| Introduction |
| 1. | These views are submitted in response to the call from the Director of Planning for public views on the initial land use proposals formulated under the first stage of the two studies. The views are based on information available in the consultation digests issued by the Planning Department. |
| Basic selection criteria |
| 2. | The HKBWS welcomes the inclusion of "protection of high quality ... ecological ... resources..." as a basic selection criterion in the studies. |
| 3. | The Chief Executive of the HKSAR announced in his 1999 policy address that the government will embrace the concept of sustainable development in the future. The maintenance of biodiversity and natural resources is a key guiding principle of sustainable development. Both are aspects of ecology. Thus the protection of ecological resources falls in line with the adoption of sustainable development as the foundation of HKSAR policies. |
| 4. | The concern of the HKBWS is that this declared selection criterion for the studies is apparently not reflected in the proposed development plans, especially that for Kwu Tung North which will be the focus of this Society's comments. |
| Planning principles |
| 5. | There is no reference to the protection of ecologically important sites in the list of principles, in spite of a figure labelled "preserved wetland area" on p. 4 of the consultation digest on NENT. The HKBWS considers that it is essential to have this explicitly adopted as a planning principle, so as to be consistent with the sustainable development concept. |
| Feasibility of the proposed plans |
| 6. | The consultative document states that "no major problems have been identified". The HKBWS would like to point out that a major problem exists with the proposed development plan for Kwu Tung North, in respect of the transport infrastructure planned east of the town. |
| The problem |
| 7. | The consultation digest presents the Sheung Shui - Lok Ma Chau spur line as a fait accompli. The Society contends that the exact location of the spur line should be a subject of further deliberation. The route of the spur line as shown in fig. 11 on p. 7 of the digest passes through the heart of "Long Valley", the flood plain bounded by Ho Sheung Heung to the north, Yin Kong and Tsung Pak Long to the south and the KCR railway to the east. It would fragment and destroy a site of high ecological value, contrary to the spirit of the basic spirit of protection of sites of ecological importance. The HKBWS has lodged a formal objection to this route, under the provisions of the Railway Ordinance. |
| 8. | On the same ground, the HKBWS objects to the indicated location of the proposed Fanling Bypass and West Rail Phase within the Long Valley. |
| 9. | The HKBWS is concerned that under "Kwu Tung North" (pp. 5 - 11), the consultation digest makes no reference to the Long Valley and that there is apparently a lack of recognition of its ecological importance. We were nevertheless heartened by Mr Gordon Siu, then Secretary for Planning, Environment and Lands (now re-titled Secretary for Planning and Lands), making a public remark on 19 November 1999 that Long Valley was an ecologically important site and that it would be preserved. We hope that this viewpoint of Mr Siu would be incorporated into the next stage of the NENT study. |
| 10. | Briefly stated, Long Valley is the last remaining piece of land of any significant size representative of the natural habitat associated with the once extensive flood plains in the northwestern part of the New Territories. Once it is gone, it is not replaceable because there is now nowhere else to go further upstream. This type of natural habitat provides the stage for a diversity of life forms to live and breed and is a major source of biodiversity in the territory. More than 210 bird species have been recorded here. More detailed discussion on the ecological importance of Long Valley is given in Annex A. |
| 11. | Long Valley is also a site of great heritage value. Traditional wet agricultural practice is still alive here, co-existing with the natural wildlife in harmony. While we local people might sometimes take it for granted, this is extremely striking in the eyes of overseas visitors. Annex B gives a collection of sample remarks about Long Valley made by foreign visitors who have been there. It is clear that the place provides a vivid and impressive picture of Hong Kong's agricultural past as well as a natural habitat for a diversity of birds and other forms of life. It is a major resource for eco-tourism with a heritage sideline. |
| 12. | Long Valley is a site of great education value for students, in terms of appreciation of nature and the traditional way of Hong Kong life, which is essential to the healthy upbringing of our younger generation. We have collected some writings of local children to illustrate the impact of a visit of the place on their thinking and how they value the experience. They are given in Annex C. |
| 13. | Noting the ecological, heritage and education value of Long Valley, HKBWS considers it essential for the benefit of the Hong Kong community as a whole to preserve the open flood plain - wetland characteristics of Long Valley. The construction of highways and railway lines across the plain as illustrated in the consultative digest will be a major problem. The scheme will destroy the characteristics by fragmenting the habitat to the disadvantage of birds and other forms of life and by changing the open landscape which now forms the foundation of its aesthetic value. |
| HKBWS Proposals |
| 14. | The HKBWS urges that the railways and the Fanling Bypass should be located out of Long Valley. Potential alternative routes are sketched in Annex D. These alternative routes would result in no increase in the length of the highway and that of the spur line and West Rail phase 2 taken together. It is a 3-way win-win situation for the natural environment, KCRC and the Hong Kong community. |
| 15. | The HKBWS further recommends that:
- Long Valley should be zoned, such as a ˇ§Conservation Areaˇ¨, in a way that would ensure the protection of its ecological value especially in terms of biodiversity;
- Government should adopt a proactive policy to manage Long Valley to maintain its inherent inland wetland characteristics, with its traditional multiplicity of micro-habitats, so as to maintain and if possible to maximize its ecological value in terms of biodiversity.
|
| 16. | A significant amount of natural habitat in the NENT and NWNT study areas will be destroyed to give way to the Strategic Growth Areas and associated transport infrastructure. Thus, there is a need to mitigate for this loss. This adds to our argument for the proposed zoning of Long Valley with an ecological objective. |
| 17. | The Hong Kong population lives in a crowded urban environment and is badly in need of opportunities that would allow them to get in touch of nature and enjoy the pleasant sight of open space filled with natural life including both plants and animals. And birds are what most people associate with easily and happily. Long Valley provides that kind of opportunity. The open space at Long Valley with its contents in the form of birds co-existing harmoniously with traditional farming therefore is a most valuable asset for Hong Kong. To build the spur line across the plain will be sacrificing this common long-term asset for the narrow gain of a commercial operation. To set it aside for the greater good of the Hong Kong community will be the only appropriate way forward. |
| 18. | On "developing" Long Valley, the Society considers that by maximizing its biodiversity, there is great potential for developing the area into a Nature Reserve comparable to Mai Po. The difference is that Long Valley will be representative of an inland wetland habitat rather than a brackish water habitat, and that the geiwai shrimp farming at Mai Po is substituted by traditional wet agriculture. With careful management, it would become a resource for biodiversity conservation, public education in nature and heritage as well as eco-tourism. There is significant prospect of job creation too. |
| 19. | For Kwu Tung North residents, the existence of a nature reserve next door will be a pride for the new community. It would provide open vistas, sense of affinity to nature, pleasure of seeing free-flying birds, liveliness beyond the mechanical routines of urban living, and the moderating effects of a wetland on the otherwise urban climate of an inland town. |
