The EIA report for the San Tin Technopole was released before the Lunar New Year holiday (2/2), and the 30-day statutory consultation period is now coming to an end with 10 more days to go. We spotted a few apparent errors in the ecological impact assessment (EcoIA) of the EIA report. In Appendix 10.2 of the EcoIA, some of the bird photographs and the corresponding names do not match.
(1) The photo of Wood Sandpiper is written as Marsh Sandpiper.
(2) The photo of Long-toed Stint is labelled as Little Stint.
(3) The photo annotated Crested Goshawk, despite the limited image quality, is believed to be another small raptor species within the Accipiter family instead of Crested Goshawk.
Although we are not sure whether these errors are due to "typo " or "misidentification of birds", given that birds are important species and indicators for the conservation of the Deep Bay wetlands, while the EIA report is a professional and legally binding document, we are surprised by such mistakes. This may not only leads to underestimation of the impact of development on the ecological environment and wildlife, but also affects the credibility of the report, raising doubts about the "seriousness" of the impact assessment of the San Tin Technopole.
Deep Bay wetland is the most intact coastal wetland system remaining in the Greater Bay Area, and it should be treated with great care. We hope the relevant authorities and the Advisory Council on the Environment (ACE) would rigorously review the EIA report, ensuring that it provides accurate, reliable, and comprehensive ecological baseline data, so as to enable a comprehensive evaluation of potential environmental impacts and to prevent irreversible damage to the wetland system caused by any developments.
The public consultation on the EIA report for the San Tin Technopole has started. Please seize the final opportunity and submit your comments via email to eiaocomment@epd.gov.hk or online: https://shorturl.at/elAZ8 before 2 March 2024
————————————————
Nice to read HKBWS's updates and URLs on the subject amid the closing of the consultation very soon. As members of Society and the public may not be familiar with the grandiose blueprints, we look forward to more posts/analyses like this on the EIA and EcIA in due course, if not a Society Briefing to members on the stance.
BTW, the low resolution of Plate 3 impedes the identification. Crested goshawk likely though. At least it was not been asserted as a passenger pigeon. Not too bad!
Welcome to HKBWS Forum 香港觀鳥會討論區 (http://hkbws.org.hk/BBS/)
