10.1.1 This Chapter presents the terrestrial ecological baseline condition within and in the vicinity of Kai Tak Area through literature review and surveys. Potential construction and operational impacts on terrestrial ecology caused by this Project have been identified and evaluated. Mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize potential impacts where necessary.
10.2
Relevant Legislations, Standards & Guidelines
10.2.1 Reference has been made to criteria in the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process of the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499) (EIAO TM) for evaluating ecological impacts, i.e.:
l Annex 8 stipulates
criteria for evaluating ecological impacts
l Annex 16 sets out the
general approach and methodology for the assessment of ecological impacts
arising from a project or proposal.
10.2.2 The following EIAO guidance notes detail temporal considerations in arranging surveys, survey methodology at different habitat types, data collection and requirement of impact assessment:
l GN 6/2010 “Some
Observations on Ecological Assessment from the Environmental Impact Assessment
Ordinance Perspective”
l GN 7/2010 “Ecological
Baseline Survey for Ecological Assessment”
l GN 10/2010 “Methodologies
for Terrestrial and Freshwater Ecological Baseline Surveys”
10.2.3
Other
Hong Kong ordinances and guidelines relevant to this study for reference
include:
l Forests and Countryside
Ordinance (Cap. 96) and its subsidiary legislation in the Forestry Regulations,
which prohibit destructive activities in the forest and trading or keeping of
rare plants;
l Wild Animals Protection
Ordinance (Cap. 170), which protects wild mammals, avifauna, reptiles, amphibians
and insects under column 2 from hunting, possession, trading and disturbance;
l Country Parks Ordinance
(Cap. 208), which designates, controls and manages country parks and special
areas;
l Protection of
Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586), which regulates
trading and possession of endangered species in response to Convention on the
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES);
l Town Planning Ordinance
(Cap. 131), which stipulates the planning use of an area. Land uses related to
this chapter are country parks, conservation areas, green belts, coastal
protection areas, sites of special scientific interest and other specified uses
that promote conservation or protection of the environment;
l Hong Kong Planning
Standard and Guidelines (Chapter 10), which provides principles of
conservation, policies to identify and conserve natural landscape and habitats
through legislation and administrative controls and planning.
10.2.4
This
assessment made also reference to the following international conventions where
appropriate:
l Convention on the
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES);
l IUCN Red List;
l United Nations
Conventions on Biological Diversity (1992).
10.3
Study Area & Site of Conservation Importance
10.3.1 The Study Area for this terrestrial ecological impact assessment covers 500 m radius of the proposed Project, as shown in Figure 10-1.
10.3.2 In the Study Area, there is no recognized site of conservation importance as defined in Annex 16 of the EIAO-TM.
10.4.1 Baseline ecological information had been obtained through collection and review of past findings of relevant studies/surveys regarding ecological characters of the assessment area. Examples of published references, other environmental studies carried out in vicinity of the Project Site and referenced websites include:
l Aerial photos
l Websites managed by
AFCD, e.g. Hong Kong Biodiversity Database & Hong Kong Herbarium
l AFCD Newsletters
l Approved Kai Tak (KPA
22) Outline Zoning Plan (Plan No. S/K22/4)
l Approved Ma Tau Kok
(KPA 10) Outline Zoning Plan (Plan No. S/K10/20)
l Approved Wang Tau Hom
& Tung Tau (KPA 8) Outline Zoning Plan (Plan No. S/K8/21)
l Books and reports by
Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, e.g. the Avifauna in Hong Kong
l Past EIA studies, e.g.
Comprehensive Feasibility Study for the Revised Scheme of South East Kowloon
Development (Arup 2001); Kai Tak Development (Maunsell 2008); Shatin to Central
Link – Stabling Sidings at Hung Hom Freight Yard (Arup 2011a); & Shatin to
Central Link – Tai Wai to Hung Hom Section (Arup 2011b)
l Porcupine! by the
University of Hong Kong
l Other related field
books
10.4.2 According to Arup (2001), 3 habitats (Urbanised Area, Planted Grass Area and Amenity Planting Area) were recorded in the Study Area. However, according to Maunsell (2008), 4 different habitats – Developed Area, Wasteland, Watercourse and Artificial Coastline – were recorded in the Study Area.
10.4.3 The Wasteland area comprised mainly construction sites and vacant lands and occupied most of the area of the former Kai Tak Airport (Maunsell 2008). This habitat was dominated by ruderal species, such as Casuarina equisetifolia, Celtis sinensis, Lantana camara and Neyraudia reynaudiana.
10.4.4 The Developed Area consisted of temporary parking areas and urban residential/industrial buildings at the periphery of and at the vicinity of the former Kai Tak Airport respectively (Maunsell 2008). Trees and vegetation found were mostly located in amenity planting areas (e.g. roadside and parks). The most common species in this habitat included Aleurites moluccana, Bauhinia x blakeana and Bombax ceiba. All plant species recorded are common and widespread in Hong Kong (Maunsell 2008).
10.4.5 Only 1 watercourse, the Kai Tak Nullah, was recorded within/near the Study Area (Maunsell 2008). It is an artificial concrete-lined nullah for drainage purpose. Very limited riparian vegetation was recorded in this habitat. Only common vegetation species such as Leucaena leucocephala and Bidens alba were found in this habitat (Maunsell 2008).
10.4.6 Vertical seawall, and man-made rock/boulder slopes composed the Artificial Coastline within/near the Study Area (Maunsell 2008). Only scattered trees and shrubs were found. All species recorded (e.g. Ficus microcarpa and F. virens) are common in Hong Kong (Maunsell 2008).
10.4.7 Two recent studies carried out by Arup (2011a; 2011b) recorded 4 habitats – Urban/Residential Area, Temporary At-Grade Work Sites, Channelised Watercourse and Plantation – in the Study Area. Although habitat classification differed between Arup (2011a; 2011b) and Maunsell (2008), both nature of habitats, habitat distribution and vegetation composition were similar.
10.4.8 No rare or protected plant species was found within/near the Study Area (Maunsell 2008; Arup 2011a; Arup 2011b).
10.4.9 According to Arup (2001; 2011a; 2011b) and Maunsell (2008), no terrestrial mammal individual or burrows of mammal species was recorded within/near the Study Area.
10.4.10 According to Shek (2006), besides the Brown Rat (Rattus norvegicus) and Roof Rat (R. rattus) that are distributed in urban areas throughout Hong Kong, only Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx) was recorded near the Study Area. Although Short-nosed Fruit Bat is very common in Hong Kong, it is protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170) (AFCD 2014a).
10.4.11 In Hong Kong, all wild birds are protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170).
10.4.12 According to Arup (2011a), 13 avifauna species were recorded from the vicinity of the proposed Kai Tak Station, which is within the Study Area of this Project. In which, 2 species, Little Ringed Plover (Charadrius dubius) and Little Egret (Egretta garzetta), were with conservation importance. Their conservation statuses were summarized in Table 10-1.
10.4.13 In addition, Arup (2011b) recorded 39 species around Kai Tak Runway which is within/near the Study Area of this Project. In which, 17 species were of conservation interest, while 7 of them (Great Egret Ardea alba, Grey Heron Ardea cinerea, Eastern Cattle Egret Bubulcus coromandus, Little Ringed Plover Charadrius dubius, Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis, Little Egret Egretta garzetta and Black-crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax) were recorded within the Study Area of this Project. Their conservation statuses were summarized in Table 10-1.
10.4.14 According to Maunsell (2008), 36 avifauna species were recorded within/near the Study Area, while 9 of them were with conservation importance. Out of the 9 species with conservation importance, only 6 of them – Great Egret (Ardea alba), Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea), Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta), Black Kite (Milvus migrans) and Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) – were recorded within the Study Area (Maunsell 2008). Their conservation statuses were summarized in Table 10-1.
10.4.15
Injured
Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) was
rescued from Kai Tak (Ades et al. 2004).
10.4.16
According
to a breeding bird survey conducted by the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society
(Carey et al. 2001), 13 bird species were recorded to breed within/near the Study Area. In which, 4 species – Oriental Skylark (Alauda gulgula), Bonelli's Eagle (Aquila fasciata), Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) and Black Kite (Milvus migrans) – are species with
conservation importance (AFCD 2014a). Their conservation statuses were summarized in Table 10-1.
10.4.17
According
to Arup (2001), 38 avifauna species were recorded within/near the Study Area. In which, 15 species
– Red-throated Pipit (Anthus cervinus),
Great Egret (Ardea alba), Grey Heron
(Ardea cinerea), Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus), Eastern Cattle
Egret (Bubulcus coromandus), Little Ringed Plover (Charadrius
dubius), Oriental Plover (Charadrius
veredus), Zitting Cisticola (Cisticola
juncidis), Collared Crow (Corvus
torquatus), Japanese Quail (Coturnix japonica), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta), Intermediate Egret (Egretta intermedia), Common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), Black Kite (Milvus
migrans) and Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) – were with
conservation importance (AFCD 2014a). Their conservation statuses were summarized in Table 10-1.
10.4.18 In the 70 species recorded in past studies (Arup 2001; Carey et al. 2001; Ades et al. 2004; Maunsell 2008; Arup 2011a; Arup 2011b), Oriental Skylark (Alauda gulgula), Bonelli's Eagle (Aquila fasciata), Japanese Quail (Coturnix japonica) and Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) are scare, while Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis), Long-toed Stint (Calidris subminuta), Collared Crow (Corvus torquatus), White-bellied Sea Eagle (Haliaeetus leucogaster) and Broad-billed Sandpiper (Limicola falcinellus) are uncommon in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a). Beside Eurasian Hoopoe (Upupa epops) and Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) are occasional visitor, other species recorded are either common or abundant in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a).
Table 10-1 Conservation Statuses of Birds with
Conservation Importance Recorded within/near the Study Area in Past Studies
(Arup 2001; Carey et al. 2001; Ades et al. 2004; Maunsell 2008; Arup 2011a;
Arup 2011b; AFCD 2014a; IUCN 2014)
|
Common Name (Species Name) |
Conservation
Status |
|
Oriental Skylark (Alauda gulgula) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Red-throated Pipit (Anthus cervinus) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Bonelli's Eagle (Aquila fasciata) |
1.
Protected
under the Protection of Endangered
Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586); 2.
Listed as “Rare” in the China Red Data Book Status; 3.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Great Egret (Ardea alba) |
1.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea) |
1.
Listed as “Potential Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus) |
1.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Eastern Cattle Egret (Bubulcus coromandus) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Little Ringed Plover (Charadrius dubius) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Oriental Plover (Charadrius veredus) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Zitting Cisticola (Cisticola juncidis) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Collared Crow (Corvus torquatus) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) 2.
Listed as “Near threatened” in IUCN Red
List |
|
Japanese Quail (Coturnix japonica) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) 2.
Listed as “Near threatened” in IUCN Red
List |
|
Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) |
1.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Intermediate Egret (Egretta intermedia) |
1.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Saker Falcon (Falco cherrug) |
1.
Listed as “Endangered” in IUCN Red List |
|
Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) |
1.
Protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance
(Cap. 586); 2.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Common Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) |
1. Protected
under the Protection of Endangered
Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586) |
|
Black Kite (Milvus migrans) |
1.
Protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance
(Cap. 586); 2.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) |
1. Listed
as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) |
1.
Listed as “Potential Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
*All
birds are protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170). ** Species listed as “Least Concern” by IUCN Red
List were not included. |
|
10.4.19 According to Arup (2011b), a dead snake Checkered Keelback (Xenochrophis piscator) was recorded around Kai Tak Runway. Nevertheless, this species is common and widespread in Hong Kong, and has no conservation importance.
10.4.20 According to Arup (2011a) and Chan et al. (2005), no amphibian species was recorded within/near the Study Area.
10.4.21 According to Maunsell (2008), no individual of herpetofauna was recorded within/near the Study Area. In addition, no sign of reptile breeding or breeding habitat was recorded.
10.4.22 According to Arup (2001), although no amphibian species was recorded within/near the Study Area, 2 reptiles – Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta) and Chinese Skink (Plestiodon chinensis) – were recorded within/near the Study Area. Both species are widespread in Hong Kong, and have no conservation importance (AFCD 2014a).
10.4.23 According to Arup (2011a; 2011b), 1 butterfly and 1 odonate species were recorded near the proposed Kai Tak Station. Both species recorded are either abundant or common, and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a). No species with conservation importance was recorded.
10.4.24 Arup (2011b) also recorded 2 butterfly species around the Kai Tak Runway. Both species are very common and widely distributed in Hong Kong. None of them has conservation importance.
10.4.25 According to Maunsell (2008), 5 butterfly and 6 odonate species were recorded within/near the Study Area. All butterfly and odonate species recorded are either abundant or common, and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a). No species with conservation importance was recorded.
10.4.26 According to Arup (2001), 1 butterfly and 1 odonate species were recorded within/near the Study Area. Both species recorded are either very common or abundant, and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a). No species with conservation importance was recorded.
10.5
Methodology for Terrestrial Surveys
10.5.1
Comparing findings in past studies and recent site
visits conducted during this EIA Study, there was no major change in habitat
types and their coverage. The Site and its immediate surroundings in Kai Tak
area are comprised of construction sites and abandoned grounds. Further away
from the old airport is developed land of residential and industrial uses.
Therefore, terrestrial surveys were conducted to verify the previous findings
and to update the baseline conditions.
10.5.2 In September 2014, February, March and August 2015, terrestrial surveys had been carried out at representative habitats that are likely to be affected by this Project. Surveys had been conducted according to the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance, Cap. 499, GN No. 10/2010 Methodologies for Terrestrial and Freshwater Ecological Baseline Surveys. The survey area covered the area within 500m boundary from the proposed Project Site. An ecological survey plan showing survey transect and point count locations is presented in Figure 10-1. The survey route covered most areas within the Study Area, in particular the Project Site.
10.5.3 Aerial photos of the Project Site and its surrounding have been interpreted to identify habitat types found within the Study Area. This was verified and updated by ground-truthing.
10.5.4 Vegetation surveys had been conducted to identify key vegetation communities and dominant species within the Project Site. These were followed by plant species surveys which recorded plant species found in different habitats within the Study Area. Surveys covered the transect (see Figure 10-1) and areas nearby. A pair of binoculars was used to aid observation where the area is inaccessible. Any rare, protected and threatened plant species and other species of conservation importance had been identified with their location marked.
10.5.5 Terrestrial mammals had been actively searched along transect and identified by direct observation. Any traits observed, such as dung, feeding signs, footprints, burrows and dens were recorded, and tracks that were left by mammals were identified as far as possible.
10.5.6 Transect survey and point count were adopted to record bird species in early morning when avifauna are most active. For point count, counts had been made within fixed time period (around 5 minutes) using a pair of binoculars. Any bird presented within observable distance along transect and from counting point were recorded and identified. Identification was also made from bird calls. In addition, any feeding, nesting and breeding behaviours were noted.
10.5.7 Active searching had been carried out to look for amphibians and reptiles during day-time along the transect. Potential breeding ground and microhabitats, such as pools, water channels, crevices and fallen leaves, had been searched. Any eggs and tadpoles found were also recorded. Mating calls of frogs and toads were assisted in species identification as well.
10.5.8
Butterflies
and odonates surveys had been conducted during daytime and under fine weather
when these insects are active. Transect survey and point count had been carried
out. For point count, counts had been made within fixed time period (around 5
minutes). Any butterflies and odonates observed along transect and from
counting point were counted and identified by naked eyes. A pair of binoculars
had been used for assisting counting and species identification when necessary.
10.5.9
Freshwater wildlife (active swimming fishes and
crustaceans) in Kai Tak Nullah were observed by direct sighting and by the aid
with a pair of 8x binoculars.
10.6
Survey Results – Habitats & Vegetation
10.6.1
Within the Study Area, terrestrial habitats
identified included construction sites, developed area, abandoned area,
watercourse and artificial coastline. A map showing the distribution of
habitats in the Study Area was presented in Figure 10-2, while representative photos of habitats were
presented in Appendix 10.1.
10.6.2
The dominant habitat is Construction Sites at the
former Kai Tak Airport. Most land were excavated and exposed. Some area was used
for stockpiling and material storage. Operation of powered mechanical equipment
is common in this area. Patches of plant nursery were located, in which plants
were usually in poor condition. Remnant trees were few and vegetation found in
this habitat were mostly small weeds growing on the edge. Examples included Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa, and Kalanchoe tubiflora.
10.6.3
1
avifauna species with conservation importance was recorded in Construction Sites. 1 uncommon avifauna species was also recorded in this habitat.
10.6.4
The area adjacent to the former Kai Tak Airport was
dominated by Developed Area. Developed Area consisted of urban area with
residential/industrial buildings, greening areas/parks and temporary parking
areas, which are utilized by human continuously. Trees and vegetation found in
this habitat were mostly cultivated for amenity purpose in greening
areas/parks. Species that were commonly found included Bauhinia x blakeana, Ixora chinensis and Loropetalum chinense.
10.6.5
4
avifauna species with conservation importance were recorded in Developed Area. No uncommon or rare species was found in this
habitat.
10.6.6
Several pieces of Abandoned Area were found in the
former Kai Tak Airport. This habitat was disturbed by human, but has been
abandoned for a period of time. Vegetation found in this habitat was mostly
ruderal species, including Bidens alba
and Neyraudia reynaudiana.
10.6.7
3
avifauna species with conservation importance were recorded in Abandoned Area. No uncommon
or rare species was found in this habitat.
10.6.8
Kai Tak Nullah is the only
watercourse found within the Study Area. It is an artificial concreted channel for
drainage purpose. Its smooth bank surface allowed limited and scattered trees
and vegetation growth (e.g. Ficus
microcarpa and Leucaena leucocephala).
A number of construction activities (e.g. reclamation, diversion) were in
progress in and near the Nullah.
10.6.9
5
avifauna species with conservation importance were recorded in Watercourse. No uncommon or
rare species was found in this habitat.
10.6.10
All coastlines found in the Study Area were
artificial. They were either vertical seawall or man-made sloping seawall
constructed of armour rocks. Only limited and scattered trees and vegetation (e.g. Celtis sinensis, Melia azedarach and Neyraudia reynaudiana) were found.
10.6.11
7
avifauna species with conservation importance were recorded in Artificial Coastline. In which, Collared Crow is
uncommon in Hong Kong. No other uncommon or rare species was found
in this habitat.
10.6.12
The Site covered about 28 ha in the former Kai Tak
Airport, which is comprised of Construction Sites (16.1 ha or 57%), Abandoned
Area (6.9 ha or 24%) and Developed Area (i.e. temporary parking areas, 5.0 ha
or 19%). Trees and vegetation (e.g. Casuarina
equisetifolia and Neyraudia
reynaudiana) were mostly found in Abandoned Area scattered within the Site.
10.6.13
2 avifauna species of conservation importance (Chinese
Pond Heron Ardeola bacchus, and Black
Kite Milvus migrans) and 1 uncommon avifauna species (Common
Myna Acridotheres tristis) were
recorded in the Project footprint.
10.6.14
125 plant species were recorded in the Study Area
(see Appendix 10.2). Most
species recorded were exotic, which were planted for landscaping (e.g. Bombax ceiba, Lagerstroemia speciosa, Bougainvillea
spectabilis) or were fast-growing species that were competitive in
disturbed habitats (e.g. Leucaena
leucocephala, Lantana camara, Mikania
micrantha). Native plants generally belongs to Ficus spp. and other species that are commonly found in Hong Kong,
such as Celtis sinensis and Morus alba.
10.6.15
8 species recorded – 2 native and 6 exotic species
– have conservation statuses, which were shown in Table
10-2 (AFCD
2014b; IUCN 2014). Although they have conservation statuses, all of them are
cultivated individuals and are commonly planted in Hong Kong. Therefore, none
of them is considered having conservation importance.
Table
10-2 Conservation
Statuses of Plants Recorded in the Study Area (AFCD 2014b; IUCN 2014)
|
Species Name |
Origin |
Conservation
Status |
|
Ailanthus fordii (常綠臭椿) |
Native |
1.
Protected under the Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96) 2.
Listed as “Near Threatened” by
the Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong (Status in China) |
|
Camellia
hongkongensis (香港茶) |
Native |
1.
Protected under the Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96) 2.
Listed as “Endangered” by the
Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong (Status in China) |
|
Araucaria
heterophylla (異葉南洋杉) |
Exotic |
1.
Listed as
“Vulnerable” by the IUCN Red List |
|
Dimocarpus
longan (龍眼) |
Exotic |
1. Listed
as “Near Threatened” by the IUCN Red List |
|
Dypsis lutescens (散尾葵) |
Exotic |
1. Listed
as “Near Threatened” by the IUCN Red List |
|
Lagerstroemia speciose (大花紫薇) |
Exotic |
1. Protected
under the Forests and Countryside
Ordinance (Cap. 96) |
|
Michelia x
alba (白蘭) |
Exotic |
1. Protected
under the Forests and Countryside
Ordinance (Cap. 96) |
|
Platycladus orientalis (側柏) |
Exotic |
1. Listed
as “Near Threatened” by the IUCN Red List |
10.7.1
This section summarizes terrestrial fauna observed
throughout the survey period. A species list with details on the distribution,
rarity and conservation status can be found in Appendix 10.2. For the species with
conservation importance, their locations were presented in Figure 10-2, while their photographic records can be found in Appendix 10.3.
10.7.2
2 terrestrial mammal species – House Mouse Mus musculus and Brown Rat Rattus norvegicus – were recorded in the
Study Area. Both species are widely distributed in urban areas associated with
human activity, and has no conservation importance (AFCD 2014a). No breeding behaviour or
immature individual was recorded in the Study Area.
10.7.3
34 avifauna species were recorded in the Study
Area. Commonly recorded species were Crested Myna (Acridotheres cristatellus), Eurasian Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus) and Red-whiskered
Bulbuls (Pycnonotus jocosus). Except
Common Myna (Acridotheres tristis)
and Collared Crow (Corvus torquatus)
are uncommon, all species recorded are common in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a).
Besides Common Myna, Grey Heron (Ardea
cinerea) and Collared Crow have restricted distributions, all species
recorded are widely distributed in Hong Kong.
10.7.4
Out of the 34 recorded species, 10 of them – Great
Egret (Ardea alba), Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea), Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus), Greater Coucal (Centropus sinensis), Collared Crow (Corvus torquatus), Little Egret (Egretta garzetta), White-throated
Kingfisher (Halcyon smyrnensis),
Black Kite (Milvus migrans),
Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax
nycticorax) and Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax
carbo) – are species of conservation importance (AFCD 2014a). Their conservation statuses
were listed in Table
10-3.
Table 10-3 Conservation Statuses of
Birds with Conservation Importance Recorded within the Study Area in Recent
Surveys (AFCD 2014a)
|
Common Name |
Conservation Status |
|
Great Egret (Ardea
alba) |
1. Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Grey Heron (Ardea
cinerea) |
1. Listed as “Potential Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus) |
1.
Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Greater Coucal (Centropus sinensis) |
1. Listed as “Vulnerable” by the
China Red Data Book |
|
Collared Crow (Corvus
torquatus) |
1.
Listed as “Local Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002); 2.
Listed as “Near Threatened” by the IUCN Red List |
|
Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) |
1. Listed as “Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
White-throated Kingfisher (Halcyon smyrnensis) |
1. Listed as “Local
Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Black Kite (Milvus
migrans) |
1.
Protected under the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance
(Cap. 586); 2. Listed as “Regional Concern”
by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) |
1. Listed as “Local
Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo) |
1. Listed as “Potential Regional Concern” by Fellowes et al. (2002) |
|
*All
birds are protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170). **
Species listed as “Least Concern” by IUCN Red List were not included. |
|
10.7.5
During surveys, a Black-collared Starling (Gracupica nigricollis) was building nest
on Roystonea regia in Developed Area beyond
the Project footprint (see Figure 10-2). This
suggests that Developed Area is a breeding ground of Black-collared Starling.
10.7.6
Immature individuals of Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) – a species with
conservation importance (Table
10-3) – were
found on tree tops of a landscaped garden near Kai Tak approach channel and on
tree tops in Artificial Coastline. This suggests that these habitats are
nursery grounds of Black-crowned Night Heron.
10.7.7
Immature individuals of Eurasian Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus) and Red-whiskered
Bulbul (Pycnonotus jocosus) were
found in landscaped gardens (i.e. Developed Area) near Ma Tou Wai. This
suggests that Developed Area is a nursery ground of these species.
10.7.8
Great Cormorants (Phalacrocorax carbo) were found only in marine waters away from the
coast. Both Great Cormorants and Ardeids (e.g. Little Egret Egretta garzetta and Black-crowned Night
Heron Nycticorax nycticorax) were
recorded to forage around marine water while White-throated Kingfisher (Halcyon smyrnensis) and Great Egret (Ardea alba) foraged in Kai Tak Nullah. These suggest that
waterbodies within the Study Area are foraging grounds for waterbirds.
10.7.9
Black Kite
Milvus migrans soared in the sky above Construction Sites and waterbodies
in the Study Area searching for food.
10.7.10
No herpetofauna was found in the Study Area.
10.7.11
8 butterfly species were recorded in the Study
Area. All
recorded species are common and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a).
No species with conservation importance was recorded. Butterflies were recorded
mainly in landscaped area in Developed Area (e.g. Pale Grass Blue Pseudozizeeria maha serica) and around
flowering ruderal plants in Abandoned Area (e.g. Red-base Jezebel Delias pasithoe pasithoe).
10.7.12
No breeding behaviour, larva or pupa was recorded
in the Study Area.
10.7.13
3 odonate species were recorded in the Study Area.
All species recorded are abundant and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD
2014a). No species with conservation importance was recorded.
10.7.14
No breeding behaviour or naiads was recorded in the
Study Area.
10.7.15
1 fish species – Grey
mullet (Mugil cephalus) –
was recorded in the
Kai Tak Nullah. It is common and widely distributed in Hong Kong (AFCD 2014a).
No species with conservation importance was recorded.
10.7.16
No crustacean was found in the Kai Tak Nullah.
10.7.17
No breeding behaviour or immature individual was
recorded in the Study Area.
10.8.1
Ecological values of each habitat have
been evaluated according to EIAO-TM Annex 8 Table 2.
Table 10-4 Ecological Value of Construction Sites
|
Criteria |
Construction
Sites |
|
Naturalness |
Artificial |
|
Size |
~ 97.4 ha |
|
Diversity |
Low flora and fauna
diversity, largely exotic |
|
Rarity |
Habitat: Common in
Hong Kong Species: 1 avifauna
species having conservation importance – Black Kite – was recorded. |
|
Recreatability |
Recreateable |
|
Fragmentation |
Not fragmented |
|
Ecological linkage |
No significant
ecological linkage to surrounding was identified |
|
Potential value |
Low |
|
Nursery / breeding ground |
No nursery or
breeding ground identified |
|
Age |
≤ 15 years |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Very Low |
|
Ecological
value |
Very Low |
Table 10-5 Ecological Value of Developed Area and Abandoned
Area
|
Criteria |
Developed
Area |
Abandoned Area |
|
Naturalness |
Artificial |
Semi-artificial |
|
Size |
~ 65.8 ha |
~ 19.4 ha |
|
Diversity |
Low flora and fauna
diversity, largely exotic |
Very low flora and
fauna diversity, largely exotic |
|
Rarity |
Habitat: Common in
Hong Kong Species: 4 avifauna
species having conservation importance – Great Egret, Little Egret, Black Kite and
Black-crowned Night Heron – were recorded. |
Habitat: Common in
Hong Kong Species: 3 avifauna
species having conservation importance – Chinese Pond Heron, Greater Coucal and Black Kite
– were recorded. |
|
Recreatability |
Recreateable |
Recreateable |
|
Fragmentation |
Not fragmented |
Fragmented |
|
Ecological linkage |
No significant
ecological linkage to surrounding was identified |
No significant
ecological linkage to surrounding was identified |
|
Potential value |
Low |
Low |
|
Nursery / breeding ground |
Nursery ground of Black-crowned Night Heron, Eurasian Tree Sparrow
and Red-whiskered Bulbul; Breeding ground of Black-collared Starling |
No nursery or
breeding ground identified |
|
Age |
≤ 100 years |
≤ 15 years |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Low |
Very Low |
|
Ecological
value |
Very Low |
Very Low |
Table 10-6 Ecological Value of Watercourse and Artificial
Coastline
|
Criteria |
Watercourse |
Artificial Coastline |
|
Naturalness |
Artificial |
Artificial |
|
Size (Length) |
About 1.4 km |
About 2.4 km |
|
Diversity |
Very low flora and
fauna diversity |
Very low flora and
fauna diversity |
|
Rarity |
Habitat: Uncommon
in Hong Kong Species: 5 avifauna
species having conservation importance – Great Egret, Grey Heron, Little Egret,
White-throated Kingfisher and Black Kite – were recorded. |
Habitat: Common in
Hong Kong Species: 7 avifauna
species having conservation importance – Great Egret, Grey Heron, Chinese Pond Heron,
Collared Crow, Little Egret, White-throated Kingfisher and Black-crowned
Night Heron – were recorded. In
which, Collared Crow is
uncommon in Hong Kong. |
|
Recreatability |
Recreatable |
Recreatable |
|
Fragmentation |
Fragmented by
several access bridges |
Not fragmented |
|
Ecological linkage |
Drain water to
marine water in Kai Tak Approach Channel, which is a forage ground of
waterbirds |
Linked to
surrounding marine water, which is a forage ground of waterbirds |
|
Potential value |
Low |
Low |
|
Nursery / Breeding ground |
No nursery or
breeding ground identified |
Nursery ground of Black-crowned Night Heron |
|
Age |
≤ 50 years |
≤ 90 years |
|
Abundance/ Richness of Wildlife |
Very Low |
Very Low |
|
Ecological
value |
Very Low |
Low |
10.9
Identification of
Ecological Impacts
10.9.1
The proposed Multi-purpose Sport Complex would lead
to habitat loss (i.e. about 28 ha in total, which comprises 5.0 ha of Developed
Area, 16.1 ha of Construction Sites and 6.9 ha of Abandoned Area) in the
Project footprint. However, no habitat with ecological importance will be
impacted directly.
10.9.2
As habitats in the Project footprint would be
changed (i.e. habitat loss), this may lead to habitat fragmentation and
isolation.
10.9.3
Surrounding habitats and their associated
communities would be impacted indirectly by liquid contamination (water quality
impact), noise, dust and glare, which will be induced from constructional and
operational activities.
10.9.4
There will be a permanent loss of 5.0 ha of
Developed Area, 16.1 ha of Construction Sites and 6.9 ha of Abandoned Area,
where the Multi-purpose Sport Complex will be located on. Although all vegetation
and trees (about 160 nos.) within the Project footprint will be cleared, all
flora found in the Project footprint are largely exotic (mainly Leucaena leucocephala and Casuarina equisetifolia) and commonly
found in Hong Kong. No flora with conservation importance will be affected.
10.9.5 Nevertheless, 2 avifauna with conservation importance (Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola bacchus, and Black Kite Milvus migrans) and 1 uncommon avifauna (Common Myna Acridotheres tristis) would be impacted directly, as they were recorded in the Project footprint. However, these species do not rely on construction site or abandoned land. Chinese Pond Heron and Black Kite favour coastal and marine habitats. Common Myna is an introduced species that is well adapted to disturbed habitats. In addition, no nursery ground, breeding, foraging or roosting behaviour was identified in the Project footprint. Therefore, direct impact on these avifauna species due to habitat loss would be minor.
10.9.6
Limited
wildlife was observed within the Project footprint and they are common and
widespread in Hong Kong. Overall, the direct impact caused by the Project on
this disturbed habitat of very low ecological value in construction phase will
be minor.
10.9.7
In the
operational phase, the Site will be landscaped with trees, shrubs and lawn. The
preliminary greening area is about 7.27 ha.
10.9.8
In
construction phase, fencing and barrier established in the Project Site along
the Project boundary would obstruct locomotion of animals, especially
terrestrial mammals and herpetofauna. However, the Project Site has been
disturbed and is surrounded by human disturbed habitats (i.e. Construction
Sites & Developed Area), and existing habitats are fragmented. Therefore,
no impact resulting from habitat fragmentation and isolation is anticipated.
10.9.9
Regarding
operational phase, as the vicinity of the Project Site will be areas disturbed
by human activities instead of natural habitat, no impact resulting from
habitat fragmentation and isolation is anticipated.
10.9.10
Surface
runoff and accidental spillage of chemicals would be major water pollution
sources in construction phase. These pollutants might go into waterbodies in the
Study Area (i.e. marine water & Kai Tak Nullah) and deteriorate their water
quality. This would degrade habitat quality of waterbodies, and hence reduce
food availability for waterbirds (e.g. egrets and herons). Since several
species of waterbirds (including some species with conservation importance)
forage around waterbodies in the Study Area (see Section 10.7.8), reduced food availability in waterbodies would
cause negative impact on waterbirds.
10.9.11
Nevertheless,
there are buffer distances of about 50m between the Site and the sea and over
150m between the Site and Kai Tak Nullah. With proper implementation of mitigation
measures (e.g. provision of channel to prevent outflow of surface runoff
offsite, and proper discharge of treated effluent, see Chapter 6 – Water Quality Impact Assessment and Section 10.11 for details), the
potential water quality impact induced by the Project will be minimized and no
significant impact is expected.
10.9.12
No water
quality impact on ecology is expected during operational phase.
10.9.13
Noise
emitted from Powered Mechanical
Equipment (PME) in construction phase would be a nuisance to
wildlife. Breeding activity (of Black-collared
Starling) and nursery grounds (for Black-crowned Night Heron, Eurasian Tree
Sparrow & Red-whiskered Bulbul) would also be impacted by noise generated
from PME. Nevertheless, since habitats in the Study
Area have been exposed to high level of human disturbance (e.g. construction
works and heavy traffics etc.), wildlife (including all breeding activity and
nursery grounds) found in the Study Area are considered to be well adapted to
noise disturbance.
10.9.14
Due to
the Study Area has been highly disturbed by human activities (e.g. construction
works and heavy traffics etc.), the construction
noise transmitted would be much reduced or screened by buildings or structures
in between. The noise level is expected to be similar as
present. Moreover, since all breeding activity and nursery grounds recorded
were far away from the Project footprint (over 150m), nuisance by noise due to
the Project would be insignificant.
10.9.15
Therefore,
with proper implementation of mitigation measures (e.g. erection of noise
barrier, see Chapter 5 – Noise Impact
Assessment and Section 10.11 for
details), noise generated by the Project in construction phase shall cause only
minor impact on wildlife, and insignificant impact on all breeding activity and
nursery grounds.
10.9.16
In
operational phase, increased human activity, hence traffic and crowd noise,
during all types of events would be the major source of noise impact on
wildlife. Most of the time, regular sporting activities will be carried out at
the Indoor Sports Centre and Public Sports Ground for general public. The
degree of noise nuisance is not expected to be worse than that generated from
PMEs for construction in the current state. Big events such as international
competition that attract significant spectators will be localized at the Main
Stadium, which is equipped with retractable roof for noise control.
Nevertheless, as big events would be occasional, noise induced by the Project
in operational phase shall cause very minor impact on wildlife (including all
breeding activity and nursery grounds) in the Study Area.
10.9.17
Earthworks
(e.g. excavation and piling) and wind erosion from the Site would generate
dust, which could affect the flora in the Study Area. Dust would cover leaves
and shrink plants’ photosynthesis rate. This would lead to negative impact on
plants’ health, and hence reduce habitat quality. However, the habitat in the
vicinity of the Site has limited flora abundance or diversity and is considered
as having low habitat quality. Therefore, the dust impact is considered minor and
acceptable. With proper implementation of mitigation measures (e.g. regular and
sufficient watering and proper material handling, see Chapter 3 – Air Quality Impact Assessment and Section 10.11 for details), the impact would be further reduced.
10.9.18
No dust
impact on ecology is expected in operational phase.
10.9.19
Security
floodlights within construction site may cause glare impact, which might
interrupt wildlife’s roosting behavior. However, considering the vicinity of
the Site is highly urbanized, wildlife found in the Study Area are considered
to be well adapted to disturbance induced by urban area (such as light
pollution). Also, as these lights are usually with low light intensity, the
impact is considered as insignificant. With proper implementation of mitigation
measures (e.g. all security floodlights should be equipped with adjustable
shield, frosted diffusers and reflective covers, and should be carefully
controlled to minimize light pollution, see Chapter 11 – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Section 10.11 for details), the impact
would be further reduced.
10.9.20
Lighting
from the Project (e.g. signage and directional lights, spotlights, and façade lights) would
cause glare impact on wildlife. Since wildlife found in the
Study Area are considered to be well adapted to disturbance induced by urban
area (such as light pollution) as mentioned in Section 10.9.19, the
impact is considered as insignificant. With proper implementation of mitigation
measures (e.g. arranging lighting with due consideration of reflectance so
as to avoid glare effect, see Chapter
11 – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment and Section 10.11 for details), the impact would be further reduced.
10.9.21
Five
concurrent projects would be carried out within the Study Area during the construction phase of
this Project:
1)
East Port of Central Kowloon Route (CKR),
2)
Reconstruction and Upgrading of Kai Tak Nullah,
3)
Kai Tak Development Stage 4 (D2 road construction),
4)
North
Apron Remaining Infrastructure, and
5)
Kai Tak Approach Channel and Kwun Tong Typhoon Shelter
Improvement Works (Phase 2).
10.9.22
Kai Tak
Nullah is about 200 – 250m away from the Site and the cumulative impact would
be small. Construction sites for Works 1, 3 and 4 are located next to the
Project Site. Construction work of these three projects would bring cumulative
noise impact on wildlife.
10.9.23
According
to Chapter 5 – Noise Impact Assessment,
the concurrent projects would increase the noise level at sensitive receivers.
As mentioned in “Sections 10.9.10 –
10.9.13, Indirect Impact – Noise”, wildlife utilizing construction sites,
abandoned land and developed area accommodates to the existing noisy
environment. Also, no ecologically sensitive habitat is found in the vicinity.
Therefore, the small noise level increment is expected to bring insignificant
impact on wildlife.
10.10
Evaluation of Ecological
Impacts
10.10.1
The
significance of ecological impacts have been evaluated according to EIAO-TM
Annex 8
Table 1.
Table 10-7 Evaluation of the Significance of Ecological Impact on Construction
Sites
|
Criteria |
Construction Sites |
|
Habitat quality |
Very Low |
|
Species |
1 avifauna species with conservation importance (Black Kite) and 1 uncommon avifauna
species (Common Myna) were found. |
|
Impact Size /
Abundance |
≈ 16.1 ha will be affected directly Very low number of fauna. |
|
Impact Duration |
Permanent loss of existing habitat of the Project
footprint (≈ 16.1 ha). Indirect noise impact will be in both
construction & operational phases; while indirect water quality &
dust impact will be restricted in construction phase only |
|
Impact
Reversibility |
Irreversible for
the Project footprint, reversible for indirectly impacted area offsite |
|
Impact Magnitude |
Habitat Loss:
Minor Water
Quality: Minor Noise:
Minor Dust:
Minor |
|
Overall
Impact |
Minor |
Table 10-8 Evaluation of the Significance of Ecological Impact on Developed Area
and Abandoned Area
|
Criteria |
Developed Area |
Abandoned Area |
|
Habitat quality |
Very Low |
Very Low |
|
Species |
4 avifauna species with conservation importance (Great Egret, Little
Egret, Black Kite and Black-crowned Night Heron) were found. |
3 avifauna species with conservation importance (Chinese Pond Heron,
Greater Coucal and Black Kite) were found |
|
Impact Size /
Abundance |
≈ 5 ha will be affected directly Very low number of fauna. |
≈ 6.9 ha will be affected directly Very low number of fauna. |
|
Impact Duration |
Permanent loss of existing habitat of the Project
footprint (≈ 5 ha). Indirect noise impact will be in both
construction & operational phases; while indirect water quality &
dust impact will be restricted in construction phase only |
Permanent loss of existing habitat of the Project
footprint (≈ 6.9 ha). Indirect noise impact will be in both
construction & operational phases; while indirect water quality &
dust impact will be restricted in construction phase only |
|
Impact
Reversibility |
Irreversible for
the Project footprint, reversible for indirectly impacted area offsite |
|
|
Impact Magnitude |
Habitat Loss:
Minor Water
Quality: Very Minor - Minor Noise:
Minor Dust:
Minor Glare:
Insignificant |
Habitat Loss:
Minor Water
Quality: Minor Noise:
Minor Dust:
Minor Glare:
Insignificant |
|
Overall
Impact |
Minor |
Minor |
Table 10-9 Evaluation of the Significance of Ecological Impact on Watercourse and
Artificial Coastline
|
Criteria |
Watercourse |
Artificial
Coastline |
|
Habitat quality |
Very Low |
Low |
|
Species |
5 avifauna species with conservation importance (Great Egret, Grey Heron,
Little Egret, White-throated Kingfisher and Black Kite) were found |
7 avifauna species with conservation importance (Great Egret, Grey Heron,
Chinese Pond Heron, Collared Crow, Little Egret, White-throated Kingfisher
and Black-crowned Night Heron) were found. In which, Collared Crow is
uncommon in Hong Kong |
|
Impact Size /
Abundance |
Not affected
directly |
|
|
Impact Duration |
Indirect noise impact will be in both
construction & operational phases; Indirect water quality impact will be
restricted in construction phase only |
|
|
Impact
Reversibility |
Reversible |
|
|
Impact Magnitude |
Habitat Loss:
N.A. Water
Quality: Insignificant Noise:
Minor Dust:
Insignificant Glare:
Insignificant |
Habitat Loss:
N.A. Water
Quality: Very Minor Noise:
Minor Dust:
Insignificant Glare:
Insignificant |
|
Overall
Impact |
Very
Minor |
Very
Minor |
10.11
Recommendations &
Mitigation Measures
10.11.1
Recommendations
and mitigation measures have been proposed to minimize the ecological impact to
acceptable levels based on the following hierarchy: avoidance, minimization and
compensation.
10.11.2
Minimization
l Erection of hoarding, fencing or provision of clear
demarcation of work zones to remind workers not to damage area outside the work
boundary
l Designate areas for placement of equipment,
building materials and wastes away from drainage channels
l Adopt
good site practices (e.g. covering exposed soil surface and open stockpile with
tarpaulin or similar fabric) and implement mitigation measures proposed in Chapter 6 – Water Quality Impact Assessment
(e.g. construction of drainage channel at the periphery of the Site for collection
of silty water for sedimentation) to minimize water quality impact.
l Implement
mitigation measures proposed in Chapter
5 – Noise Impact Assessment (e.g. adopting QPME (Quality Powered Mechanical
Equipment), and erecting noise barrier) to minimize noise emission and
transmission.
l Adopt
good site practices (e.g. covering exposed soil surface and open stockpile),
and implement mitigation measures proposed in Chapter 3 – Air Quality Impact Assessment (e.g. watering regularly)
to minimize dust emission.
l Implement
mitigation measures proposed in Chapter
11 – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (e.g. arranging lighting with due consideration of
reflectance so as to avoid glare effect) to minimize glare impact.
10.12
Evaluation of Residual
Impacts
10.12.1
With proper implementation of mitigation measures, no
unacceptable residual impact is anticipated during construction and operational
phases.
10.13
Environmental Monitoring
and Audit Programme
10.13.1
Regular
site audit shall be carried out to ensure that the proposed mitigation measures
are implemented properly. No monitoring and auditing programme would be
required in operational phase.
10.14.1
No site
of conservation importance was identified in the Study Area. All 5 habitats in
the Study Area were considered to have either Low or Very Low ecological value.
20 avifauna species of conservation importance
were recorded in past studies, while 10 avifauna species of conservation importance were found in recent surveys.
10.14.2
About
16.1 ha of Construction Sites, 5.0 ha of Developed Area and 6.9 ha of Abandoned
Area will be lost in this Project. These habitats have only Very Low ecological
value. Although direct impact on 2 avifauna species of conservation importance
is expected, only minor impact is expected as no nursery ground, breeding, foraging or
roosting behaviour was recorded in the Project footprint.
Nevertheless, no site, flora or other fauna species of conservation importance would be impacted directly.
10.14.3
All
habitats and fauna species, including all recorded species of conservation
importance, are expected in to be impacted indirectly by water quality, noise
dust, and/or glare impacts in construction phase, and by noise and/or glare
impacts in operational phase. Crowd noise and traffic noise induced during
major events will be infrequent and therefore the impact is considered
acceptable. Nevertheless, with proper implementation of mitigation measures,
all indirect impact would only be insignificant to minor (i.e. acceptable
level).
10.14.4
With
proper implementation of mitigation measures, residual impact is considered
acceptable. No specific monitoring and audit programme is required for
terrestrial ecology.
10.14.5
The
overall impact on terrestrial ecology is considered as acceptable.
Ades G., Kendrick
R., Crow P., Haig A., Cheung., Chow P. & Griffiths R. (2004). Kadoorie Farm
& Botanic Garden – Wildlife updates & sightings. Porcupine! 31: 18-22.
Agriculture,
Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD). (2014a). Hong Kong Biodiversity
Online. [online] http://www.afcd.gov.hk/english/conservation/hkbiodiversity/database/search.asp. Accessed: 10 March 2015.
Agriculture,
Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD). (2014b). Hong Kong Herbarium.
[online] http://www.herbarium.gov.hk/home.aspx. Accessed: 12 March 2015.
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. & Yong L. (2001). The Avifauna of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong
Kong SAR.
Chan S.F.K., Cheung
K.S., Ho C.Y., Lam F.N. & Tang W.S. (2005). A Field Guide to the Amphibians of Hong Kong. Friends of Country
Parks, Cosmos Books Ltd, Hong Kong SAR.
IUCN. (2014). IUCN
Red List of Threatened Species Version 2014.3. [online] www.iucnredlist.org.
Accessed: 12 March 2015.
Maunsell Consultants
Asia Limited (Maunsell). 2008. Agreement No. CE 35/2006(CE) Kai Tak Development
Engineering Study cum Design and Construction of Advance Works – Investigation,
Design and Construction: Environmental Impact Assessment Report. Civil Engineering
and Development Department, Hong Kong S.A.R.
Ove Arup &
Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup). 2001. Comprehensive Feasibility Study for
The Revised Scheme of South East Kowloon Development – Final Environmental
Impact Assessment Report, Territory Development Department, Hong Kong S.A.R.
Ove Arup &
Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup). 2011a. SCL – NEX/2206 EIA Study for Stabling
Sidings at Hung Hom Freight Yard – Final Environmental Impact Assessment
Report. MTR Corporation Ltd., Hong Kong S.A.R.
Ove Arup &
Partners Hong Kong Limited (Arup). 2011b. SCL – NEX/2206 EIA Study for Tai Wai
to Hung Hom Section – Final Environmental Impact Assessment Report. MTR
Corporation Ltd., Hong Kong S.A.R.
Shek C.T. (2006). A Field Guide to the Terrestrial Mammals of
Hong Kong. Friends of Country Parks, Cosmos Books Ltd, Hong Kong SAR.