Board logo

Subject: Our comments on San Tin EIA Report [Print This Page]

Author: HKBWS Suet Mei    Time: 5/03/2024 18:40     Subject: Our comments on San Tin EIA Report

On 2 Feb 2024, just before the public holidays for the Chinese New Year, the government released the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report for the San Tin/Lok Ma Chau Development Node (i.e. San Tin Technopole) for public inspection. The 30-day statutory consultation period ended on 2 March 2024. A significant number of mistakes and inadequacies in the San Tin EIA report have been uncovered before the end of the consultation period. Below are only some of the problems mostly related to the ecological impact on birds, which is probably just the tip of the iceberg.

1. No avoidance of habitat loss in pond of high ecological value
2. Refusal to re-apply for EIA Study Brief violate procedural justice
3. Misidentification of Designated Project (DP)
4. Project Area and Assessment Area should be extended
5. Underestimation of habitat ecological value due to the deficiency of 12-month baseline surveys and the incomplete review of existing available avifauna
datasets
6. Uncertain qualification for conducting the avifauna baseline survey and inadequate gatekeeping of EIA report before public inspection
7. Underestimation of ecological value as “piecemeal approach” and inappropriate assessment was adopted in the evaluation of pond habitat
8. Absence of firefly survey and comprehensive monitoring of Eurasian Otter
9. Significant environmental changes to the egretries and their surroundings
10. Direct loss in foraging and feeding ground for the egretries was neglected and the corresponding impacts were underestimated
11. Disruption of the flight corridor for breeding egrets and herons
12. Inadequate protection of the egretry using the Open Space zoning
13. Failed to identify and assess the impacts on the day roost of Black-crowned Night Herons in San Tin Pumping Station
14. Direct impacts on the loss in foraging ground for ardeids’ night roosts were ignored
15. Missed more than half of the breeding bird species in fishpond wetlands
16. Threats to the integrity of Deep Bay wetland ecosystem caused by previous and ongoing development projects
17. Further significant fragmentation of Deep Bay wetland ecosystem by the current project
18. Absence of light impact assessment
19. Inadequate Visual Impact Assessment
20. Only four species selected for the functional value calculation and the compensation requirement is unacceptable
21. Inappropriate assumption of the Exclusion Zone (EZ) and Reduced Density Zone (RDZ)
22. Over-estimation of the carrying capacity of the compensation wetlands
23. Unjustified 45% increase in functional value
24. Absence of habitat management plan of the Sam Po Shue Wetland Conservation Park (SPSWCP)
25. Inappropriate implementation timeline of SPSWCP
26. The proposed 35m eco-interface lacks buffering function
27. Bird collision risk may not be avoided or mitigated
28. Wetland Enhancement Measures outside the assessment area of the project
29. Cumulative ecological impacts and undesirable precedent set in Deep Bay area

You may visit this link to read our full submission (Only in English):
https://cms.hkbws.org.hk/cms/phocadownload/submissions/EIA/20240302_STLMC_EIA_HKBWS.pdf

Author: K_Chan    Time: 11/03/2024 18:32

【謝過鳥會幹事雪媚post出鳥會的立場,由於只得英文版,我利用Bing Machine (AI) Translator,把其翻譯,沒有添加任何潤飾和修改,文義如有出入,一切以英文版爲榷。好待一衆人士皆能瞭解為荷,見下。】

我們對新田環評報告的意見
2024年2月2日,即農曆新年公眾假期前夕,政府公佈了新田/樂馬洲發展中心(即新田科技城)的環境影響評估報告,供公眾查閱。為期30天的法定諮詢期已於2024年3月2日結束。在諮詢期結束前,新田環評報告中的大量錯誤和不足之處已被發現。以下是一些主要與鳥類生態影響有關的問題,這可能只是冰山一角。

1. 不迴避高生態價值池塘棲息地喪失
2. 拒絕重新申請環評研究簡報違反程序正義
3. 指定專案(DP)的錯誤識別
4. 專案區和評估區應擴大
5. 由於缺乏12個月的基線調查和對現有現有鳥類的不完整審查,導致對生境生態價值的低估數據
6. 進行鳥類基線調查的資格不確定,以及在公眾檢查前對環評報告的把關不充分
7. 池塘生境評價採用「零敲碎打法」低估生態價值和不恰當的評估
8. 缺乏對歐亞水獺的螢火蟲調查和全面監測
9. 白鷺及其周圍環境的重大變化
10. 忽視了白鷺覓食和覓食地的直接損失,並低估了相應的影響
11. 白鷺和蒼鷺繁殖的飛行走廊中斷
12. 使用休憩用地分區對白鷗的保護不足
13. 未能識別和評估黑冠夜鷺在新田泵房的日間棲息地的影響
14. 忽略了對阿代斯夜間棲息地覓食地損失的直接影響
15. 漏掉了魚塘濕地一半以上的繁殖鳥類
16. 過去和正在進行的開發專案對後海灣濕地生態系統完整性造成的威脅
17. 本專案進一步嚴重破壞后海灣濕地生態系統
18. 缺乏光影響評估
19. 視覺影響評估不足
20. 僅選4種進行功能值計算,補償要求不可接受
21. 禁區 (EZ) 和低密度區 (RDZ) 的不當假設
22. 補償濕地承載力高估
23. 功能價值不合理地增加 45%
24. 三埔樹濕地保育公園(保育公園)沒有生境管理計劃
25. SPSWCP的實施時程表不適當
26. 擬建的35米生態介面缺乏緩衝功能
27. 鳥類碰撞風險可能無法避免或減輕
28. 專案評估區域外的濕地改善措施
29. 后海灣地區累積的生態影響及不良先例

您可以存取此連結閱讀我們的完整提交(僅限英文版):
https://cms.hkbws.org.hk/cms/phocadownload/submissions/EIA/20240302_STLMC_EIA_HKBWS.pdf




Welcome to HKBWS Forum 香港觀鳥會討論區 (http://hkbws.org.hk/BBS/) Powered by Discuz! 6.0.0