9. Cultural Heritage
9.1 Introduction
This Section presents the cultural heritage impact assessment (CHIA) associated with the construction of the proposed Project. In accordance with Clause 3.4.9 of the EIA Study Brief No. ESB-324/2019, a Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) including impact assessment was undertaken by the qualified marine archaeologist (Dr. William Jeffery) and the findings of the MAI are presented herein.
9.2 Legislative Requirements and Evaluation Criteria
The following legislations/standards/guidelines/requirements are applicable to the assessment of archaeological and historic resources in Hong Kong.
§ Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499) and the associated Technical Memorandum on the EIA Process (EIAO-TM);
§ Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) (AM Ordinance);
§ Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines; and
§ Requirements for Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI) (Appendix H of EIA Study Brief).
9.2.1 Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap 499)
Annex 10 of the EIAO-TM outlines the criteria for assessment of impact on sites of cultural heritage. The general presumption is in favour of the protection and conservation of all sites of cultural heritage. In addition, adverse impacts on sites of cultural heritage shall be kept to the absolute minimum.
Annex 19 of the EIAO-TM outlines the approaches required in investigating and assessing the impacts on sites of cultural heritage. There is no quantitative standard in deciding the relative importance of these sites, but in general, sites of unique archaeological, historical or architectural value will be considered as highly significant. Preservation in totality is preferred. If, due to site constraints and other factors, only preservation in part is possible, this must be fully justified with alternative proposals or layout designs, which confirm the impracticability of total preservation.
9.2.2 Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap 53)
The Antiquities and Monuments Ordinance (Cap. 53) (AM Ordinance) provides statutory protection against the threat of development on Declared Monuments to enable their preservation for posterity. The AM Ordinance also establishes the statutory procedures to be followed in making such a declaration.
Any person who discovers an antiquity, or supposed antiquity, is required to report the discovery to the Antiquities Authority.
9.2.3 Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG)
The Chapter 10, Conservation, of the HKPSG provides general guidelines and measures for the conservation of historical buildings, sites of archaeological interest and other antiquities.
9.2.4 Requirements for Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI)
Requirements for MAI provided in Appendix H of the EIA Study Brief details the standard practice, procedures and methodology which must be undertaken in determining marine archaeological baseline and potential, presence of archaeological artefacts, evaluating the potential impact and establishing suitable mitigation measures.
9.3 Assessment Methodology
9.3.1 Introduction
The CHIA follows the criteria and guidelines in Annexes 10 and 19 of the EIAO-TM. It also follows the Requirements for MAI as stated in Appendix H of the EIA Study Brief. It should be noted that the Project is marine-based and thus potential impacts on built heritage and terrestrial archaeological resources are not anticipated. Findings of the MAI of this Project are presented in the following sections.
9.3.2 Assessment Area
As the construction works of the proposed Wong Chuk Kok Hoi Fish Culture Zone (FCZ) would mainly be the assembly and anchorage of fish rafts / cages that will be carried out by the fish farmers who obtain marine fish culture licences in this new FCZ which is limited to marine area, no built heritage impact assessment and terrestrial archaeological impact assessment will be conducted for the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment (CHIA). Therefore, the CHIA will only cover the Marine Archaeological Investigation (MAI).
The Assessment Area for the MAI includes an area to be affected by the marine works associated with the anchoring system of fish rafts/cages as shown in the proposed FCZ location in Figure 9.1.
9.3.3 Baseline Review
A baseline review was conducted to collate existing information to identify the archaeological potential and their likely character, extent, quality and value. The baseline review will focus on known sources including:
a) Civil Engineering and Development Department, Geotechnical Engineering Office – The Department holds extensive seabed survey data collected from previous geological research;
b) Marine Department, Hydrographic Office – the Department holds a substantial achieve of hydrographic data and charts;
c) The Royal Naval Hydrographic Department in the UK – the Department maintains an archive of all survey data collected by naval hydrographers;
d) Relevant Government departments such as Antiquities and Monuments Office, Environmental Protection Department etc. to obtain information on dredging history on the proposed FCZ locations; and
e) Internet and libraries sources of relevant studies.
The findings will provide historical records and more detailed geological analysis of submarine features which may have been subsequently masked by more recent sediment deposits and accumulated debris.
9.3.4 Marine Geophysical Survey
A marine geophysical survey of the proposed Wong Chuk Kok Hoi FCZ was conducted with side scan sonar, multi bean and single beam echo sounding and seismic sub-bottom profiling. The data received from the survey were analysed in detail to provide:
§ Exact definition of the areas of greatest archaeological potential;
§ Assessment of the depth and nature of the seabed sediments to define which areas consist of suitable material to bury and preserve archaeological material;
§ Detailed examination of survey records to map anomalies in and on the seabed which may be archaeological material; and
§ Detailed examination of the multi beam sonar data to assess the archaeological potential of the sonar contact.
9.3.5 Establishing Marine Archaeological Potential
The data examined during baseline review and marine geophysical survey data review were analysed to provide an indication of the likely character and extent of archaeological resources within the assessment area. The results are presented in below sections.
9.3.6 Further Archaeological Actions (Provisional)
Subject to the results of establishing archaeological potential, accepted marine archaeological practices could be recommended to acquire more detailed data on areas with archaeological potential that may potentially be impacted by the proposed FCZ at Wong Chuk Kok Hoi. These may include further detailed marine geophysical surveys of potential areas, including Remote Operated Vehicle, visual diver survey, or employing a watching brief. If it is considered necessary, the detailed plan and scope will be agreed with AFCD, EPD and Antiquities and Monuments Office (AMO).
9.3.7 Impact Assessment and Recommendations
Based on the findings and analysis of the baseline conditions and results of the evaluation of the marine archaeological potential, an impact assessment was conducted to evaluate the potential marine impacts of the Project on marine archaeological resources / sites, and recommend necessary marine archaeological actions or mitigation measures.
9.4 Marine Archaeological Review
9.4.1 Baseline Review
9.4.1.1 Review of Historical Documents
The Assessment Area is located south of Double Island and west of Wong Chuk Kok Tsui in Wong Chuk Kok Hoi at the northeastern New Territories of Hong Kong. The Wong Wan Chau (Double Island) Site of Archaeological Interest is located over 600 m at the middle east coast of the island facing Double Heaven (see Figure 9.1) where Neolithic period and Bronze Age archaeological deposits had been found.
Before the evacuation of the coast in the 17th century, most of the inhabitants were Cantonese. Hakka started moving into southern China after the Mongol invasions of the Song dynasty and prided themselves on their reputation for strength and endurance (Faure, 1986). They were often associated with stonemasonry, farming and building rather than seafaring and maritime trade. They engaged in fishing and the principal routes to market for their products were by sea due to the very basic and steep unpaved paths that connected Hakka villages until late in the 20th century (ARUP, 2020).
The Assessment Area is located at the east of the old villages of the Northeastern New Territories (including the villages north of Tiu Tang Lung and Fan Kei Tok, south of Starling Inlet and Kat O Hoi; and west of Double Haven such as Lai Chi Wo, So Lo Pun, Yung Shue Au and Kuk Po) that could trace back their history to over 300 years ago (AFCD, 2005).
Sea bandits and pirates were a periodic scourge especially in the years 1790-1810 when large piratical fleets caused havoc in the Pearl River Delta. Coastal dwellers themselves were not above resorting to piracy or receiving stolen goods. The region was also notorious for its inter lineage and inter village wars, sometimes conducted along ethnic lines. In the late 19th century the coastal regions of the new territories had long acquired a reputation for unruliness (ARUP, 2020).
The maritime history of the coastal Hakka villages of the New Territories is not widely explored but it is evident that fishing and maritime transport plus maritime deities like Tin Hau (Matsui) were an essential part of the culture and economy of village life and formed the links with neighbouring villages and the wider economy and official administration cantered around Shenzhen (ARUP, 2020).
9.4.1.2 Geological Conditions
The solid geology of the Assessment Area consists of Hang Hau Formation with shallow marine sediments comprising beach sand, intertidal (mud and sand) and estuarine deposits (mud, clayey silt and sand) (EGS, 2021).
9.4.1.3 Review of Charts
A review of admiralty charts covering the Assessment Area did not identify any sites of potential marine archaeological interest. Chart number 2593 “Hong Kong to Mirs Bay” from the United States Hydrographic Office was compiled from British surveys until 1906, and no sites/shipwrecks were found to be in the Assessment Area.
9.4.1.4 United Kingdom Hydrographic Office ‘Wreck’ Files
The United Kingdom Hydrographic Office in Taunton maintains a database of known shipwrecks / undefined sites in the HKSAR. This is the same data held by the Hong Kong Marine Department, Hydrographic Office. The review showed that no wrecks were found to be within the MAI Assessment Area.
9.4.1.5 Summary of Marine Archaeological Potential
Based on the historical review, the human activities have occurred since the Neolithic period around the area. Evidence shows that fishing and maritime transport associated with the old villages has been the major maritime activities at the adjacent area. While on this basis the waters of the Assessment Area may have marine archaeological potential, no shipwrecks of marine archaeological potential could be identified from the Charts and the Wreck Databases.
9.4.2 Marine Geophysical Survey Result
A marine geophysical survey as part of the site investigations of the Project was conducted in March 2021 to study the seabed features and to locate anomalous features in the surveyed area. The survey covered the areas to be affected by marine works associated with the anchoring system of fish rafts. The survey findings were processed by the geophysicists and reviewed by the qualified marine archaeologist, Dr William Jeffery, and cultural heritage specialist, Ms Peggy Wong. Figure 9.1 show the marine geophysical survey. The survey track plots are shown in Appendix 9A. Details of survey types with objectives and survey spacing are shown in Table 9.1, and the equipment list is shown in Table 9.2. The seabed is primarily covered with fine sediment with numerous seabed scars (from trawling and anchoring). An example is illustrated in Figure 9.2.
Review of the survey findings identified one sonar contacts (A-SC001). It is located at a water depth of 14.1m and its dimension is shown in Table 9.3. It is interpreted to be debris. Its location is shown in Figure 9.1 and the sonar contact image is illustrated in Figure 9.3. No sub-bottom anomalies of marine archaeology potential were observed.
Table 9.1 Survey Types with Objectives and Survey Spacing
|
Survey Type |
Objective |
Survey Spacing |
|
Multi-beam echo sounding (MBES) |
To provide detailed seabed level variations |
50m, infill lines in shallow areas |
|
Single beam echo sounding (SBES) |
For cross check of MBES data |
50m, infill lines in shallow areas |
|
Side scan sonar (SSS) |
To locate anomalous features and map sediment types on the seabed |
50m, infill lines along the coast |
|
Seismic sub-bottom profiling (SBP) |
To identify sub-bottom features and stratigraphy |
50m x 200m grid |
Table 9.2 Equipment List
|
Type |
Equipment |
|
Survey Vessel |
Class II licenced survey vessel Wing Hung 2 |
|
Horizontal positioning |
C-Nav Globally Corrected Global Positioning System (GcGPS) Model 3050M |
|
Single beam echo sounding |
Knudsen 320M dual frequency Single-beam Echo Sounder |
|
TSS 320B Motion Sensor |
|
|
Multi-beam echo sounding |
R2Sonic SONIC2024 Multi-beam Echo Sounder |
|
Side scan sonar |
EdgeTech 4200 (100kHz & 400kHz) |
|
Seismic sub-bottom profile |
C-Boom Low Voltage high-resolution Boomer system |
|
C-Phone hydrophone system |
|
|
Software |
C-Nav computerized navigation suite |
|
C-View digital recording and processing system |
|
|
|
3-D seismic interpretation environment |
|
Others |
A/C generators, computers and bar check equipment |
Table 9.3 Sonar contact Summary Table
|
Contact number |
Latitude Longitude |
Easting Northing |
Water depth (m) |
Dimensions (m) |
Description |
|
A-SC001 |
22° 30.396' N 114° 19.364' E |
851275.6E 840781.9N |
14.1 |
1.8 x 1.5 x <0.5 |
Debris |
Figure 9.2 Example of Side Scan Sonar (SSS) Rectified Image Showing Numerous Seabed Scar (Trawling Scar) and Fine Sediment Seabed
Figure 9.3 SSS Rectified Image Showing Sonar Contact A-SC001
9.4.3 Establishment of Marine Archaeological Potential
There is one sonar contact (A-SC001) at the edge of the Assessment Area interpreted as debris that may be of archaeological potential. Nevertheless, because of the muddy/silty seabed, objects such as cannon would sink into the seabed, the sonar contact is most likely to be modern, recently deposited debris that would not be of high archaeological potential. There are no wrecks/obstructions found in the UKHO Wrecks database for the MAI Assessment Area.
Except A-SC001, the remaining Assessment Area is concluded to have no marine archaeological potential.
No sub-bottom anomalies of marine archaeology potential were observed.
9.5 Potential Sources of Impact
The construction works of the proposed Wong Chuk Kok Hoi FCZ, would mainly be on-site assembly and anchorage of fish rafts/cages within the Project Area, and will be carried out by the fish farmers who obtain marine fish culture licences in this new FCZ. Maintenance dredging or removal of sediments is not anticipated during FCZ operation under the Project.
Potential impacts arising from these activities include:
§ Direct loss of potential marine archaeological deposits due to seabed disturbance works during anchorage of the fish rafts/cages;
§ Indirect impact on access for future archaeological surveys; and
§ Permanent access disturbance to marine archaeological deposits if they are found to be within the Project Area.
9.6 Impact Assessment
The desktop review found no sites of archaeological interest, declared monuments, proposed monuments, graded historic sites/buildings/structures; and Government historic sites identified by the AMO fall within the Assessment Area. No construction phase and operation phase impact to these cultural heritage resources is anticipated. However, a sonar contact A-SC001 that may be of marine archaeological potential has been identified from marine geophysical survey. The impacts are discussed below.
9.6.1 Construction Phase
The construction of fish rafts / cages will simply involve the use of tug boats to tow the main part of the fish rafts/cages to within the Project site, and to be assembled and anchored therein. No major marine construction works, such as dredging or works with significant seabed disturbance, is expected. The fish rafts / cages will generally be gravity cages and the four corners of each cage will be anchored using weights and ropes and it is expected that the seabed to be disturbed by anchoring will be confined to a thin vertical surface layer (<0.5 m), and <2 m horizontally. Geophysical survey identified one sonar contact A-SC001 located at the edge of the Assessment Area as in Figure 9.1. It is interpreted as debris that may be of archaeological potential. Nevertheless, because of the muddy / silty seabed, objects such as cannon would sink into the seabed, the sonar contact is most likely to be modern, recently deposited debris that would not be of high archaeological potential. Potential direct impact on sonar contact A-SC001 that may be of marine archaeological potential due to anchorage of fish rafts / cages and tug boat anchorage is possible.
9.6.2 Operation Phase
Potential direct impact on sonar contact A-SC001 that may be of marine archaeological potential during operation phase of the Project is possible.
9.7 Mitigation Measures
As no impacts to sites of archaeological interest, declared monuments, proposed monuments, graded historic sites/buildings/structures; and Government historic sites identified by AMO are expected, no construction phase and operation phase mitigation measure for terrestrial cultural heritage is required. However, the mitigation measures recommended for sonar contact A-SC001 is discussed below.
9.7.1 Construction Phase
According to Annex 10 of EIAO-TM, the general presumption is in favour of the protection and conservation of all sites of cultural heritage, the potential direct impact on sonar contact A-SC001 that may have marine archaeological potential will be avoided by isolating it with a 20 m radius buffer area from any tug boat anchoring and anchoring of the fish rafts/cages as shown in Figure 9.1. The locations and relocations of fish rafts/cages are regulated by the Marine Fish Culture Ordinance (Cap. 353), and AFCD will ensure the locations of anchoring of vessels and fish rafts/cages will not be located within the buffer area. Site inspections on a regular basis by the Environmental Team are recommended to check if any seabed disturbance work is conducted in the buffer area.
9.7.2 Operation Phase
The buffer area as shown in Figure 9.1 with 20 m radius from A-SC001 should be implemented during the operation phase of the Project. AFCD will maintain the record of the buffer area and the locations of the fish rafts / cages. The locations and relocations of fish rafts / cages are regulated by the Marine Fish Culture Ordinance (Cap. 353), and AFCD will ensure the locations of anchoring of vessels and fish rafts/cages will not be located within the buffer area. AFCD will conduct regular site inspections to check if any seabed disturbance work is conducted in the buffer area.
9.8 Cumulative Impacts
At present, there are no planned projects within the Assessment Area that could have cumulative cultural heritage impacts with the proposed Project. No cumulative impact or adverse residual impacts on marine archaeological resources are expected.
9.9 Conclusion
The desktop review supplemented with the results of marine geophysical survey conducted for the Project identified one sonar contact, A-SC001, within the Project Area boundary that may be of archaeological potential. Nevertheless, because of the muddy/silty seabed, objects such as cannon would sink into the seabed, the sonar contact is most likely to be modern, recently deposited debris that would not be of high archaeological potential. A buffer area with 20 m radius from A-SC001 is recommended to avoid any tug boat anchoring and anchoring of the fish rafts/cages in the area so as to avoid any impact to A-SC001 during both the construction and operation phases of the Project. The locations and relocations of fish rafts/cages are regulated by the Marine Fish Culture Ordinance (Cap. 353), and AFCD will ensure the locations of anchoring of vessels and fish rafts/cages will not be located within the buffer area. Site inspections on a regular basis by the Environmental Team are recommended to check if any seabed disturbance work is conducted in the buffer area during construction phase of the Project. AFCD will conduct regular inspections to check if any seabed disturbance work is conducted in the buffer area during operation phase of the Project.
9.10 Bibliography
9.10.1 English
Antiquities and Monuments Office, 2012, List of Sites of Archaeological Interest in Hong Kong (as at Nov 2012).
Agriculture, Fisheries & Conservation Department (AFCD), 2005, Exploring Double Haven, Hong Kong: Cosmos Book Ltd.
EGS, 2021, Marine Geophysical Survey for Fish Culture Zone EIA Study: Site A – Wong Chuk Kok Hoi - Preliminary Report. March 2021.
Ove Arup & Partners Limited (ARUP), 2020, Pier Improvement at Lai Chi Wo – Environment Impact Assessment Report for Civil Engineering and Development Department, Hong Kong.
9.10.2 Chart
Chart number 2593 “Hong Kong to Mirs Bay” from the United States Hydrographic Office was compiled from British surveys until 1906.