cap. 170	Plantation woodland (near the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal and Ngong Ping SSSI)	Least Concern (IUCN, 2011); (LC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Avifauna#
Eastern Cattle Egret Bubulcus coromandus	Cap. 170	Gabion channel	(LC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Black Kite Milvus migrans	Cap. 170	Secondary woodland and shrubland	(RC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster	Cap. 170	Shrubland	(RC) (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo	Cap. 170	Shrubland	RC (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Reptiles
Reeves’ Terrapin Mauremys reevesii	Cap. 170	Streams outside but close to the Project Area at sampling point W8	Endangered (IUCN, 2011); GC (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Amphibians
Lesser Spiny Frog Quasipaa exilispinosa	-	Streams outside but close to the Project Area at sampling points R2, W1 and W2	Vulnerable (IUCN, 2011); PGC (Fellowes et al. 2002)
Freshwater Macroinvertebrate
Stream Crab Somanniathelphusa zanklon	-	Streams outside but close to the Project Area at sampling points R1, R2, R6, W2 and W8	Endangered (IUCN, 2011); GC (Fellowes et al. 2002)

Notes:

# All wild animal species are protected under Cap 170 Wild Animals Protection Ordinance. Only the species which are of conservation interest are included in the table.

Conservation status: LC = Local Concern; RC = Region Concern; PGC = Potential Global Concern. Letters in brackets represent the restrictedness in breeding and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

Mammals

6.7.3.2 The Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat and Japanese Pipistrelle were noted in the developed area and plantation area, respectively. Both species are listed as Least Concern in the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2011) and also considered as being of Local Concern by Fellowes et al. (2002). However, all the three species are widely distributed in Hong Kong (Shek 2006).

Avifauna (Birds)

6.7.3.3 The Eastern Cattle Egret was recorded near the channelised watercourse and is listed as being of Local Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002) and is uncommon to common all year round, although numbers are generally low away from Deep Bay (Carey et al. 2001).

6.7.3.4 The Black Kite was recorded flying over the shrubland and secondary woodland. An abundant winter visitor with a significant non-breeding population in Hong Kong (Carey et al. 2001), it has a small breeding population and is listed as being of Regional Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002). It is widespread in Hong Kong (Carey et al. 2001).

6.7.3.5 A White-bellied Sea Eagle was recorded flying over the shrubland during the wet season. An uncommon resident in coastal areas (Carey et al. 2001), it is listed as being of Regional Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002).

6.7.3.6 A Eurasian Eagle Owl was recorded calling and flying over shrubland in the dry season during a night-time survey. A scare but widespread resident (Carey et al. 2001), it is listed as being of Regional Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002).

Herpetofauna (Reptiles and Amphibians)

6.7.3.7 A single Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) was recorded at the downstream survey point of W8. Though fairly common in Hong Kong (Karsen et al. 1998), it is listed as Endangered by IUCN (2011) and considered to be of Global Concern (Fellowes et al. 2002). This species is protected locally under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170).

6.7.3.8 The Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) was recorded at the upstream survey points R2, W1 and W2 during the wet season. Tadpoles of this species were, also, recorded at survey point R2 during the dry season surveys. This species is listed in the IUCN Red List as Vulnerable (IUCN 2011) and considered as being of Potential Global Concern by Fellowes et al. (2002). This species can be found in hill streams and areas in proximity to the hill streams, and is common and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD 2005).

Freshwater Macroinvertebrate

6.7.3.9 The Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) was recorded at the survey points W2, W8, R1, R2 and R6. This species is considered as being of Global Concern by Fellowes et al. (2002) and listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2011). It is a freshwater crab which inhabits slow-flowing and lowland streams and paddy fields and its range is limited to Hong Kong and South China (Dudgeon and Corlett, 1994; Dudgeon, 1999).

6.8 Evaluation of Ecological Importance

6.8.1 Background

6.8.1.1 In accordance with the EIAO-TM Annex 8 criteria, the ecological importance of recorded habitats has been evaluated and the details provided in Table 6.7 - 6.15 below

6.8.2 Agricultural Land

6.8.2.1 Five small areas of dry agricultural land were identified within the Study Area and an area of local village cultivation is located with the proposed SA4 within the Project Area. The evaluation of the ecological value of the agricultural habitat is provided in Table 6.7 below.

Table 6.7 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Agriculture Land

Criteria	Agricultural Land
Naturalness	Man-made habitat, under intensive and regular management
Size	Very Small within the Project Area (0.03ha) and the Study Area (0.41ha) compared to the other habitats within the area.
Diversity	The vegetation diversity is low
Rarity	No rare or protected species recorded
Re-creatibility	Easy to be re-created
Fragmentation	Fragmented by other land uses
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the plantation and secondary woodland nearby
Potential Value	Low, it is heavily disturbed and under intensive and regular management
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Low
Ecological Value	Low

6.8.3 Developed Area

6.8.3.1 The Developed Area is mainly comprised of temples, village areas, tourist attractions and public utilities. The evaluation of the ecological value of the developed area is provided in Table 6.8 below.

Table 6.8 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Developed Area

Criteria	Developed Area
Naturalness	Man-made
Size	Large within the Project Area (1.17ha), but moderate size in Study Area (22.30ha) compared to the other habitats within the areas
Diversity	Vegetation diversity is low with native flora, but relatively high as a result of plantation with diverse fruit trees and ornamental species; Faunal diversity is low.
Rarity	One rare floral species: Ehretia acuminate Two protected bat species: Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat Hipposideros armiger and Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus
Re-creatibility	Easy to be re-created
Fragmentation	Not fragmented
Ecological Linkage	No significant ecological linkage with other habitats
Potential Value	Low
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Low
Ecological Value	Low

6.8.4 Grassland

6.8.4.1 Grassland is mainly found on the upper slope of the hills within the Study Area. The evaluation of the ecological value of the grassland is provided in Table 6.9 below.

Table 6.9 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Grassland

Criteria	Grassland
Naturalness	Semi-natural, control by occasional hill fires
Size	Moderate-size (22.99ha) compared to the other habitats in the Study Area
Diversity	Vegetation and faunal diversity is low
Rarity	No rare or protected flora or fauna was recorded
Re-creatibility	Easy to be re-created
Fragmentation	Naturally fragmented by shrubland
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the shrubland nearby
Potential Value	It may undergo succession to shrubland and woodland at climax stage if without human disturbance
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Low
Ecological Value	Low

6.8.5 Plantation Woodland

6.8.5.1 A few patches of plantation woodland are scattered within the Study Area and this habitat is dominated by the exotic plantation species. The evaluation of the ecological value of the plantation woodland habitat is provided in Table 6.10 below.

Table 6.10 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Plantation Woodland

Criteria	Plantation Woodland
Naturalness	Semi-natural, dominated by exotic plantation species
Size	Moderate within the Project Area (0.36ha), but small in the Study (1.95ha) Areas compared to the other habitats within the areas
Diversity	Moderate floral and faunal diversity compared to other habitats within the Study Area
Rarity	Four protected or rare floral species: Aquilaria sinensis, Ehretia acuminate, Gleditsia australis and Pavetta hongkongensis One protected bat species: Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus
Re-creatibility	Re-creatable but takes time to reach the climax stage
Fragmentation	Somewhat fragmented by the developed area nearby
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the secondary woodland nearby
Potential Value	With species of conservation interest
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Low
Ecological Value	Low-moderate

6.8.6 Secondary Woodland

6.8.6.1 Secondary woodland covers large portions of the Study Area. The evaluation of the ecological value of the secondary woodland is provided in Table 6.11 below.

Table 6.11 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Secondary Woodland

Criteria	Secondary Woodland
Naturalness	Natural
Size	Small within the Project Area (0.21ha), but large within the Study Area (79.65ha) compared to the other habitats in the areas.
Diversity	Moderate floral and faunal diversity compared to other habitats within the Study Area
Rarity	Four protected or rare floral species: Aquilaria sinensis, Camellia sinensis, Cibotium barometz and Rungia pectinata One bird species of conservation interest: Black Kite Milvus migrans
Re-creatibility	Difficult
Fragmentation	Partially fragmented by road and other development
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the plantation nearby
Potential Value	It is at climax stage
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified during the survey. The secondary woodland at Ngong Ping SSSI is known to be the breeding ground for the Romer’s Tree Frog
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Relatively high within the Study Area
Ecological Value	Moderate

6.8.7 Shrubland

6.8.7.1 Shrubland was found within the Study Area is mainly located on the hillsides. The evaluation of the ecological value of the shrubland is provided in Table 6.12 below.

Table 6.12 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Shrubland

Criteria	Shrubland
Naturalness	Natural
Size	Small within the Project Area (0.25ha), relatively large in the Study Area (51.74ha) compared with other habitats within the areas
Diversity	Vegetation diversity is moderate compared to other habitats within the Study Area; Bird diversity is moderate compared to other habitats within the Study Area, diversity of other faunal groups is low
Rarity	Eleven protected or rare floral species: Aquilaria sinensis, Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Camellia euryoides, Camellia sinensis, Cibotium barometz, Coelogyne fimbriata, Ehretia acumunata, Enkanthus quinqueflorus, Geodorum densiflorum, Lilium brownii and Rhododendron farrerae Three bird species of conservation interest: Black Kite Milvus migrans, Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo Bubo and White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster
Re-creatibility	Re-creatable but takes time to reach this stage
Fragmentation	Somewhat fragmented by the developed area/ woodland nearby
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the grassland nearby
Potential Value	With species of conservation interest
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Bird abundance is moderate comparing to other habitats within the Study Area, diversity of other faunal group is low
Ecological Value	Low to Moderate

6.8.8 Stream

6.8.8.1 Seasonal streams are located across the Study Area. Ngong Ping Stream is the major natural stream in the Study Area and the section of it located within the Ngong Ping SSSI is listed as an ecologically important stream (EIS). The evaluation of the ecological value of the streams is provided in Table 6.13 below.

Table 6.13 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Stream

Criteria	Stream*	Ngong Ping Stream within Ngong Ping SSSI
Naturalness	Natural, however, subject to pollution impacts
Size	Total Length: approx. 5390 m	Length: approx. 690 m
Diversity	Vegetation diversity is moderate compared to other habitats within the Study Area; Bird diversity is low compared to other habitats within the Study Area, diversity of other faunal groups is also low.	Vegetation diversity is low compared to other habitats within the Study Area. Bird diversity is low in this area.
Rarity	Four protected or rare floral species: Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Camellia euryoides, Coeloyne fimbriata and Rhododendron farrerae. Three fauna of conservation interest including a turtle species Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) (recorded at sampling point W8), a frog species Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) (recorded at sampling pR2, W1 and W2) and a freshwater stream crab species (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) (recorded at sampling points R2, W2 and W8).	No floral species of conservation interest recorded. Two faunal species of conservation interest present in the study area. The freshwater stream crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) was recorded at R1 and R6 and the Romer’s Tree Frog (Liuixalus romeri) has been previously recorded in this habitat (AFCD, 2006a).
Re-creatibility	Re-creatable, but takes time to reach the current stage
Fragmentation	Upstream and downstream section of Ngong Ping Stream is fragmented by channelised watercourse
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the channelised watercourse/streams nearby
Potential Value	With species of conservation interest
Nursery/Breeding Ground	Tadpoles of Lesser Spiny Frog were recorded at the natural streams near sampling point R2.
Age	Unknown
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Low
Ecological Value	Low to Moderate	High (as this is an EIS)

* excluding Ngong Ping Stream inside the Ngong Ping SSSI.

EIS= Ecologically Important Stream/River as defined under ETWB 5/2005. SSSI = Site of Special Scientific Interest.

6.8.9 Channelised Watercourse

6.8.9.1 Channelised watercourses are identified in the Project and Study Areas. The evaluation of the ecological value of the channelised watercourse is provided in Table 6.14 below.

Table 6.14 Evaluation of Ecological Value of Channelised Watercourse

Criteria	Channelised Watercourse
Naturalness	Low
Size	Small within the Project Area (0.17ha) and Study Area (0.69ha) (Length: approx. 490m)
Diversity	Low vegetation and faunal diversity
Rarity	One protected floral species: Orchid Geodorum densiflorum recorded at southern landscape channel bank. One bird species of conservation interest: Eastern Cattle Egret Bubulcus coromandus recorded foraging along the watercourse
Re-creatibility	Easy to be re-created
Fragmentation	Fragmented by development including drain pipes and culverts
Ecological Linkage	Ecologically linked to the streams nearby
Potential Value	Low, unless disturbance (e.g. pollution) is controlled
Nursery/Breeding Ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified
Age	Varied at different section. The gabion channel is built about 10 years ago
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife	Low
Ecological Value	Low

6.8.10 Project Area

6.8.10.1 About 900m of drainage improvement pipes will be carried out to improve the existing drainage system. The proposed works boundary (see Figures 6.3 and 6.4) covers seven of the eight habitats found in the Study Area, including agricultural land, the channelised watercourse, developed area, plantation and secondary woodland, shrubland and streams.

6.8.10.2 The species present within the Project Area are mostly common and widespread in Hong Kong, although 10 floral species of conservation interest were recorded within the Project Area. The ecological value of the Project Area as a whole is provided in Table 6.15.

Table 6.15 Evaluation of Ecological Value of the Project Area

Criteria	Project Area
Naturalness	Man-made: developed area, agricultural land, channelised watercourse Semi-natural: plantation Natural: secondary woodland, shrubland and stream
Size	Small (2.22ha)
Diversity	Moderate floral diversity and low faunal diversity
Rarity	Ten protected or rare floral species: Aquilaria sinensis, Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Camellia euryoides, Camellia sinensis, Coelogyne fimbriata, Ehretia acuminate, Enkianthus quinqueflorus, Geodorum densiflorum, Gleditsia australis and Rhododendron farrerae
Re-creatability	Easy for the man-made and semi-natural habitats, difficult for the natural habitats
Fragmentation	Not applicable
Ecological linkage	Ecologically linked to the corresponding habitats within the Study Area
Potential value	Provide habitats for above mentioned floral and fauna species with conservation interests and other species.
Nursery/ breeding ground	No significant nursery/breeding ground identified within the Project Area.
Age	Various age
Abundance/ Richness of wildlife	Low
Ecological value	Low to Moderate

6.8.11 Overall Evaluation

6.8.11.1 The Project Area and habitats present within the Study Area are ranked according to their overall ecological value evaluated in Tables 6.7 – 6.15 above and summarised in Table 6.16 below. The ecologically important stream, the Ngong Ping Stream (within the Ngong Ping SSSI), is considered to be of high ecological value as it is a known breeding ground for the protected endemic Romer’s Tree Frog. The secondary woodland is considered as being of moderate ecological value, whereas the Project Area, shrubland, plantation woodland and streams (excluding Ngong Ping Stream within the Ngong Ping SSSI) are considered to be of low to moderate value. Agricultural land, the channelised watercourse, developed area and grassland are considered to be of low ecological value.

Table 6.16 Summary of the Ecological Value of Habitats within the Study Area (Descending Order of Importance)

Project Area/ Habitat	Ecological Value
Ngong Ping Stream (EIS) within the Ngong Ping SSSI	High
Secondary Woodland	Moderate
Project Area	Low to Moderate
Stream (excluding Ngong Ping Stream inside the Ngong Ping SSSI)	Low to Moderate
Plantation	Low to Moderate
Shrubland	Low to Moderate
Agricultural Land	Low
Channelised Watercourse	Low
Developed Area	Low
Grassland	Low

EIS= Ecologically Important Stream/River as defined under ETWB 5/2005. SSSI = Site of Special Scientific Interest.

6.9 Ecological Impact Assessment Methodology

6.9.1.1 This section assesses the direct and indirect, as well as on-site and off-site impacts likely to occur during the construction and operation phases of the Project. The significance of ecological impacts has been evaluated based primarily on the criteria set in Table 1 of Annex 8 of the EIAO-TM:

· Habitat quality;

· Species affected;

· Size/abundance of habitat/organism affected;

· Duration of impacts;

· Reversibility of impacts; and

· Magnitude of environmental changes.

6.9.1.2 Impacts are ranked as “minor”, “moderate” or “severe”, although in a few cases, “insignificant” (less than “minor”) or “extremely severe” may also be given. The ranking of a given impact will vary based on the criteria listed above. For example, an impact might be ranked as “minor” if it affected only common species and habitats, or if it affected only small numbers of individuals or small areas, whereas it might be ranked as “severe” if it affected rare species or habitats, large numbers of individuals or large areas. The major factors giving rise to a ranking of “moderate” or “severe” are spelled out in the text as far as possible. As noted in Annex 16 of the TM, a degree of professional judgement is involved in the evaluation of impacts.

6.9.1.3 Impacts to species or groups assessed as ‘minor’ are predicted to cause a slight, and/or short term reduction in the local population numbers or geographic distribution of a species or group, but the species or groups are predicted to recover from the perturbation with no long-term adverse impacts. Habitat impacts are considered ‘minor’ when no species of conservation or regulatory concern are found, and when the habitat in question was widely distributed locally.

6.9.1.4 Impacts to species or groups assessed as ‘moderate’ are predicted to cause local reduction of species or group population numbers. The reductions would be long-term, and probably not recoverable, but the species or groups in question are considered widely distributed or common, and abundant on a local, regional, or global scale. Habitat impacts are judged ‘moderate’ when the habitat in question was of limited local or regional distribution or declining in extent, and when the potential for the habitat to support fauna and flora was considered of conservation or regulatory importance.

6.9.1.5 Impacts to species or groups are assessed as ‘severe’ when they are judged to adversely affect species or groups which are of conservation or regulatory concern locally, regionally, or globally due to scarcity or declining population or distribution trends. Impacts to habitats are considered ‘severe’ when the habitats are found to be limited or declining in geographic distribution, contain plant species of regulatory or conservation concern, or are generally considered by the scientific community to be of local, regional or global importance to the support of wild fauna.

6.9.1.6 If ecological impacts are found to be significant (i.e., moderate to severe) mitigation needs to be carried out in accordance with the TM. Mitigation measures are not required for insignificant impacts although precautionary and/or enhancement measures may be recommended if desirable. The policy for mitigating significant impacts on habitats and wildlife is to seek to achieve impact avoidance, impact minimisation and impact compensation in that order of priority. Impact avoidance typically consists of modifications to the project design, but may in extreme cases require abandonment of the project (the “no-go” alternative). Impact minimisation includes any means of reducing the scope or severity of a given impact, e.g. through timing of construction works, modification in design, or ecological restoration of disturbed areas following the completion of works. Impact compensation assumes that an irreversible impact will occur upon a given habitat or species and attempts to compensate for it elsewhere, for example, by enhancement or creation of suitable habitat. Compensation may take place on-site or off-site.

6.9.1.7 Implementation of the Project will result in permanent loss of habitat at the intakes, outfalls and manholes. There will be an additional temporary loss resulting from the construction of haulage roads, site office, works areas, stockpiling area including the excavation of trenches and pits along the proposed alignment. The temporary areas will not be permanently occupied and may, therefore, be re-instated once the construction works have been completed and selected areas may be used for compensatory tree planting if deemed suitable.

6.9.1.8 In calculating the permanent and temporary areas of habitat that would be lost as a result of the project, all above ground structures, that is, intakes, outfalls and manholes, of the proposed drainage system have been regarded as permanent loss. All areas within the works boundary but not forming part of the above ground structure will be reinstated upon works completion and, hence, these areas are considered as temporary loss only.

6.10 Potential Construction Phase Ecological Impacts

6.10.1 Background

6.10.1.1 Construction phase impacts to fauna are related to direct habitat loss and fragmentation of habitat. Secondary impacts are related to the effect of habitat loss and subsequent reduction of food resources and breeding sites and also impacts on the habitats through construction run-off. The proximity of the project to sensitive habitats (such as the Ngong Ping SSSI) renders it imperative that proper control is exerted on the Contractors’ management and disposal of any excavated material. Accidental or other intrusion of construction activities beyond the designated works area is also a potential impact.

6.10.1.2 A potential impact is due to disturbance and direct habitat loss during the drainage pipeline construction. Although the more mobile species present will avoid the disturbed areas, some reptile, amphibian and freshwater crab species of high conservation interest in the Study Area could have restricted mobility and specific habitat requirements.

6.10.1.3 Habitat fragmentation (i.e., the breaking down of existing habitat into smaller areas of habitat) is associated with linear construction projects such as drainage channels. Fragmentation of habitats, such as woodlands, is known to lead to the reduction in numbers of many species such as birds (Treweek 1999). Increased habitat fragmentation caused by large road projects has also been shown to reduce the reproductive success of species such as birds that are intolerant to an increase in edge to habitat ratio (Reijnen et al. 1995). As the proposed drains will ultimately be underground facilities, the permanent habitat loss is, therefore, limited to isolated areas associated with a few manholes, intakes and outfalls, the project is not expected to induce or increase habitat fragmentation.

6.10.1.4 As such, the potential for ecological impacts as a result construction of the project would be related to the following direct and indirect sources:

· Habitat and vegetation loss;

· Disturbance; and

· Construction run-off.

6.10.2 Habitat and Vegetation Loss

6.10.2.1 Direct impacts that could arise from the proposed project implementation would include permanent terrestrial habitat loss and associated impacts to wildlife resulting from permanent land take for the intakes, outfalls and manholes. In addition, the temporary site clearance and resumption of land for the construction works would, also, result in temporary habitat loss and associated impacts to wildlife. However, because of the linear nature of the alignment and, also, that the adoption of an underground drainage system, the size of the affected area is generally very small, especially in respect of permanently affected habitat.

6.10.2.2 The estimated losses of habitat are shown in Table 6.17. The permanent habitat loss associated with intakes and outfalls physically encompass the watercourse (stream or channel) and the associated bank-side habitats which are mainly located in the developed area, except for Outfall B which is located in the shrubland and part of the stream habitat included in the Lantau North Country Park. For the purpose of presenting worst case habitat loss calculations, it is assumed that all the area affected is watercourse as the ecological value of the aquatic habitat is generally slightly higher than the associated terrestrial counterpart (see Table 6.16).

6.10.2.3 In terms of temporary habitat loss, the Project Area, that is, the area within the proposed works limit as shown in Figure 2.9a - 2.9g, has been defined to be larger than the actual works requirements. In particular, the areas along the pipe jacking section (Works Sections 2 and 6) will not be disturbed as the works will be underground and the surface works will be limited to the jacking and receiving pits and the intermediate pit area. During the course of the study, the land requirements for the works and stockpiling areas has been reviewed and well defined as shown in Figure 2.9a and 2.9g and the area of disturbance will be limited to those defined areas and the 9m drainage reserve area along the cut-and-cover trench. In addition, within some designated works and stockpiling areas, some trees will be fenced off for protection and therefore, these protected areas will not be affected or lost. As such, the defined footprint of the works will actually be smaller than the designated Project Area and the habitat loss has been calculated on this basis.

Table 6.17 Estimation of Potential Terrestrial Habitat Loss within Study and Project Areas

Habitat	Temporary Loss in Project Area^(1) (ha)	Maximum Percentage of Temporary Loss^(^2) (%)	Maximum Permanent Loss (ha)^(3)	Maximum Percentage of Permanent Loss (%)^(2)
Agricultural Land	0.03	7.3%	-	-
Developed Area	0.26	1.2%	0.009 ^(4,5,6)	0.04%
Grassland	-	-	-	-
Plantation Woodland	0.03	1.6%	0.002	0.08%
Secondary Woodland	0.07	0.1%	0.0003	0.0003%
Shrubland	0.02	0.04%	0.001	0.002%
Stream	0.03	1.7%	0.003^(4)	0.17%
Channelised Watercourse	0.02	3.1%	- ^(5)	-
Grand Total	0.47	0.3%	0.02	0.008%

Notes:

(1) The Project Area is the area inside the proposed works boundary as indicated in Figure 2.9a and 2.9g. However, not all of the project area is proposed to be active works area and includes areas that will not be required by the construction works such as underground pipe jacking sections and extra areas which have been retained as part of the Project Area for the sake of construction site management. As such, the temporary loss of habitats would not include the total habitat within the Project Area.

(2) All percentage calculations are relative to the total area of the same habitat within the Study Area.

(3) The maximum permanent loss covers the area under the drainage reserve. Unless the area is occupied by permanent structures like manholes, intakes or outfalls, areas under the drainage reserve will be reinstated to the original state after works. However, such reinstatement will not include planting of new trees along the drainage reserve.

(4) For the intakes and outfalls, the affected habitats actually include both the edge of the stream and associated bank-side habitat. For the purpose of the assessment, the area to be lost has been assumed to be entirely stream habitat to present a worst case scenario.

(5) The intakes and outfalls will form part of the artificial channel and, hence, there will be no permanent loss of channelised watercourse.

(6) The intakes, manholes and outfalls will form part of the artificial channel and hence there will be no permanent habitat loss.

6.10.2.4 Habitat loss is a potential threat to many species as it may be linked to direct mortality, species displacement and is most severe in species that have an inability to translocate to suitable habitats elsewhere (Treweek 1999). Although the species-area relationships have been extensively studied (larger areas of habitat generally support a greater number of species), it is difficult to estimate the minimum area of habitat required for most animals and this is more difficult with highly mobile species such as birds. Where the works pass through high value habitat such as secondary woodland and stream, the footprint has been reduced as far as possible. Potential impacts from habitat loss in areas of conservation interest including the Ngong Ping SSSI and the Lantau North Country Park are discussed in Section 6.10.5 below.

6.10.3 Disturbance

6.10.3.1 One of the major construction impacts associated with this project is disturbance to fauna present in the study area. Disturbance during the construction phase is likely to be associated with noise and movement from construction traffic and the greater presence of human activities on-site. Short-term disturbance can affect the time species have available for feeding, whilst longer term effects can cause a reduction in the use of a particular area for feeding and/or breeding (Treweek, 1999). The proposed alignment is mainly along the existing access and footpath adjacent to the existing development, in which a certain degree of human disturbance already persists. Many animal populations can gradually habituate to low levels of disturbance and transient constructional phase impacts are not predicted to be significant to fauna present, provided that all measures are taken to ensure that disturbance is kept to a minimum.

6.10.4 Construction Run-off

6.10.4.1 Construction site surface run-off, if it enters into the watercourses, can indirectly affect the aquatic ecology due primarily to sedimentation and contamination. Surface runoff from the site is likely to carry sediment eroded from the excavated areas and stockpiled earthed material. Elevated suspended solids levels in the water bodies can directly affect aquatic fauna by clogging their respiratory system (e.g., gill structures) or physically smothered smaller the smaller individual and larval stage of aquatic species. High suspended solids can, also, decrease dissolved oxygen levels rendering the water bodies hostile to intolerant species. Contaminants, likely to be fuel, oil, solvents and lubricants from maintenance of construction machinery and equipment, in the surface runoff can be toxic to the aquatic biota or cut-off the oxygen supplies. Spillage of bentonite from the pipe jacking works, if present, could, also, affect the aquatic environment.

6.10.4.2 The natural streams in the area are known to support the protected endemic Romer's Tree Frog although it was not recorded during the project specific baseline surveys. Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa), locally common (Karsen et al. 1998) but globally considered as vulnerable (IUCN 2011), was recorded in the streams course near Works Section 1. The Reeves' Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii), locally common (Karsen et al. 1998) but globally considered as endangered (IUCN 2011), was recorded at the downstream section of Ngong Ping Stream near Works Section 6. The endemic freshwater crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) has restricted local distribution (Dudgeon and Corlett, 1994) and globally considered as endangered (IUCN 2011) was recorded at both areas and, also, the upstream section of the Ngong Ping Stream. These aquatic species are of particular concern and mitigation measures would be recommended to reduce the impacts to the lowest extent possible.

6.10.5 Impacts to Sites of Conservation Importance

6.10.5.1 The Ngong Ping SSSI and the EIS section of Ngong Ping Stream are located to the south-east of the Study Area and upstream of the proposed works. They are about 280m (line distance) upstream of the Intake B and about 200m from the proposed Site Office location, respectively. Both areas are outside the Project Area and will not be affected by the proposed Project. The closest boundary of the Lantau South Country Park is, also, at least 340m away from the proposed Project and will not be affected.

6.10.5.2 Works Section 6, where construction of the flood relief drain will be undertaken, is partially located within the Lantau North Country Park. Shrubland and plantation woodland are the main habitat types in this area, and there is an access road to the Columbarium. Some floral species of conservation interest were recorded in this area (see Figure 6.5). Direct impacts to this area have been minimised by the adoption of a trenchless construction method. This significantly reduces the area of excavation required along the whole 198m alignment to a few localised spots required for the jacking pit JP2, receiving pits RP3 and RP4 (see Figure 2.9g) and the associated works and stockpiling areas (total of 0.06ha). However, given the above efforts and the careful location of the works and stockpiling areas, no direct impacts to species of conservation interest found in the shrubland area within the Lantau North Country Park would be predicted.

6.10.5.3 Portion of Works Section 1, is positioned at the edge of a Conservation Area adjacent to the village development and the Lantau North Country Park (Figure 6.1). The vegetation in the area of Intake A will have to be permanently cleared and vegetation in the area of a small stockpiling area SA1 adjacent will need to be temporarily cleared. Temporary direct impacts have been substantially reduced by the reduction in the size of the stockpiling area SA1 from 0.02ha to the current 0.01ha. However, no floral species of conservation interest were identified in the area of Intake A and due to the small size of the area affected, the direct impacts are unlikely to be significant. Controlling indirect impacts due the construction run-off to avoid affecting the natural streams nearby is considered as essential for this section of works.

6.11 Construction Phase Overall Impact Evaluation

6.11.1 Background

6.11.1.1 The potential ecological impacts to habitats and species of ecological concern have been evaluated according to Table 1 of Annex 8 of the EIAO TM and described in the following sections.

6.11.2 Agricultural Land

6.11.2.1 There are small plots of agricultural land scattered within the Study Area (Figures 6.3 and 6.4) and about 0.03ha of agricultural land, in the form of a small area of village cultivated land for fruit and vegetable growing, identified within the Project Area. The habitat within the Project Area is located with the proposed stockpiling area SA3 in Work Section 5 and as such, will be directly affected by the construction works as most of the vegetation along the excavation trench and the designated stockpiling area SA3 will be cleared. However, no floral species of conservation interest were identified in this area. There will be no permanent loss of this area. The drainage reserve is required for future maintenance access and planting in this area will be restricted to grass species.

6.11.2.2 In addition, a plot of about 0.05 ha of agricultural land to the north-west of the “Walking with Buddha” attraction is parallel to the cut-and-cover construction works for the box-culvert in Works Section 5. Another plot of about 0.07 ha of agricultural land to the west of Lin Ping Road is adjacent to the stockpiling area SA2 in Works Section 4. This habitat is currently actively used for agricultural production and, therefore, under intensive disturbance. As there are no works in this habitat in the broader Study Area, there will be no direct impacts. Indirect impacts due to increased human disturbance are not expected to be of significance as the site is already under persistent management disturbance. Indirect impacts due to construction site runoff are, also, not expected to be of ecological concern as the quality of this habitat is low. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.18 below.

Table 6.18 Overall Impact Evaluation for Agriculture Land

Evaluation Criteria	Agricultural Land
Habitat quality	Low
Species	No species of conservation interest
Size/Abundance	Approximately 0.03ha will be affected in the Project Area and none in the Study Area. No permanent loss anticipated.
Duration	The impact will persist during the construction phase for about 15 months
Reversibility	Habitat affected by temporary works is reversible.
Magnitude	The scale of the temporary habitat loss and impact is moderate compared to other habitats in the Study Area as it constitutes approximately 7.3% of this habitat type within the Study Area.
Overall Impact Conclusion	Minor

6.11.3 Developed Area

6.11.3.1 The proposed works will purposely be undertaken largely within the developed area to avoid affecting the natural habitats. About 1.20ha of developed area is located within the Project Area, mostly along the existing road and footpath and the largest area to be affected would be as a result of the resumption of the village parking area. Apart from the Site Office in Works Section 2, works in the developed area include cut-and-cover for the interception drain in Works Sections 1 and 3, and cut-and-cover for the box culvert construction works in Works Section 5. Also, the receiving pits RP1 and RP2 in works Section 1 and 2, respectively. However, the temporary loss will amount to 0.33ha only. The developed area to be temporarily resumed within the Project Area will be larger than the actual works boundary so as to allow for temporary traffic and access arrangement / diversion as necessary. While small areas of the developed area (about 0.01ha) will be permanently occupied for manholes and intake, this is not considered as habitat loss as these new facilities are also developed area.

6.11.3.2 The only rare floral species found in this habitat, Ehretia acuminate, recorded beside a village house to the west of the bus terminal, is about 80m away from any part of the Project Area and will not be directly or indirectly affected by the works. Similarly, the protected Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat (Hipposideros armiger) and Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus) were not recorded within the Project Area and will not be directly affected. While the Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat (Hipposideros armiger) was recorded near the water tank, immediately next to the Works Section 1, both bat species are likely to use a series of habitats in the area rather than be confined to a particular spot. Both bats species are nocturnal and as night time works are not proposed and, therefore, impacts associated with the construction disturbance to them would not be anticipated either. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.19 below.

Table 6.19 Overall Impact Evaluation for Developed Area

Evaluation Criteria	Developed Area
Habitat quality	Low
Species	One floral species of conservation interest Ehretia acuminate, was recorded in the habitat. Two fauna species of conservation interest Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat (Hipposideros armiger) and Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus) were recorded in the habitat. None of the species of conservation interest will be affected.
Size/Abundance	Approximately 0.26ha will be affected including about 0.009ha being permanently occupied for manholes.
Duration	The impact will persist during the construction phase for about 30 months.
Reversibility	The impact of the direct temporary habitat loss is readily reversible
Magnitude	The scale of the temporary habitat loss and impact is small as it constitutes approximately 1.2% of this habitat type within the Study Area. About 0.04% of permanent loss of developed area will be anticipated.
Overall Impact Conclusion	Insignificant

6.11.4 Grassland

6.11.4.1 The uphill grassland habitat is some distance (over 100m uphill) from the proposed works, except for a small patch adjacent to the Works Section 5 and located within some private land lots. However, no grassland is present within the Project Area and therefore, this habitat will not be directly affected. The grassland, including the path near Works Section 5, is uphill of the Project Area and, hence, indirect impacts due to construction site run off are not anticipated. In addition, the impact of indirect disturbance impacts would unlikely be significant as no faunal species of conservation interest were noted in the grassland areas, the habitat quality is low to moderate and the grassland is, generally, located some distance from the Project Area. For the patch near Works Section 5, it is surrounded by village houses and constantly under some level of human disturbance, and the construction period is short. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.20 below.

Table 6.20 Overall Impact Evaluation for Grassland

Evaluation Criteria	Grassland
Habitat quality	Low to moderate
Species	No rare or protected flora or fauna was recorded
Size/Abundance	No impacts anticipated
Duration	No impacts anticipated
Reversibility	--
Magnitude	No impacts anticipated
Overall Impact Conclusion	Insignificant

6.11.5 Plantation Woodland

6.11.5.1 About 0.31ha of the plantation woodland habitat is located within the Project Area and present in all Work Sections, except Works Section 1, but as not all the area within the Project Area will be used during the construction works, about 0.02ha of plantation woodland is expected to be affected by the works for the drainage alignment and associated works and designated stockpiled areas. The main affected plantation woodland areas would be as a result of the cut-and-cover construction for the interception drain in Works Section 3, cut-and-cover construction for box culvert in Works Section 4 and the stockpile area SA2 between these two works sections.

6.11.5.2 Most of the ground vegetation along the excavation trench and the designated stockpiling area SA2 will be cleared, although trees will be retained as far as possible and it is anticipated that only about 57 trees will have to be removed. Upon completion, the majority of the affected area will be reinstated, although some small areas equating to only about 0.002ha, will be permanently occupied by 2 manholes and the associated drainage reserve. The drainage reserve is required for future maintenance access and will occupy be either side of the alignment and planting in this area will be restricted to hydroseeding, with no trees being allowed to be planted in this area. Existing trees along the drainage reserve will not be affected unless they are in direct conflict the construction works (i.e., along and right adjacent to the excavation trench).

6.11.5.3 Jacking pit JP2 will be constructed within SA4 and converted into a permanent manhole at the end of the construction period. SA4 is, also, assumed to be cleared for the works and while the size of the area has been minimised as far as possible, 6 trees will need to be cleared in additional to the shrub ground cover. However, no species of conservation interest were found in the location of SA4 and JP2. Upon completion, the affected area can be reinstated, although a small area of plantation woodland of about 0.0005ha will be permanently occupied by the final manhole in the location of JP2.

6.11.5.4 There were no faunal species of conservation interested recorded in this habitat type. However, Four floral species of conservation interest, small tree Aquilaria sinensis (Cap 96A and Cap 586 protected), herb Ehretia acuminate (very rare but unprotected), small tree Gleditsia australis (rare but unprotected), and tree Pavetta hongkongensis (Cap 96A protected) were recorded in the plantation woodland habitat. The Pavetta hongkongensis is outside the Project Area and some 20m away from the SA2 and, therefore, will not be affected either directly or indirectly but the first three species are located within the Project Area and could be affected by the works.

6.11.5.5 Clusters of Aquilaria sinensis, Ehretia acuminate and Gleditsia australis were located in the plantation woodland between the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal and the Columbarium inside the Lantau North Country Park where Works Section 6 is located. Direct impacts to the plantation woodland / shrubland in the country park have been minimised overall by the adoption of the trenchless pipe jacking construction method in Works Section 6. The alignment and stockpiling area SA4 in Works Section 6 have, also, been reviewed and revised to avoid the species of conservation interest in the Lantau North Country Park by relocating the jacking pit JP2 closer to the Ngong Ping 360 Cable Car Aerial Ropeway alignment the existing road (see Section 2.5.5 and Figure 2.4)

6.11.5.6 In terms of the plantation woodland habitat as a whole, although the affected size is small and the habitat quality of low to moderate only, given the habitat loss and the potential for direct and indirect impacts on species of conservation interest, the ecological impacts are considered to be of minor significance. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.21 below.

Table 6.21 Overall Impact Evaluation for Plantation Woodland

Evaluation Criteria	Plantation Woodland
Habitat quality	Low to moderate
Species	Three floral species of conservation interest were identified within the Project Area, including Aquilaria sinensis, Ehretia acuminate and Gleditsia australis but these will not be directly and indirectly affected. A locally protected species, Pavetta hongkongensis, was recorded within this habitat. However, this species was far from the Project Area and will not be affected. There is no fauna species of conservation interested recorded in this habitat type.
Size/Abundance	Approximately 0.03ha will be affected including about 0.002ha which will be permanently occupied area.
Duration	The impact will persist during the construction phase for about 30 months.
Reversibility	Habitat affected by temporary works is reversible. The permanent loss for manholes is irreversible.
Magnitude	The scale of temporary habitat loss and impact is moderate as it constitutes approximately 1.1% of this habitat type within the Study Area. The scale of permanent habitat loss and impact is negligible as it constitutes approximately 0.08% of this habitat type within the Study Area
Overall Impact Conclusion	Minor

6.11.6 Secondary Woodland

6.11.6.1 Secondary woodland is the dominant habitat in the Study Area (Table 6.17) and includes a portion to the east and south-east of the Tian Tan Buddha Statue which is designated as the Ngong Ping SSSI. The proposed works are downstream of the SSSI and the alignment section closest to the SSSI is about 220m away. Thus, the SSSI will not be affected directly or indirectly by the Project. A portion of about 0.07ha of the secondary woodland located within the Project Area in Works Section 5 will be affected by the works for the drainage alignment and associated works areas, including the proposed stockpile area SA3. This portion of secondary woodland is located to the north-east of the “Walking with Buddha” attraction and is within the cut-and-cover alignment for the box culvert in Works Section 5, the associated works and stockpiling area SA3. During the construction, most of the ground coverage along in Works Section 5 and the designated stockpiling area SA3 will be cleared although trees will be retained as far as practicable and only 42 trees along the alignment excavation trench will have to be removed. No healthy trees within the SA3 will be felled, although some will have to be pruned to allow works to proceed.

6.11.6.2 Upon completion, the majority of the affected area will be reinstated, although a small area of about 0.0003ha will be permanently occupied by a manhole and the associated drainage reserve occupying 3m either side of the alignment, for future maintenance access. Reinstatement in the drainage reserve will be restricted to the planting of grass and shrubs only, with no new trees being allowed to be planted in this area for future maintenance access.

6.11.6.3 The stockpiling area SA1 for Works Section 1 is just adjacent to the uphill secondary woodland to the east of the Study Area and Work Section 6 is, also, adjacent to another secondary woodland are in the west of the Study Area. There will be no works undertaken in these two woodland areas, although the woodland near SA1 is partly defined as within the Project Area. This area is adjacent to the existing car access and, thus, already under constant disturbance. Therefore, the slight increase in human distance is not anticipated to induce significant indirect impacts.

6.11.6.4 Four floral species of conservation interest, Aquilaria sinensis, Camellia sinensis, Cibotium barometz and Rungia pectinata were recorded in the secondary woodland but none of these species are located within the Project Area and as these species are at least 50m away from the works, they would not be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed works. A Black Kite (Milvus migrans) was been observed flying over the shrubland / secondary woodland habitat but no nesting place was observed. The Black Kite is likely to use a series of habitats in the wider Ngong Ping area and would unlikely be indirectly affected by the proposed works.

6.11.6.5 Only a small portion of the secondary woodland habitat and no species of conservation interested in woodlands will be affected. Nonetheless, as the secondary woodland habitat to be affected is of moderate ecological quality, the overall ecological impact to this habitat is considered minor but mitigation measures would be recommended. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.22 below.

Table 6.22 Overall Impact Evaluation for Secondary Woodland

Evaluation Criteria	Secondary Woodland
Habitat quality	Moderate
Species	Four floral species of conservation interest were identified in the secondary woodland, including Aquilaria sinensis, Camellia sinensis, Cibotium barometzand Rungia pectinata. One bird species of conservation interest: Black Kite Milvus migrans However, none of them were recorded within Project Area and will not be affected.
Size/Abundance	Approximately 0.07ha will be affected including about 0.0003ha permanently occupied area.
Duration	The impact will persist during the construction phase for about 15 months
Reversibility	Habitat affected by temporary works is reversible although it will take a relatively long duration for the habitat to restore to its current condition. The permanent loss for manholes is irreversible.
Magnitude	The scale of temporary habitat loss and impact is negligible as it constitutes only approximately 0.1% of this habitat type within the Study Area. The scale of permanent habitat loss and impact is negligible as it constitutes only approximately 0.0003% of this habitat type within the Study Area
Overall Impact Conclusion	Minor

6.11.7 Shrubland

6.11.7.1 Shrubland is the second largest habitat in the Study Area (Table 6.17). The shrubland areas are generally located some distance (at least 70m) from the Project Area, although about 0.29ha of the shrubland in located within and adjacent to the Lantau North Country Park area where pipe jacking for construction of the flood relief drain (Works Section 6) will be undertaken. As trenchless pipe jacking will be used to construct the flood relief drain, the area of shrubland actually affected is likely to be limited to the small stream side in Works Area WA4 of 0.01ha in size, although a larger area along the alignment is defined as part of the Project Area, and as a result of stockpiling area SA4. The assessment has been based on the larger footprint along the alignment as there is still a potential that this larger area to be affected if frac-out release of bentonite slurry occurs (see Section 5.8.4 for details about frac-out). The receiving pit RP4 will be constructed at WA4 which will then converted into the Outfall B after the pipe jacking operation has been completed. The ground coverage at WA4 will have to be cleared for the works, although trees will be mostly preserved except for 6 common trees which are in direct conflict with the works and have to be removed. Upon completion, the affected areas can be reinstated, although a small stream side shrubland area of about 0.001ha will be permanently occupied by the final Outfall B.

6.11.7.2 Jacking pit JP2 will be constructed with SA4 and converted into a permanent manhole cover at the end of the construction period. SA4 is, also assumed to be cleared for the works and while the size of the area has been minimised as far as possible. However, no species of conservation interest where found in the location of SA4 and JP2. Upon completion, the affected area can be reinstated and about 0.0001ha of shrubland will be permanently occupied by the final manhole in the location of JP2.

6.11.7.3 Eleven species of conservation interest were recorded in the shrubland, Aquilaria sinensis, Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Camellia euryoides, Camellia sinensis, Cibotium barometz, Ehretia acuminata, Enkianthus quinqueflorus, Geodorum densiflorum, Coelogyne fimbriata, Lilium brownie and Rhododendron farrerae. As discussed in Section 2, the alignment has been adjusted to avoid directly affecting the epithetic orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata, and, also, Rhododendron farrerae by shifting the location of Outfall B southwards.

6.11.7.4 Nonetheless, a few Camellia euryoides, and Enkianthus quinqueflorus, both protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A), would still be affected by the revised alignment and WA4/RP4. These species would still have been affected under the old scheme for access construction if the alignment has not been adjusted. With this adjustment, the orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata and also Rhododendron farrerae will now be about 15m away from the proposed works and would not be directly affected (Figure 6.5), although indirect impacts could occur.

6.11.7.5 Only three birds of conservation interest are recorded in the shrubland habitat including A Black Kite Milvus migrans, A Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo and a White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster. These were observed flying over the shrubland habitat and they are to use a series of habitats in the wider Ngong Ping area and would unlikely be indirectly affected by the proposed works.

6.11.7.6 It should be noted that the direct impacts to the shrubland habitat in the Project Area have been minimised by the adoption of the trenchless pipe jacking construction method in Works Section 6 and careful location of the stockpiling areas. The alignment has, also, been revised so that the Outfall B would avoid the orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata at the rock cliff and, also, Rhododendron farrerae close by. Given that only a small portion of the shrubland habitat will be affected and its habitat quality is only low to moderate, the overall ecological impact to the shrubland habitat is considered minor. However, as the protected Camellia euryoides and Enkianthus quinqueflorus will be directly affected, and Aquilaria sinensis, Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Coelogyne fimbriata, Ehretia acuminate and Rhododendron farrerae could still be indirectly affected as detailed above, the overall impact evaluation would be of minor significance but mitigation measures would be recommended. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.23 below.

Table 6.23 Overall Impact Evaluation for Shrubland

Evaluation Criteria	Shrubland
Habitat quality	Low to moderate
Species	Eleven species of conservation interest were identified in the shrubland, including Aquilaria sinensis, Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Camellia euryoides, Camellia sinensis, Cibotium barometz, Ehretia acuminata, Enkianthus quinqueflorus, Geodorum densiflorum, Coelogyne fimbriata, Lilium brownie and Rhododendron farrerae. Camellia euryoides and Enkianthus quinqueflorus at WA4/RP4/Outfall B will be directly affected. Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Coelogyne fimbriata and Rhododendron farrerae are at close proximity (~15m apart) to WA4/RP4/Outfall B. Three bird species of conservation interest: Black Kite Milvus migrans, Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo and White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster. None of these species shall be affected.
Size/Abundance	At the maximum of about 0.02ha will be affected temporarily including about 0.001ha permanently occupied area.
Duration	The impact will persist during the construction phases for about 14 months.
Reversibility	Habitat affected by temporary works is reversible.
Magnitude	The scale of temporary habitat loss and impact is negligible constituting 0.1% of this habitat type within the Study Area.
Overall Impact Conclusion	Minor

6.11.8 Stream

6.11.8.1 Ngong Ping Stream is the main natural stream course in the Study Area but it is fragmented by the channelised sections in the developed area. The upstream section of Ngong Ping Stream is located within the Ngong Ping SSSI and will not be affected by the project. The downstream section of Ngong Ping Stream is located within the Lantau North Country Park and runs nearly parallel to the proposed flood relief drain to be constructed in Works Section 6. However, the stream is largely outside the Project Area, except at works area WA4[1], where the receiving pit RP4 and subsequently Outfall B will be constructed. The bank-side vegetation will have to be cleared for working space and construction of a cofferdam separating the works from the stream, but otherwise there is no works proposed on the stream. Approximately 30m of the eastern stream bank at WA4 will be permanently occupied for the Outfall B. These temporary structures will be removed after the works.

6.11.8.2 Some small upstream seasonal streams in the north-eastern part of the Study Area will, also, interface with the cut-and-cover interception drain construction in Works Section 1 and the works area WA1 for receiving pit RP1. A small north-south running stream where sampling point W2 (Figure 6.2) was located (hereafter referred to as “W2 stream” for the sake of identification), is just outside the Project Area but is about 8m from WA1 and could be subject to indirect impacts from contaminated runoff from WA1. The W2 stream, also, crosses under the existing access in Works Section 1, where the cut-and-cover works are proposed, before entering a box culvert underneath the Po Lin Monastery (Figure 2.1; Portion B). This 3m stretch of underpass crossing is already concreted but will be destroyed for the trench construction. The remaining short downstream stretch of about 2m in length could be subject to indirect impact if there is contaminated runoff from Works Section 1.

6.11.8.3 There is, also, a small east-west running stream where sampling points R2 and W1 (Figure 6.2) were located. The upland stream is intercepted by the U-channel to the east of the Po Lin Monastery storage tank and leaves the tank through another U-channel to the west of the tank. The stream then runs parallel to the local access for about 50m before entering the box culvert underneath the Po Lin Monastery (Figure 2.1; Portion B) as the W2 stream. While a portion of the stream is demarcated as being within the Project Area (hereafter referred to as R2-W1 stream), there are no works proposed in the natural stream. The Intake A will connect to the existing U-channel to the east of the water storage tank rather than involving a direct connection to the natural stream. The R2-W2 stream, however, is generally only about 3m to 5m from the cut-and-cover trench and could be indirectly affected if there is contaminated run-off from the Works Section 1 and SA1.

6.11.8.4 There are no floral species of conservation interest recorded in the riparian habitat in Works Section 1 or in the upstream section of the Ngong Ping Stream in the Ngong Ping SSSI. However, two faunal species of conservation interest, the Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and freshwater stream crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) were, however, present around sampling points R2, W1 and W2 upstream and downstream of Works Section 1. These aquatic species are limited to the water courses and could be both directly or indirectly affected if they are present in the trench crossing section when the excavation is underway, although as the crossing is short (about 3m only) and already concreted, the possibility of their presence at that spot during the works is considered remote. The aquatic fauna are sensitive to water quality change, and, indirect impacts as a result of contaminated site runoff are more likely to present a significant indirect impact to them.

6.11.8.5 Another possible indirect impact to these aquatic species is blockage of the access corridor between the upstream and downstream areas. The cut and cover pipe laying works in Works Section 1 will be undertaken in the dry season (see Figure2.6a) and the crossing construction shall last for about 2 months only. Given that the water level of the stream in the dry season is generally low, about 15-20cm, a 2 months blockage of the potential access corridor during this time is not anticipated to represent a significant impact to these species.

6.11.8.6 The Outfall B in Works Section 6 interfaces with the downstream stream section of the Ngong Ping Stream and the riparian shrubland will be directly affected. As discussed above in shrubland section above, the alignment has been revised to avoid affecting the bank-side orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata, although the bank-side Camellia euryoides cannot be completely avoided. There were no fauna species of conservation interest recorded at sampling point W9 located adjacent to the WA4/Outfall B, but an individual of the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) and the freshwater Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) were noted at sampling point W8, which is about 140m upstream of W9. These two species could possibly, also, utilise the stream habitat between these two points. While direct works on the stream are not anticipated as discussed above, if individuals of these species are present at WA4/Outfall B during works, they could be disturbed by the work, although the possibility of this is likely to be low. Similar to the stream adjacent to Works Section 1, the stream near Works Section 6 could, also, be indirectly affected by construction site run-off from the works and mitigation measures would be required to minimise such impacts.

6.11.8.7 While the habitat quality of the Ngong Ping Stream in Ngong Ping SSSI is high, there are no direct or indirect impacts predicted and, therefore, the overall impact would be insignificant. In respect of the other section of the stream, while bankside works will be conducted in the dry season, will be short term and the habitat is of only low to moderate quality, there is a small habitat loss, some of it permanent and the presence of the both floral and faunal species of conservation interest that would be directly and indirectly affected would results in an overall minor impact. The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.24 below.

Table 6.24 Overall Impact Evaluation for Stream

Evaluation Criteria	Stream*	Ngong Ping Stream in Ngong Ping SSSI**
Habitat quality	Low to moderate	High
Species	Four floral species Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Coeloyne fimbriata, Camellia euryoides and Rhododendron farrerae were recorded in the riparian shrubland in the Project Area. Only Camellia euryoides will be directly affected. Three fauna species Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii), Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) were recorded in the stream habitats inside and outside the Project Area, and these may be directly and indirectly affected.	No floral species of conservation interest recorded in the riparian habitat. Known habitat for Romer’s Tree Frog (AFCD, 2006a). Stream Crab Somanniathelphusa zanklon recorded.
Size/Abundance	0.03ha stream area (130 m stream stretch) is within the Project Area and would be temporary affected. Approximately 0.003ha riparian habitat (32m stream stretch) will be permanently occupied.	No impacts anticipated
Duration	The direct impact (stream crossing at Works Section 1) will persist for about two months only. The indirect impact will persist during the construction phases for about 30 months for the upstream end, 14 months for the downstream Ngong Ping Stream.	No impacts anticipated
Reversibility	Habitat affected by temporary works is reversible. The permanent loss for Outfall B is irreversible.	--
Magnitude	The scale of temporary habitat loss and impact is small as it constitutes 1.7% of this habitat area (0.16% in length) within the Study Area. The scale of permanent habitat loss and impact is negligible as it does constitutes about 0.003ha (0.17%) of this habitat area within the Study Area	No impacts anticipated
Overall Impact Conclusion	Minor	Insignificant

* excluding Ngong Ping Stream inside the Ngong Ping SSSI.

** EIS= Ecologically Important Stream/River as defined under ETWB 5/2005. SSSI = Site of Special Scientific Interest.

6.11.9 Channelised Watercourse

6.11.9.1 The main channelised watercourses in the Study Area are the open channel to the right of Lin Ping Drive at the beginning of Portion E (see Figure 2.1), and the gabion channel to the north of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal, Portion F and about a 115m stretch of these channels are located within the Project Area, although the directly affected section will be limited to a shorter interfacing area where the Intakes B and C and Outfall A will be constructed. The cut-and-cover construction of the box culvert in Works Section 4 begins at the upstream open channel near the Lin Ping Drive and it is, also, the place where Intake B will be constructed and directly interface with the open channel, but only on the north-eastern bank for about 6m. The cut-and-cover construction of the box-culvert in Works Section 5 ends at the downstream gabion channel to the west of the “Walking with Buddha” attraction where Outfall A will be constructed and will directly interface with the gabion channel on the northern bank for about 7m only. The associated works and stockpiling areas adjacent to the open and gabion channels are SA2 and SA3, respectively.

6.11.9.2 Further downstream of the gabion channel, near to the north side of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal, receiving pit RP3 and the Intake C for the pipe jacking flood relief drain in Works Section 6 will be constructed on the northern bank only. The associated works area WA3 on the channel bank will be about 22m long, although the width of the Intake C is only about 10m wide. The existing channel wall at the interfacing section will have to be removed for construction of a temporary cofferdam to separate the water in the channel from the works area. The temporary structure will be removed after works have been completed, although the intakes and outfall structure will replace the occupied channel wall. The Intakes B and C and Outfall A will, ultimately, form part of the artificial channel and, hence, there will be no permanent habitat loss.

6.11.9.3 A few individuals of the protected orchid Geodorum densiflorum were found on the southern bank of the gabion channel to the north of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal. Although this section of the gabion channel is defined as within the Project Area for WA3, the works will be on the northern bank only and there are about a 20m separation distance between the southern and northern crests of the banks. Hence, the orchid will not be directly affected. Trees will be retained as far as possible and only 1 deadwood will have to be felled. Indirect impacts are, also, not anticipated as the scale of the proposed works at WA3 is very small and limited to the small excavation of receiving pit RP3 of about 4m (W) x 5m (L) in size (or about 20m²) and for the in-situ casting of Intake C.

6.11.9.4 During the wet season survey, an Eastern Cattle Egret (Bubulcus coromandus) was recorded foraging in the gabion channel to the north of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal. The Eastern Cattle Egret is likely to utilise the entire stream and watercourse in the area rather than be restricted to a particular locality and indeed it was not subsequently observed in the dry season surveys. Therefore, direct impacts to this species are unlikely. Indirect impacts, in terms of temporary habitat unavailability, are not anticipated to be significant as the majority of the channel and natural stream course in the area will still be available. Even if the channel within the Project Area is affected, there will still be over 75% of channel length in the Study Area unaffected. Also, given the availability of the larger study area for the Eastern Cattle Egret and the fact that works at WA4 and RP3 are likely last for only about 2 months at the most (see Figure 2.8b), disturbance impacts to this species, if any, will be temporary and unlikely to be of significance given the small scale of works.

6.11.9.5 Because the artificial channel does not support good biodiversity even though it has been gabion-lined to enhance vegetation growth, the direct and indirect impacts to the channel itself are considered to be insignificant.

6.11.9.6 The indirect impacts to the downstream natural section of the Ngong Ping Stream due to discharge of contaminated site run-off is discussed in under Steam in Section 6.11.8 above.

6.11.9.7 The gabion channel to the north of the Ngong Ping 360 Terminal was constructed and is operated under the Tung Chung Cable Car Project - Diversion of the Ngong Ping Stream as detailed in the Project Profile (Register No. PP-193/2003) and the Environmental Permit (Register No. EP-192/2004). The mitigation measures proposed under the Environmental Permit EP-192/2004 were mainly applicable at time of its construction when the natural stream was modified and should not be applicable to any future works in the constructed gabion channel as the channelised section does not now any support diverse ecology nor species of conservation interest, especially in the area of the affected stretch (Outfall A and Intake C) in this Project. The operation of the gabion channel was, also, governed by EP-192/2004, which, however, was surrendered in May 2007. Nonetheless, the specific conditions of EP-192/2004 (see Section 2.7.7) will be followed, as far as practicable, to ensure the aquatic environment will not be unduly affected.

6.11.9.8 Based on the current programme (Figure 2.8b), the first half of pipe jacking works will reach the receiving pit RP3 at WA3 in around April. While it is possible to construct the RP3 just before the jacking head reaches RP3 in order to minimise works in the wet season, RP3 will constructed at the beginning of dry season in October of the previous year. However, RP3 cannot be converted to Intake C until the pipe-jacking works for that section of the drain have been completed which is anticipated be in the early wet season in April. The pit for the construction of Intake C will not be left exposed over the entire wet season as this would results in additional impacts. Therefore, as the programme cannot be changed, additional mitigation to control run-off during the works at Intake C in the early wet season in April will be required.

6.11.9.9 The overall impact evaluation for this habitat is given in Table 6.25 below.

Table 6.25 Overall Impact Evaluation for Channalised Watercourse

Evaluation Criteria	Channalised Watercourse
Habitat quality	Low
Species	A protected orchid Geodorum densiflorum was recorded on the southern bank of gabion channel. Impacts are not anticipated as works are limited to the northern bank of the channel. One bird species of conservation interest, the Eastern Cattle Egret (Bubulcus coromandus) was recorded in the channalised watercourse. The species is unlikely to be directly affected. Indirect impact is expected to be minimal.
Size/Abundance	Approximate 0.02ha channel area (115m linear stretch) is within the Project Area although the actually affected area will be limited to the shorter 45m directly interfacing stretch.
Duration	The impact will persist during the construction phases for about 3 to 6 months for each interfacing area.
Reversibility	Habitat affected by temporary works is reversible.
Magnitude	The scale of temporary habitat loss and impact is moderate as it constitutes approximately 3.1% of this habitat area (24% in length) within the Study Area.
Overall Impact Conclusion	Insignificant

6.11.10 Works Areas

6.11.10.1 The proposed project does not require off-site construction areas, although a series of works areas (WA) and stockpile areas (SA) have been designated along the alignment within the overall Project Area. The Project Area and these designated areas are indicated in Figure 2.9a - 2.9g. Nine major working areas can be identified and detailed description of these areas is given in Table 2.13. It should be noted that while specific works areas (WA) and stockpiling areas (SA) are defined, for the cut-and-cover construction sections, that is Works Sections 1, 3, 4 and 5, the works and small amount of temporary stockpiling will be spread along the alignment within the Project Area. The potential ecological impacts of the works to the designated and non-designated areas are already covered in the relevant habitat assessment above.

6.11.11 Overall Impact to Species of Conservation Interest

6.11.11.1 Fourteen floral species and nine faunal species of conservation interest were recorded during the surveys. None of the faunal species of conservation interest were recorded in the Project Area and, thus, these will not be subject to direct impacts. However, three aquatic species were are found in close vicinity to the Project Area and could be subject to indirect impacts, potentially a result of any water quality deterioration due to the release of contaminated construction site run-off. The three aquatic species may also be subject to direct impacts if they happened to be present in the bank-side works area when the works commence in Works Section 1.

6.11.11.2 Ten floral species of conservation interest were found within the Project Area and two of these were in the designated working areas (WA/SA) and would be directly affected.

6.11.11.3 Potential impacts to species of conservation interest recorded have been assessed along with the habitat evaluation above. A summary of potential construction impacts to all species of conservation interest recorded is presented in Table 6.26.

Table 6.26 Overall Impact to Species of Conservation Interest

Species / Group	Location Recorded			Significance of Potential Impacts
	Study Area (excluding PA)	Project Area (PA)	Designated Area in PA	Direct	Indirect
Flora
1. Incense Tree Aquilaria sinensis	Secondary woodland	Plantation woodland and shrubland	-	No	No
2. Ambrosia Orchid Bulbophyllum ambrosia	-	Riparian shrubland	-	No	Yes
3. Eurya-leaved Camellia Camellia euryoides	Riparian secondary woodland	Riparian shrubland	WA4	Yes	No
4. Tea Camellia sinensis	Agricultural land, secondary woodland and shrubland	Developed area	-	No	No
5. Lamb of Tartary Cibotium barometz	Shrubland, secondary woodland	-	-	No	No
6. Brown Rock-orchid Coelogyne fimbriata	-	Riparian shrubland	-	No	Yes
7. Heliotrope Ehretia Ehretia acuminata	Developed area	Plantation woodland and shrubland	-	No	No
8. Chinese New Year Flower Enkianthus quinqueflorus	Shrubland	Shrubland	WA4	Yes	No
9. Walking-stick Orchid Geodorum densiflorum	Shrubland	Gabion channel	-	No	No
10. Small-fruited Honeylocust Gleditsia australis	-	Plantation	-	No	No
11. Chinese Lily Lilium brownii	Shrubland	-	-	No	No
12. Hong Kong Pavetta Pavetta hongkongensis	Plantation	-	-	No	No
13. Mrs. Farrer’s Rhododendron Rhododendron farrerae	Riparian plantation	Shrubland	-	No	Yes
14. Rungia pectinata	Secondary Woodland	-	-	No	No
Mammals
15. Himalayan Leaf-nosed Bat Hipposideros armiger	Developed area	-	-	No	No
16. Japanese Pipistrelle Pipistrellus abramus	Developed area and plantation	-	-	No	No
Avifauna
17. Eastern Cattle Egret Bubulcus coromandus	Gabion channel	-	-	No	No
18. Black Kite Milvus migrans	Secondary woodland and shrubland	-	-	No	No
19. White-bellied Sea Eagle Haliaeetus leucogaster	Shrubland	-	-	No	No
20. Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo	Shrubland	-	-	No	No
Reptiles
21. Reeves’ Terrapin Mauremys reevesii	Stream (sampling point W8)	-	-	Possible^(3)	Yes
Amphibians
22. Lesser Spiny Frog Quasipaa exilispinosa	Stream (sampling point R2, W1 and W2)	-	-	Possible^(3)	Yes
Freshwater Macroinvertebrate
23. Stream Crab Somanniathelphusa zanklon	Stream (sampling points R1, R2, R6, W2 and W8)	-	-	Possible^(3)	Yes
No of floral species of conservation interest^(1)	11	10	2	2	3
No of faunal species conservation interest^(2)	9	0	0	0	3
Overall Impact Conclusion				Minor	Minor

Notes:

1. Please refer to Table 6.5 for the status of individual floral species of conservation interest.

2. Please refer to Table 6.6 for the status of faunal species of conservation interest.

3. These aquatic species have limited mobility and were not observed in the works area during the surveys. However, the directly affected stream stretch is a suitable habitat for them and they could be present when the construction works begin.

6.11.12 Summary of Overall Construction Phase Impacts Evaluation

6.11.12.1 The potential ecological impacts during the construction phase have been evaluated above and are summarised in Table 6.27 below. Overall, because of the small scale of the proposed works, the alignment being largely in the already developed area of low habitat quality and the ecological value of other affected habitats being generally low or low to moderate, the potential impacts are predicted to be insignificant or minor. The minor impacts are predicted for a few habitat types mainly because species of conservation interest could be affected.

Table 6.27 Summary of Construction Phase Impacts

General Impact	Specific Impact	Severity of Impact	Mitigation Required	Enhancement Recommended
Habitat Loss	Maximum temporary loss of about 0.03ha agricultural land. No permanent loss of agricultural land.	Minor	No	No
	Maximum temporary loss of about 0.29ha developed area. No permanent loss of developed area.	Insignificant	No	No
	Maximum temporary loss of about 0.03ha plantation woodland. Maximum permanent loss of about 0.002ha plantation woodland.	Minor	No	Yes
	Maximum temporary loss of about 0.07ha secondary woodland. Maximum permanent loss of about 0.0003ha secondary woodland.	Minor	No	Yes
Habitat Loss	Maximum temporary loss of about 0.02ha shrubland. Maximum permanent loss of about 0.001ha shrubland.	Minor	No	Yes
	Loss of a few individuals of Camellia euryoides and of Enkianthus quinqueflorus as a result of Works Area WA4.	Minor	Yes (Avoidance)	No
	Maximum temporary loss of 0.03ha (130m) stream bankside. Maximum permanent loss of about 0.003ha (32m) stream bankside.	Minor	No	Yes
	Maximum temporary loss of about 0.02ha (115m) channelised watercourse. No permanent loss of channelised watercourse.	Insignificant	No	No
Disturbance	Potential disturbance to orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia and Coelogyne fimbriata and Rhododendron farrerae, close to WA4.	Minor	Yes (Avoidance)	No
	Potential direct impacts to the Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and freshwater stream crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) as a result of construction of the trench crossing section in Works Section 1.	Minor	Yes (Avoidance)	No
	Potential direct impact to the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) and the freshwater Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) as a result of works in WA4/Outfall B in Works Section 6.	Minor	Yes (Avoidance)	No
Construction Run-off	Indirect impacts to the Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and freshwater stream crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) during cut-and-cover trench works in Works Section 1 and SA1 close to stream R2-W2.	Minor	Yes (Minimisation)	No
	Indirect impact to the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) and the freshwater Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) as a result of works in WA4/Outfall B in Works Section 6.	Minor	Yes (Minimisation)	No
	Indirect affects to water quality in Works Section 1 and 6 including works at Intake C in the early wet season in April.	Minor	Yes (Minimisation)	No

6.12 Pre-Construction and Construction Phase Mitigation Measures

6.12.1 Hierarchy of Impact Mitigation

6.12.1.1 Annex 16 of the EIAO-TM states that the general policy for mitigation of significant ecological impacts, in order of priority, is:

(a) Avoidance: Potential impacts shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable by adopting suitable alternatives;

(b) Minimisation: Unavoidable impacts shall be minimised by taking appropriate and practicable measures such as constraints on intensity of works operations or timing of works operations; and

(c) Compensation: The loss of important species and habitats may be provided for elsewhere as compensation. Enhancement and other conservation measures shall always be considered whenever possible.

6.12.1.2 The proposed alignment and chosen construction methods have already substantially avoided and minimised potential ecological impacts by design, as summarised below:

· No widening / training of the existing natural streams by providing an alternate floodway;

· Works in or close to the natural stream to be limited to the construction of interfacing Intake A and Outfall B;

· The adoption of the trenchless construction method in Works Sections 2 and 6 will minimise the extent of direct impacts, especially to the shrubland and plantation woodland areas within the Lantau North Country Park (Works Section 6);

· The adoption of an underground drainage system instead of open channel and, hence, reduction of permanent habitat loss;

· Alignment has been fine tuned to avoid direct impacts on two orchid species near WA4 (Works Section 6);

· Reduction of the stockpiling area SA1 in the Conservation Area in Works Section 1 from 0.02ha to the current 0.01ha, thus, reducing the potential to generated contaminated run-off next to the natural stream;

· Reduction of the portion of stockpiling area SA2 located within the secondary woodland from 0.09ha to the current 0.04ha, reducing temporary habitat loss and removal of trees to about 42 trees; and

· Relocation of stockpiling areas SA4 to avoid species of conservation interest.

6.12.1.3 Further minimisation of construction impacts can also be achieved through good construction practice measures which should be implemented and should include:

· avoid damage and disturbance to the remaining and surrounding natural habitat;

· placement of equipment in designated areas within the existing disturbed land;

· spoil heaps should be covered at all times;

· construction activities should be restricted to the designated works areas; and

· disturbed areas to be reinstated immediately after completion of the works.

6.12.1.4 Further mitigation measures for the specific pre-construction and construction phase impacts identified are discussed in the sections below.

6.12.2 Habitat Loss

Habitats

6.12.2.1 With the above design consideration, the habitats directly affected by the proposed Project have been reduced to a total of 0.47ha which is only about 0.3% of the habitat within the Study Area. The permanently affected total habitat, comprising developed land, plantation woodland, secondary woodland and shrubland, is a small proportion of this at 0.02ha, which is about 0.008% (Table 6.17) of the available habitat. The ecological impacts from the proposed project to the various habitats have been ranked between “insignificant” and “minor” as summarised in Table 6.27.

6.12.2.2 The impacts to the stream bankside, agricultural land, shrubland, plantation woodland and secondary woodland areas have been ranked as “minor” as the areas are relatively small and the habitats will be restored once the temporary works are completed but some enhancement tree planting and hydroseeding is recommended.

6.12.2.3 A total of 0.43ha of landscape compensatory planting is recommended as mitigation for the loss of landscape (refer to Section 7 and Figures 7.9a-7.9e ), but, in addition, this will, also, serve the function as an enhancement to the tree and habitat loss as a result of drainage improvement works. The following species of trees are recommended (Table 6.28):

Table 6.28 Recommended Planting Species

Floral Type	Botanical Name
Trees	Cinnamomum burmannii Elaeocarpus sylvestris Ficus microcarpa Pongamia pinnata Schefflera heptaphylla Sapium discolor

6.12.2.4 For the temporary and permanent loss of the 0.03ha of stream bankside, 0.03ha of agricultural land, 0.03ha of plantation woodland, 0.07ha secondary woodland and 0.02ha shrubland, 0.43ha of tree planting and hydroseeding would be planted in designated areas along the alignment as an enhancement measure. As the stream bankside, plantation woodland and shrubland are of low to moderate ecological value and partly fragmented, the planting of native trees would be effective in replacing this habitat. Also, while the secondary woodland habitat is of moderate ecological quality, the majority of the trees within this habitat will not be removed as a result of the works areas with only 31 secondary woodland live trees being required to be felled, while about 89 heavy standard native trees will be provided on a 1:1 ratio for all live trees to be felled as part of the landscape proposal. As such, while time is required for the compensatory planted trees to reach the same level of maturity, as the largely temporary loss of 0.07ha of secondary woodland is a small fraction of the 79.65ha available in the overall Study Area, it is considered that equivalent planting of native species would be sufficient to replace this habitat.

Species of Conservation Interest

6.12.2.5 The direct loss of some floral species of conservation interest (Table 6.26 and 6.27), all within Works Section 6, have been ranked as “minor” and transplantation is recommended.

6.12.2.6 As detailed in Table 6.27 above, there is predicted to be a direct loss of three individuals of Camellia euryoides and some species of Enkianthus quinqueflorus as a result of Works Area WA4. Camellia euryoides is protected under the Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A) and the distribution of Camellia euryoides is identified as restricted by Xing et al (2000). Enkianthus quinqueflorus is protected but they are actually common in their recorded habitats in Hong Kong (Siu 2000, Xing et al. 2000).

6.12.2.7 Notwithstanding, given the small numbers of individuals involved, the ecological effect of their loss would be minor and transplanting the directly affected individuals will be an effective mitigation measure.

Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey

6.12.2.8 In respect of all the floral species of conservation interest, as there will be a time lapse until the start of the construction contract and given the dynamic nature of the natural environment, it is recommended that prior to the site clearance works, an “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey” shall be conducted by a qualified ecologist and land surveyor of the Environmental Team (ET) to reconfirm the presence of the floral species of conservation interest in the Project Area within Works Section 6. This will allow a more focused plan of transplantation or protection to be formed.   The position of each individual floral species of conservation interest, including those listed in Table 6.26 and any new species found, shall be precisely recorded in 1:500 topographical maps.

6.12.2.9 Based on the survey finding, the Environmental Team (ET) ecologist, in association with the Contractor shall review if these species can be preserved in-situ or have to be transplanted. Wherever possible, priority shall be given to in-situ preservation over off-site transplantation. An evaluation of the recommended mitigation measures are presented in Table 6.27, although these will be subject to confirmation following the Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey.

6.12.2.10 The ecologist(s) of the Environmental Team shall seek the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Environmental Protection Department and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s approval on the “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey”. The “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey” report shall be submitted at least two months before the works commence.

Floral Protection Plan

6.12.2.11 Based upon the findings of the “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey”, for the individual species of conservation interest that can be in-situ preserved, the ET shall prepare a “Floral Protection Plan” for each species for submission at least one month in advance of the works commencing to specifically define the protection measures required in each case. The possible measures for in-situ preservation include:

· Restricting access to the floral species of conservation interest by mean of fencing, railing or temporary barriers. Enclosing or bunding of the species shall be considered as the last resort;

· Restricting the works activities to within designated works area by mean of fencing, railing or temporary barrier; and

· Controlling site-runoff if the species are located downstream of works area.

6.12.2.12 Whenever possible, it is recommended that solid fencing be erected at the access entrance to the floral species to be protected before the commencement of works to prevent vehicle movements and encroachment of personnel into adjacent areas where these species are located. All the proposed in-situ preservation measures shall be audited by the ET at least monthly to ensure that the approved “Floral Protection Plan” is properly implemented and that damage does not occur to the flora being protected and, also, the surrounding environment. In addition, environmental briefing/training sessions should be provided and scheduled for site staff to raise their awareness on environmental protection.

6.12.2.13 The ecologist(s) of the Environmental Team shall seek the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Environmental Protection Department and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s approval on the “Floral Protection Plan” prior to implementing the recommendations.

Floral Transplantation Plan

6.12.2.14 Based upon the findings of the “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey”, for those species that cannot be preserved in-situ, each shall be transplanted. The ET shall submit a detailed “Floral Transplantation Plan” for each species for submission at least two months in advance of the works commencing, which shall include details such as the species and number to be transplanted, the programme and reception site. If the affected individual is deem not suitable for transplantation due to factors such poor health or anticipated low post-transplantation survival rate, compensatory planting may be considered as an alternative.

6.12.2.15 The ecologist(s) of the Environmental Team shall seek the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Environmental Protection Department and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s approval of the “Floral Transplantation Plan”, including the receptor site(s), before implementing the recommendations of the plan. The transplantation works will be undertaken in the pre-construction phase and at least 1 week before works commence.

6.12.2.16 Following the transplantation, in order to ensure the transplantation is providing an effective mitigation measure, post-transplantation monitoring would be required. The post-transplantation monitoring shall be conducted monthly for the first 12 months and then quarterly for a further 12 months. Given the works contract is approximately 30 months, all the post-transplantation monitoring would be undertaken within the construction phase. Should the survival rate of the transplanted individual be found to be unacceptably low, then the Environmental Team shall propose alternative compensation methods, such as seed collection or planting of new individuals of the same species after the works area has been reinstated. If required, a “Compensatory Planting Plan” shall be prepared by the ET and submitted to the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Environmental Protection Department and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s for approval before implementing the recommendations of the plan. The “Compensatory Planting Plan” shall include details of the implementation programme and methodology for any proposed compensatory planting for species of conservation interest.

6.12.3 Disturbance

Floral Species of Conservation Interest

6.12.3.1 The indirect potential disturbance to some floral species of conservation interest (Table 6.26 and 6.27), all within Works Section 6, have been ranked as “minor” and protection measures are recommended. Potential impacts could occur to the orchids Bulbophyllum ambrosia, Coelogyne fimbriata and species Rhododendron farrerae close to WA4 and proper protection would be required.

6.12.3.2 As noted above in Section 6.12.2 for species potentially directly affected but ultimately concluded as not being suitable for transplantation, an “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey” to confirm the presence of the species, followed by a “Floral Protection Plan” for each species would be required to be prepared by a qualified ecologist(s) within two and one month of the commencement of the works respectively. The ecologist(s) of the Environmental Team shall seek the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Environmental Protection Department and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s approval of the “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey” and “Floral Protection Plan”, before implementation.

6.12.3.3 The possible measures for in-situ preservation are detailed in Section 6.12.2.12 above.

Faunal Species of Conservation Interest

6.12.3.4 Disturbance impacts of minor significance have been predicted as a result of the potential for direct impacts to the Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and freshwater stream crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) during construction of the trench crossing section in Works Section 1. Direct disturbance impacts to the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) and the freshwater Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) as a result of works in WA4/Outfall B in Works Section 6 are, also, predicted.

Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan

6.12.3.5 Although the fauna species of conservation interest in the natural streams were not recorded within the Project Area, as the stream and tributaries are connected, these species could be present in the Project Area at the time the works commence. Therefore, as an avoidance measure, it is considered necessary to prepare an “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan”. A qualified ecologist as part of the ET shall prepare and submit an “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan” at least two months in advance of the works commencing, which shall include details such as the species, potential numbers, methodology for survey and translocation for each species, the programme and reception sites.

6.12.3.6 The ET shall seek approval of the “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan” by the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s and the DEP.

Aquatic Fauna Translocation Survey

6.12.3.7 Based upon the approval of the “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan”, an “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Survey” will be conducted at the affected sections of the stream courses, at Works Sections 1 and 6, prior to site clearance works. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified ecologist as part of the ET and cover the stretch of the stream course 5m upstream and downstream of the works and identify potential receptor sites. Any aquatic fauna species of conservation found shall be collected and translocated to the approved translocation receptor site on the same survey date. Since the species are mostly nocturnal, the translocation survey shall be conducted at night-time. However, the translocation works shall be undertaken no more than a week before the relevant site works.

6.12.3.8 An “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Survey” report shall be prepared by a qualified ecologist of the Environmental Team (ET) and submitted within 2 weeks of the translocation works for approved by the Engineer, the Independent Environmental Checker (IEC), Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department’s and the DEP.

6.12.4 Construction Run-off

6.12.4.1 There were no aquatic species of conservation interest recorded within the Project Area. However, three aquatic fauna species of conservation interest, the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii), Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and the Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon), were recorded in close vicinity to the proposed works and may be indirectly affected as a result of construction run-off or indirect effects on water quality from the same source. While the species diversity of the aquatic system is not high, possibility due to historical pollution, the aquatic ecosystem of the natural stream can be vulnerable to impacts of uncontrolled sediment laden / contaminated construction run-off and, therefore, controlling the discharge of site runoff is required to mitigate the potential minor impacts. Downstream water quality, also, has the potential to be affected by construction run-off and a minor impact would be predicted if not mitigated.

6.12.4.2 Indirect impacts to the Lesser Spiny Frog (Quasipaa exilispinosa) and freshwater stream crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) could occur during the cut-and-cover trench works in Works Section 1 and SA1 close to stream R2-W2 and to the Reeves’ Terrapin (Mauremys reevesii) and the freshwater Stream Crab (Somanniathelphusa zanklon) as a result of works in WA4/Outfall B in Works Section 6.

6.12.4.3 Minimisation mitigation measures required to protect water quality and the three aquatic faunal species of conservation would comprise controlling surface run-off. A series of mitigation measures to effective minimise water quality impacts potential arise from the project and accidental spillage have been recommended in Section 5. Strict compliance of the recommendation in Section 5 will also ensure the indirect impact to ecology, in particular the aquatic system, will be minimal. These control measures largely follow the Practice Note for Professional Persons on Construction Site Drainage, Environmental Protection Department, 1994 (ProPECC PN 1/94). The more essential recommendation are briefly summarised below:

· All works on the banks of the natural stream should be undertaken within the dry season, where practical;

· Perimeter cut-off drains to direct off-site water around the site should be constructed with internal drainage works and erosion and sedimentation control facilities implemented;

· Channels (both temporary and permanent drainage pipes and culverts), earth bunds or sand bag barriers should be provided to divert the stormwater to silt removal facilities;

· Oil interceptors should be provided in the drainage system downstream of any oil/fuel pollution sources;

· Stockpiled material shall be covered by tarpaulin and /or watered as appropriate to prevent windblown dust and surface run off;

· Overnight stockpiling of earthed material along the exposed trench shall be minimised as far as possible and excavated soil shall be transferred to the designated stockpiling area as soon as possible;

· All bentonite slurry shall be suitably stored in accordance with Section 5.8.8 of this EIA Report to minimise the chance of spillage;

· All fuel tanks and storage areas should be provided with locks and sited on sealed areas, within bunds of a capacity equal to 110% of the storage capacity of the largest tank to prevent spilled fuel oils; and

· Pipe jacking areas shall be closely monitored for frac-outs release of bentonite and frac-out area immediately cleaned if they occur.

6.12.4.4 The particular measures to protect the ecology of the Lantau North Country Park are summarised below:

· Major stockpiled areas shall be sited outside of the country parks area (Works Section 6) and away from stream courses as far as practicable;

· All backfilling material and cement required for Works Section 6 shall be delivered only in the quantities required;

· No storage of chemical waste in Works Section 6; and

· No construction plant maintenance facilities in Works Section 6.

6.12.4.5 Also, as detailed in Section 2.5.6, the location of Stockpiling Area SA4, has been relocated during the design evolution stage of the project to avoid floral species of conservation interest. In addition to the above, to prevent stream bank erosion and directly affect the stream ecology, treated site drainage shall be discharged via the existing drainage system or diverted to the artificial channel. No site drainage shall be allowed to be discharged at the natural stream bank.

6.12.4.6 Mitigation measures to preserve ecological resources within and at the border of the site works area including have been recommended. Considering the uncertainty associated with transplantation or translocation for the species of conservation interest, the ET will be required to carry out the audit and monitoring for post-transplantation or post-translocation as specified in the EM&A Manual under separated cover. In addition to this, the ET will recommend supplementary measures, if needed, such as compensatory planting of rare species seedlings.

6.12.5 Summary of Implementation and Audit of Pre-Construction and Construction Phase Mitigation Measures

6.12.5.1 A summary of the proposed mitigation measures and their respective implementation phase (pre-construction or construction) is provided in Table 6.29 below.

Table 6.29 Summary of Pre-Construction and Construction Phase Mitigation Measures

Mitigation Measures	Implementation Phase
	Pre-Construction	Construction
Habitat Loss
Enhancement Planting	-	Y
Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey	Y	-
Preparation of Floral Protection Plan	Y	-
Auditing of Floral Protection Plan	-	Y
Preparation of Floral Transplantation Plan	Y	-
Floral Transplantation Works	Y	-
Auditing of Transplantation Works	-	Y
Disturbance
Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey	Y	-
Preparation of Floral Protection Plan	Y	-
Auditing of Floral Protection Plan	-	Y
Preparation of Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan	Y	-
Aquatic Fauna Translocation Survey and Translocation Works	Y	-
Construction Run-off
Run-off control	-	Y

6.13 Operation Phase Impact Assessment

6.13.1.1 As described in Section 2.7.7, the proposed underground drainage system will be operated by gravity and no pumping stations or similar active systems are required. Therefore, active management of the drainage system is not required during the operational stage. While maintenance desilting may be required, the frequency is expected to be low (at most once a year), and limited at the sand traps at the intakes. However, the disposal of any removed silt material shall be properly handled in accordance with the recommendations in Section 9 of this EIA Report.

6.13.1.2 Weir walls, of at least 500mm in height at all intakes and outfalls or equivalent (e.g. by raising the invert level of the new drain above the existing stream/channel bed), have been recommended at the inception of the EIA study to ensure the normal flow of existing watercourse is not interrupted during the operational stage. These will ensure the existing hydrology, and, hence the aquatic environment and ecology will not be adversely affected.

6.14 Operation Phase Mitigation Measures

6.14.1.1 As discussed above, the proposed drainage system will provide a by-pass floodway during periods of high flows which will require minimal maintenance requirements. Thus, the project is not anticipated to induce any adverse ecological impacts during the operational phase and operational phase mitigation measures are not required. Nevertheless, if desiliting works at the intakes are found to be required, it is recommended as a precautionary measure that works shall be conducted during the dry season to avoid any secondary impacts due to temporary deterioration of water quality.

6.14.1.2 Weir walls, of at least 500mm in height or equivalent approved by the Engineer, shall be included in the drainage design at all intakes and outfalls to ensure the normal flow of existing watercourse is not interrupted during the operational stage.

6.14.1.3 The gabion channel at the north Ngong Ping 360 Terminal was constructed and operated under the Tung Chung Cable Car Project - Diversion of the Ngong Ping Stream as detailed in the Project Profile (Register No. PP-193/2003) and the Environmental Permit (Register No. EP-192/2004). The specific environmental mitigation measures for its operation as summarised in Section 2.7.7 shall also be followed by this Project.

6.15 Cumulative Impacts

6.15.1.1 As discussed in Section 2, there are no known concurrent projects in the Study Area that may cause cumulative impacts with the Project.

6.15.1.2 The natural streams flow would not be affected by the upgraded works of the proposed drainage system as a result of wier walls that are at least 500mm or equivalent. They would take the overflow and would ensure the normal flow of existing watercourses.

6.16 Residual Impacts

6.16.1.1 The residual impacts refer to the net impacts after mitigation, taking into account the background environmental conditions and the impacts from existing, committed and planned projects. Residual impacts associated with the construction have been assessed but no quantification of residual impacts is required.

6.16.1.2 With implementation of the above mitigation measures and following the re-establishment of vegetation in reinstated works areas, it was considered that the proposed project would have insignificant long-term, unacceptable residual terrestrial ecological impacts.

6.16.1.3 In addition, the extent of ecology nuisance would be unlikely to induce any adverse impacts to the health of biota or risk to life.

6.17 Environmental Monitoring and Audit Requirements

6.17.1.1 The implementation of the ecological mitigation measures described in Sections 6.12 and 6.14 will be audited as part of the EM&A procedures during the construction period. Environmental audit is needed to ensure the ecological impacts from the construction of the Project are kept within acceptable levels, and the application and mitigation measures are practical and effective. Further details of the specific EM&A requirements are detailed in Section 10 of this report and in the EM&A Manual.

6.18 Summary and Conclusions

6.18.1.1 The potential ecological impacts have been substantially reduced by adoption of the terrestrial by-pass routing instead of direct widening and training of the natural Ngong Ping Stream. Permanent impacts have been further reduced by the adoption of underground drainage instead of open channel. Potential ecological impacts during the construction phase have been identified as temporary loss of mostly relatively low ecological value habitats although small amount of woodland habitat will also be affected, permanent loss of relatively low ecological value habitats, indirect impacts due to sedimentation and contamination, and indirect disturbance. The size of the affected natural habitat is small and the duration of impacts are generally short. Landscape compensatory planting is recommended as mitigation for the loss of landscape and this will, also, serve the function as an enhancement to the tree and habitat loss as a result of drainage improvement works. Hence, with the implementation of enhancement planting, adverse ecological impacts to the habitats in the Project Area are not anticipated.

6.18.1.2 The impacts on the agricultural land have been investigated to assess how the construction works could affect the local communities. The impacts on the fisheries activities are not relevant to this project and, therefore, have not been assessed.

6.18.1.3 Ecological mitigation and enhancement measures, therefore, focus on protection of species of conservation interest that may be affected. Species specific mitigation measures including an “Updated Baseline Vegetation Survey”, a “Floral Protection Plan” and a “Floral Transplantation Plan” have been recommended to avoid and minimise direct and indirect impact on floral species of conservation interest. If required, a “Compensatory Planting Plan” shall be prepared before implementing the recommendations of the “Floral Transplantation Plan”. In terms of aquatic fauna, an “Aquatic fauna Translocation Survey” and an “Aquatic Fauna Translocation Plan” are recommended for translocation of aquatic fauna species of conservation.

6.18.1.4 The implementation of the good construction site practices in accordance with the EPD’s ProPECC PN 1/94 Construction Site Drainage to control indirect impacts due to sedimentation and contamination is of equal importance. Specific restriction of works at the Lantau North Country Park is, also, recommended. With the above measures, residual impacts would not be anticipated.

6.18.1.5 Weir walls, of at least 500mm in height or equivalent, shall be constructed at all intakes and outfalls as planned to ensure the normal flow of existing watercourse is not interrupted during the operational stage. Hence, the aquatic ecology of the Study Area will not be affected by the proposed project.

6.18.1.6 Since Outfall A and Intake C and the associated works area are within the gabion channel, the construction and operation (maintenance desilting works, if any) of both shall comply with the Specific Conditions of EP-192/2004 (see Section 2).

6.19 References

AFCD. (2003). Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, Hong Kong.

AFCD. (2004). Check List of Hong Kong Plants. Hong Kong Herbarium, AFCD.

AFCD. (2005). A Field Guide to the Amphibians of Hong Kong. Friends of Country Park.

AFCD. (2006a). AFCD Website. Romer’s Tree Frog – Conservation. Available at: http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/con_fau/con_fau_rom/con_fau_rom_con/con_fau_rom_con.html. Visited on Jan 2012.

AFCD. (2006b). A Field Guide to the Venomous Land Snakes of Hong Kong. Friends of Country Park.

AFCD. (2007). Flora of Hong Kong Volume 1. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, Hong Kong.

AFCD. (2008). Flora of Hong Kong Volume 2. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, Hong Kong.

AFCD. (2009). Flora of Hong Kong Volume 3. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, Hong Kong.

AFCD. (2011). Flora of Hong Kong Volume 4. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administration Region, Hong Kong.

Carey, G. (1996). Hong Kong Bird Report 1995. Hong Kong Birdwatching Society, Hong Kong.

Carey, G. (1998). Hong Kong Bird Report 1996. Hong Kong Birdwatching Society, Hong Kong.

Carey, G. and Tai, S.L. (1999). Hong Kong Bird Report 1997. Hong Kong Birdwatching Society, Hong Kong.

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 Hong Kong. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong.

CSIS. 2012. China Species Information System Red List (www.baohu.org). Downloaded on 09 February 2012.

DSD (2002). Agreement No. CE 29/2001 Outlying Islands Sewerage Stage 1, Phase 1 – Ngong Ping Sewage Treatment Works and Sewerage Investigation, Design and Construction: Final EIA Study Report (Volume I) (Register No.: AEIAR-074/2003) (Ove Arup and Partners 2002)

Dudgeon, D. (1999). Tropical Asian Streams: Zoobenthos, Ecology and Conservation. Hong Kong University Press.

Dudgeon, D. and Corlett, R. (1994). Hills and streams: an ecology of Hong Kong. Hong Kong University Press.

Environment, Transport and Works Bureau, Technical Circular (Works) No. 5/2005 (2005). Protection of natural streams/rivers from adverse impacts arising from construction works

Hill, D.S. and Phillips, K. (1981). A Colour Guide to Hong Kong Animals. Hong Kong Government Printer. History Society. 23:5-20.

HKBWS. (2012). Hong Kong Bird List Category I to III. Downloaded from [http://www.hkbws.org.hk/web/eng/download_eng.htm] on 8^th January 2012.

Hong Kong Herbarium. (2004). Check List of Hong Kong Plants. AFCD.

Hu Q., Wu T., Xia N., Xing F., Lai P.C.C., Yip K. (2003). Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong (2^nd revision). AFCD, Friends of Country Park and Cosmos Books Ltd., Hong Kong.

IUCN. (2011). IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. available at www.iucnredlist.org.

Karsen, S.J., Lau M.W.N. and Bogadek, A. (1998). Hong Kong Amphibians and Reptiles. Urban Council, Hong Kong.

Lau, M.W.N and Dudgeon, D. (1999). Composition and Distribution of Hong Kong Amphibian Fauna. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 22: 1-80.

MTRC (2003). Document No. 203842/01/A: Tung Chung Cable Car Project Environmental Impact Assessment (Final) (Register No.: AEIAR-065/2002) (Mott Connell Ltd. 2003)

Shek, C.T. (2006). A Field Guide to the Terrestrial Mammals of Hong Kong. AFCD.

Siu, L.P.G. (2000). Orchidaceae of Hong Kong, Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society: 23:137-148.

Turnbull M., Ma K.W.(Ed) (2003). Hong Kong Bird Report 1999 & 2000. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong.

Viney , C., Phillipps, K., and Lam, C.Y. (2005). The Birds of Hong Kong and South China. Hong Kong Government Printer, Hong Kong.

Virginia L.F. Lee, Samuel K.S.Lam, Franco K. Y.Ng, Tony K.T.Chan and Maria L.C.Young. (2004). Freshwater Fish in Hong Kong. AFCD, Friends of Country Park and Cosmos Books Ltd., Hong Kong;

Walthew, G. (1997). The status and flight periods of Hong Kong butterflies. Porcupine! 16: 34-37.

Wilson, K.D.P. (2004). Field Guide to the Dragonflies of Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Friends of Country Park and Cosmos Book Ltd. Hong Kong.

Wong, C.H. (1999). HKLS Events and Activities: Po Lin Monastery to Tung Chung, Lantau Island – Field Trip on 5th September 1999 for Watching the Troides species. (web page).

Wong, C.H. (2000). HKLS Events and Activities: Po Lin Monastery for Museum of History – Field Trip on 17th September 2000. (web page).

Wu, S.H., and Lee, T.C. (2000). Pteridophytes of Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 23:5-20.

Xing, F.W., Ng, S.C., and Chau, L.K.C. (2000). Gymnosperms and angiosperms of Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 23: 21-136.

Yiu, V. (2004). Field Guide to the butterflies of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Discovery Ltd.

Young, J.J. and Reels, G.T. (1998). A brief note on the distribution and conservation of Birdwing butterflies in Hong Kong. Porcupine! 17, August 1998

China National Environmental Protection Agency & Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences. 1992. China Plant Red Data Book - Rare and Endangered Plants. Science Press, Beijing.

The State Council, People’s Republic of China. 1999. List of Wild Plants Under State Protection.

Chong, D.H. and Dudgeon, D. (1992). Hong Kong stream fishes: An annotated checklist with remarks on conservation status. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society 19: 79-112.

Lam, K.S. (2004). Freshwater Fish in Hong Kong. Cosmos Books Ltd., Hong Kong.

IUCN. (2011) IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Visited in Jan 2012.

Reijnen R., Foppen R., Ter Braak C. and Thissen J. (1995). The effect of car traffic on breeding bird populations in woodland. III. Reduction of density in relation to the proximity of main roads. Journal of Applied Ecology 32: 187-202.

Treweek, J. (1999). Ecological Impact Assessment. Blackwell Science, Oxford.

---

[1] The isolated area surrounding the Columbarium, including the proposed works area WA4 and part of Outfall B, is actually outside the limit of the Lantau North Country Park. However, because of the close proximity and similarity of habitats within and outside the boundary of the Lantau North Country Park, the habitat impact assessment has not distinguished the country park boundary to present a worst case assessment.