WWF Mai Po

米埔自然保護區2010年3 月31日起關閉21天。
Mai Po will be closed for 21 days starting 31 March 2010.

世界自然基金會香港分會新聞稿：WWF-HK Press release (Eng)
漁農自然保理署新聞稿：AFCD Press release (Eng)

[ Last edited by WWF Mai Po at 31/03/2010 12:20 ]

WWF Mai Po

於米埔自然保護區關閉期間，米埔訪客中心將於星期一至五，上午九點至下午五點，照常開放，但於星期六、日及公眾假期休息。


During the period of closure, the opening hours of the visitor centre is 9am to 5pm, from Monday to Friday and closed on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays.

[ Last edited by WWF Mai Po at 31/03/2010 12:21 ]

wmartin

Looks another ridiculous closure. [Might not protect people or birds given current situation; tho of course just a slight chance of safeguarding officials from blame, so well worth taking this measure...]

If it proves to be H5N1, will be intriguing to figure how the swallow caught it. Best notion I have is that it was from drinking water that contains the virus, maybe at or near a poultry farm - and maybe somewhere to south on migration route, but not too far away.

Sze

Quote:

Original posted by wmartin at 1/04/2010 10:42
If it proves to be H5N1, will be intriguing to figure how the swallow caught it. Best notion I have is that it was from drinking water that contains the virus, maybe at or near a poultry farm - and maybe somewhere to south on migration route, but not too far away.

The Barn Swallow was confirmed carring H5N1, and I also interest how the barn swallow caught the virus?

And information from WHO : "The highly pathogenic form (bird flu) is far more dramatic. It spreads very rapidly through poultry flocks, causes disease affecting multiple internal organs, and has a mortality that can approach 100%, often within 48 hours."

kmike

Its also important to remember that that there are no proven cases of people catching bird flu from a wild bird anywhere in the world.

Cheers
Mike

Sze

Quote:

Original posted by kmike at 2/04/2010 04:40
Its also important to remember that that there are no proven cases of people catching bird flu from a wild bird anywhere in the world.

Cheers
Mike

Yes for sure! Although I was close to the dead Barn Swallow in 1m on that day, I have not caught any bird flu!

[ Last edited by Sze at 2/04/2010 18:19 ]

Jonathmartinez

Did MPNR still close to public or not?

Thanks

Jonathan

mhs

Quote:

maria 發表於 17/04/2010 21:59
if my counting isn't wrong, it'll reopen on 21st!!

Hi Maria, I can't find any offical announcement from WWF.

WWF Mai Po

Ahead of a formal WWF press release later today or early tomorrow, yes Mai Po will re-open tomorrow. Officially AFCD has to notify us, but as yet have not.

Today around lunchtime both gei wai #11 and #16/17 were full up with shorebirds and terns, even the Phillipine Duck is still around.... so it should be a great few days ahead with the afternoon high tides.

Bena
________________________________________

19:30
AFCD press release about re-opening tomorrow here

[ Last edited by WWF Mai Po at 20/04/2010 19:32 ]

tsheunglai

Dear all Members of the Society and of WWFHK

In the past and during the past three weeks in particular, we have been just helplessly and haplessly watching the closure of MPNR by a directory of AFCD, strictly by the finding that a dead wild bird
found within three kilometres of the reserve's perimeter. And MPNR and N.T. in general is just a short
distance from other semi-wild habitats of north-west N.T.

Don't forget that Hong Kong is just small place inside the migratory route of wild birds, and HK is small in width when compared with that of the m.r. of the birds. Will AFCD close all public areas including country parks and even Kowloon Park becuase they care about we Hong Kong citizens according to its present
closure policy? They dared to close MPNR because it is directly under it? Has it taken equal concern
when we birded on the access road. Did they come out and advise and even drive us away? They didn't.
Because the law just protects them withing MPNR.

What evidence that AFCD could directly co-relate bird-flu with infection of human in the past
pathological history and record in the colony and the whole world in general? The answer is
there is none. According to what we have learned in the forum alone, there has not even one
established case that a human being has been infected by visiting wild places. And remember,
we never, and the wild birds never allow us go close to them to effect bodily touch. And
yet AFCD 'love' us so much that MPNR was closed at short notice.

It is not that I as birder can't wait and make some hobby-kind of sacrifice. It is the rationale,
the evidence and sense that surround the case in question that arouse me beyond bearance. And Hong
Kong at the moment is surrouded by all that nonsense and false logic or pretext that allows a
particular HK gov't department to exercise its statuory power or non-statutory adminstrative power.

Just on last Sunday, I experienced unlicensed streetsellers blocking most of the paedestrian walkway
without exercising the least alertness of intervention by the law-enforcers. And yet the dep't
concerned will not hesitate to arrest and brought a licensed ice-creamer seller to court on receiving
a complaint from the public, according to newspaper report or a documentory of RTHK.

Now an example of such nonsense confronts  us. Should we allow those power-holders to dictate upon
us on whatever grounds they think fit?

It is time for us to take action. I myself will take on a course of action shortly. In the meantime
I sincerely hope that an organized, well-thought out and well-orchestrated plan be effectively
carried out, still best by the management side of both HKBWS and WWFHK. I will volunteer to devote
my time for the fight, if necessary for days, if necessary for months.

Meanwhile, keep voicing your thoughts and suggestions here. English and Chinese both will serve well
here.

S L Tai

puppymic

其實真係應該檢討下條條例，又無根據，對米埔既運作又有影響啦 .... 快d廢左佢啦

http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/redi ... amp;goto=nextoldset

[ Last edited by puppymic at 20/04/2010 21:23 ]

John Holmes

Good to see a stronger statement from WWF about the costs to them ( in both money and lost educational opportunities) caused by these "closures" of Mai Po by the Government.

I certainly agree that forbidding visits to MPNR sends entirely the wrong message to the public about the possibility that being anywhere near wild birds might be dangerous.  As Mike K. pointed out earlier, no-one has ever caught avian 'flu from a wild bird.

I gather that some form of "quarantine" regulation was imposed, but there is NO transparency from the Government about which section of which law is being used to keep us out.

I think that just telling us "It's closed" isn't good enough.

Does anyone know which regulation was used to exclude us ?

Late

fly 3kM just need 2min

Sze

Quote:

Original posted by WWF Mai Po at 21/04/2010 08:48
Mai Po Re-opens Today

WWF Press Release ( Eng )    ( Chi )

Strongly Support!

wmartin

Letter I sent S China Morning Post; somewhat edited version appeared today:

Quote:

Mai Po and the Dead Ducks Don't Fly Principle

I refer to the long and yet insubstantial letter from Dr Mary Chow, for director of agriculture, fisheries and conservation ("Public health is main concern during closure of bird reserves"), which sought to justify closures of Mai Po as a result of isolated cases of dead birds being found, and testing positive for H5N1 bird flu.

For five years, I have been active in striving to highlight the fact that wild birds do not sustain and spread virulent forms of H5N1. Overwhelmingly, birds that catch H5N1 sicken, and die: which might be summarised as "Dead Ducks Don't Fly". Yet there have been considerable efforts to show otherwise, and to blame wild birds for spreading flu; and remarkably little effort to investigate the role of the poultry industry, including extensive poultry smuggling.

As Dr Chow is aware, yet many officials and industry people are loathe to admit, highly pathogenic - highly lethal - forms of bird flu are products of the poultry industry. The virulent strains of H5N1 of concern evolved in the poultry industry - particularly in factory farming conditions that are ideally suited to evolving deadly diseases; the poultry industry has sustained H5N1, despite eradication efforts.

Hence, this "bird flu" is something of a misnomer: H5N1 would be better termed "poultry flu". There is justification for measures to limit spread within the poultry industry, particularly in crowded farms and markets rather than backyards. However, measures such as the recent closure of Mai Po because of a single dead swallow being found outside the reserve are over-reacting, and not based on science.

Extensive testing at Mai Po and - I believe - worldwide has yet to find even one apparently healthy wild bird with virulent H5N1: the Dead Ducks Don't Fly principle holds. So when all birds at Mai Po look healthy, they surely are healthy. Dr Chow notes the reserve closure would minimise human contact with wild birds and their faecal droppings. Yet I have been visiting Mai Po for some 23 years, and not once come into contact with a wild bird there; nor am I prone to touching their droppings - or eating them, as flu is not contracted through skin.

The closure decision would appear political - perhaps showing the poultry industry it is not being singled out. It not only stopped visits to the reserve in the short-term, and hit WWF-Hong Kong financially, but also contributed to undue notions that the natural world is somehow scary: we already have too many Hongkongers who are afraid of creatures like butterflies, and even nervous regarding trees. Given the "Conservation" in its name, the AFCD should be doing all it can to reverse such notions, and to stand up for wild birds and science.

It is good the government is conducting a review of the overall risk; I hope science and commonsense will prevail. I hope, too, the government will indeed work closely with WWF-HK on this front.

HKBWS WY

香港觀鳥會已去函南華早報"Letters to Editor"，指出政府因應禽流感而封閉米埔保護區的政策已經過時，並支持世界自然基金會香港分會要求政府應盡快檢討是項政策。

HKBWS has sent an letter to "Letters to Editor", South China Morning Post to support WWF-Hong Kong's position that the government closure of Mai Po is an outdated policy which should be reviewed urgently.

tsheunglai

Dear all

It is time for me to tell that I've written a letter to the society's executive committee sent by
e-mail, attention to Dr Cheung our chairman. It was sent on the 14th of May, one day before
I left HK for six days and three days before the committee's meeting.

I did this not for publicity, or self-promotion. It is out of my concern for seeing birds in the best
way that cause them no harm, and see if out of great enjoyment, how to protect the things, living or
non-living, which I love. I love Mai Po, as many thousands before and after me have and will feel so.
I have so far consciously or uncounsciously abstained from visiting the Wetland Park for its non-recyclable infrastructure and fearsome cost of maintaining it. It is totally against the philosophical side of my birdwatching mind.

Personally, I will strive my best to see that, as a result of my effort and influence, however small their contribution to its cause, Mai Po enclosure policy will get a proper and rational review for a better and realistic overhaul.

S L Tai