14 October

土地共享先導計劃 關於南生圍及社山兩宗申請的聯合聲明 Joint Statement from NGOs concerning Two Applications under the Land Sharing Pilot Scheme at Nam Sang Wai and She Shan

Click here for the English version

土地共享先導計劃
關於南生圍及社山兩宗申請的聯合聲明

1. 就最近兩宗在土地共享先導計劃(LSPS)下分別位於南生圍(LSPS-002 )及林村社山(LSPS-003 )的申請,我們希望藉此聯合聲明表達深切關注。該兩個申請地點現在主要為鄉郊環境所覆蓋及包圍,發展密度極低;而有關申請不但會為該兩處引入高樓大廈(LSPS-002:24至25層;LSPS-003:17至39層),更會帶來龐大人口(LSPS-002:10,487人;LSPS-003:33,937人)。簡而言之,我們認為這兩個項目實在難以理解,我們會在下文詳細闡述。

生態環境問題
2. LSPS-002的申請地點位處南生圍核心濕地的南面,而該地點本身也有魚塘及河道。事實上,此地點亦位於濕地緩衝區(WBA)內;顧名思義,WBA本來就是要為緩衝敏感及具國際重要性的后海灣濕地而設 。WBA亦為繁殖期的鷺鳥提供飛行通道,以進入濕地保育區(WCA)內的覓食地。我們因此非常關注擬議的高樓會影響WBA原應發揮的緩衝作用及繁殖鷺鳥。南生圍核心濕地及周邊河道是不少具高保育重要性的水鳥的生境(包括全球性受威脅的黑臉琵鷺 Platalea minor)。區內亦有一個具區域重要性的普通鸕鷀(Phalacrocorax carbo)冬季棲地。此外,這區亦為在內地及香港都極具保育關注的歐亞水獺(Lutra lutra)提供生境。上述動物基本上對人類活動都極度敏感。擬議的9棟住宅高達24至25層,不但明顯阻礙雀鳥飛行路線,也會產生各種如光害及噪音的影響,干擾四周相對低矮的環境。擬議發展所帶來的人口亦會令區內的人類干擾大增,影響上述生態敏感受體。

3. 社山的擬議發展(LSPS-003)估計可能會令整個林村谷的人口激增約1.75倍(2016年的中期人口統計顯示林村谷只有19,369人 )。現時,該區的建築主要為三層高的村屋。明顯地此項涉及樓高17至39層共28棟大廈 (未包非住用建築)的發展建議,必然會嚴重破壞區內景觀及影響生態。擬議發展地點及其周邊現存大量農地及河道,為不少依賴開闊原野的具保育價值鳥種提供覓食及棲息地,包括全球性極危的黃胸鵐(Emberiza aureola)及易危的硫磺鵐(Emberiza sulphurate)。此外,擬議發展項目與覆蓋社山風水林的社山具特殊科學價值地點(SSSI)的最短距離少於10米,而此SSSI為不少具保育價值的動植物(如櫟子青岡(Cyclobalanopsis blakei)、褐林鴞(Strix leptogrammica)、黑冠鳽(Gorsachius melanolophus)提供生境。受法例保護的寬藥青藤(Illigera celebica)生長在社山風水林的邊陲,此稀有植物亦為稀有蝴蝶燕鳳蝶(Lamproptera curius)幼蟲的寄主。此外,最新的研究亦表明道路人工照明會對周邊環境的昆蟲數量構成重大影響 (而光害也能嚴重影響其他動物)。故此,觀乎社山擬議發展的位置,高度及規模,令人無法不聯想到此發展會大大干擾該區的野生生物(如昆蟲、在夜間活躍的雀鳥及蝙蝠)。

4. 我們相信這兩個項目更可能會大大增加路殺及鳥撞風險,直接影響野生生物和當區生物多樣性。

規劃問題
5. 如上述,LSPS-002的申請地點位於WBA內,此區的發展受到城市規劃委員會(城規會)規劃指引編號12C的規管。擬議項目地點覆蓋一些魚塘及河道,相關計劃摘要內的圖則顯示,一段河道及部份魚塘面積會因為該發展而消失。城規會規劃指引編號12C指出,在考慮后海灣地區的發展建議時,會採用「不會有濕地淨減少」的原則。儘管申請人近日在報章聲稱會遵循有關原則 ,LSPS-002現時唯一公開的正式文件(即計劃摘要)中,卻未有詳細說明該擬議發展會如何遵守這個原則。

6. LSPS-003的申請地點及林村谷均為林村分區計劃大綱核准圖 所覆蓋。而該圖則的整體規劃意向如下:

該區的發展是以「全港發展策略檢討」和「新界東北發展策略檢討」的結果作為指引的。這兩項檢討都沒有選定該區為可作策略性增長的地區。當局就新界東北的長遠發展所制訂的整體規劃政策,着重保育和保護鄉郊腹地的天然環境和景觀,而除現有新市鎭人口和已承諾進行的市區式發展帶來的人口外,會盡量遏止該區的人口增長。現在和已承諾建設的運輸和基礎設施網絡,不足以承受該區截至二零一一年的額外人口增長。

鑑於新界東北的發展受到限制,以及有需要保育/保存該區的鄉郊特色、天然景觀和生態價值,當局不鼓勵在區內闢設露天貯物場或進行非正式的工業和住宅發展。因此,該區的規劃意向,一方面是透過管制區內的發展和促進農業活動,以保存其鄉郊特色;另一方面是在適合發展的地點容許鄉村擴展……

7. 綜觀上述內容及社山擬議項目的發展參數,我們認為有關計劃根本不符合林村谷的原規劃意向。

公眾參與及透明度問題
8. 關於LSPS的公眾參與及透明度問題,我們在相關文件看到下列敘述:

立法會參考資料摘要(土地共享先導計劃) (DEVB(PL-CR)1-55/127/1) :

……為建立信心及保障公眾利益,先導計劃會採用具透明度的機制,並由特 設的顧問小組提供第三方意見。所有相關法定程序,包括修訂法定圖則及授權進行公共道路/渠務工程等刊憲程序,以至現有這些法定程序所涉及的公眾參與渠道,將繼續適用……

……自二零一九年《施政報告》公布後,發展局就先導計劃的擬議框架諮詢了主要持份者,包括立法會發展事務委員會(事務委員會)、香港地產建設商會(地產商會)、土地及建設諮詢委員會、與發展相關的專業學會、鄉議局等。事務委員會亦於二零二零年一月召開會議聽取代表團體的意見。經考慮接獲的意見及政策目的,發展局建議,行政長官會同行政會議批准以下詳列的先導計劃細節,以予實施……

立法會發展事務委員會討論文件(LC Paper No. CB(1)160/19-20(03)) :

……為保持透明度,先導計劃的資料、接獲的申請及每宗申請的進度均會於不同階段向公眾發布。我們會公布接獲的申請細節,亦會在顧問小組就個別個案討論後公布小組的意見。現行法定規劃、環境、收地及/或工程授權程序下的既定公眾參與渠道將繼續適用……

9. 我們同意建立信心、保障公眾利益及保持透明度為LSPS的重要構成部分。可是,目前我們只能從計劃摘要得悉極少有關項目的資料,相關計劃摘要亦無附上任何有關項目潛在影響的評估。沒有進一步資料,公眾如何能適切地對這些位處於環境敏感地區的發展項目提供意見?

「先破壞,後發展」問題
10. 社山的申請地點曾經被嚴重破壞(傾倒泥頭),而亦因為這個個案,有關方面修訂了分區計劃大綱圖內農業地帶的註釋,以處理農業地帶的填土問題及加強規劃管制 。
11. 城規會亦曾公布 :

城規會決心保護鄉郊及天然環境,不會容忍任何蓄意破壞鄉郊及天然環境的行動,企圖使城規會對有關土地上的其後發展給予從寬考慮……

12. 我們希望各有關方面仔細考慮在此地點擬議發展任何大型項目是否恰當。

結論
13. LSPS有一個「最少新增房屋數量」準則,原意是為儘量增加每個申請的總樓面面積8。雖然這個試驗性策略或能在一些地方增加房屋供應,我們認為在某些錯誤地點以非常高聳及高密度的發展去達至LSPS的準則本身就是一個錯誤。LSPS的目的是協調發展過程,而非漠視政府一貫的發展措守及規範,對現有社群及敏感的生物多樣性,仍須一如既往地緊慎考量及妥善兼顧。

14. 現時有關這兩個項目的資訊非常少,直接影響討論的成效及事實基礎。儘管如此,憑我們現時手上的資料,我們認為南生圍及社山這兩處絕不適合發展如此「非常」的大型項目。由於現時的公開資料沒有包含任何詳細評估報告,我們不清楚擬議項目明顯會引致的潛在影響如何能夠得到處理。

15. 我們絕對明白弱勢社群對公營房屋的需求,但確實亦難以理解在偏遠鄉郊建屋能如何切合基層所需–上述兩個申請地點不但缺乏公共運輸系統等適切的基礎建設,更為敏感環境所包圍。我們亦要問,這些項目能如何維護無價的天然資源予後代共享?我們重申並強調,社會上眾多界別早已指出,香港仍有很多適合作公營房屋發展的土地資源,也有不少增加房屋供應的方法。

16. 綜觀以上資訊,及為了確保下一代的環境不會受到不可逆轉的破壞,我們不支持這兩個項目。

聯署團體(依筆劃序):

世界自然基金會香港分會
長春社
香港鄉郊基金
香港觀鳥會
創建香港
綠色力量
嘉道理農場暨植物園

 

Joint Statement from NGOs concerning Two Applications under the Land Sharing Pilot Scheme at Nam Sang Wai and She Shan

1. We would like to express our grave concern regarding two recent applications submitted under the Land Sharing Pilot Scheme (LSPS), one at Nam Sang Wai (LSPS-002) and the other at She Shan, Lam Tsuen (LSPS-003). At present, the two application sites and their surroundings are highly rural in nature with significantly low development density. The proposed developments, however, would introduce many high-rise blocks (LSPS-002: 24 to 25 storeys; LSPS-003: 17 to 39 storeys) and large populations (LSPS-002: 10,487; LSPS-003: 33,937) into these two places. Simply speaking, from various perspectives, we have found these two proposals to be completely incomprehensible; our detailed views are presented below.

 

Ecological issues

2. The application site of LSPS-002 is located to the south of the core wetland area of Nam Sang Wai, and the site itself also encompasses several fish ponds and a watercourse. Indeed, the site is well within the Wetland Buffer Area (WBA) which is primarily delineated to buffer the sensitive and internationally important Deep Bay wetlands. More importantly, WBA also serves as a flight path/corridor for breeding ardeids to access their foraging grounds within the Wetland Conservation Area (WCA). We are highly concerned that the proposed high-rise blocks would undermine the buffering function which the area is designated to provide, and would have adverse impacts on the breeding ardeids. The core Nam Sang Wai area as well as the channels surrounding the application site are habitats for many waterbird species of high conservation importance, including the globally threatened Black-faced Spoonbill (Platalea minor). It is also a winter roosting site for Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), and is of regional importance. The area also provides habitats for the Eurasian Otter (Lutra lutra), which is of very high conservation concern in Hong Kong and mainland China. These species are in general highly sensitive to human activities. The proposed 9 high-rise blocks ranging from 24 to 25 storeys would become an obvious obstacle to bird flightpaths and impose various impacts such as light and noise disturbance on the relatively low-rise surroundings. The proposed increased population would also greatly increase human disturbance to the above mentioned ecological sensitive receivers in the region.

3. The proposed development at She Shan (LSPS-003) would greatly increase the population of Lam Tsuen Valley by a predicted 1.75 times (population of Lam Tsuen Valley is around 19,369 persons based on 2016 by-census). At present, there are mainly 3-storey village houses in this area. The proposed development, with 28 high-rise blocks (17 to 39 storeys each; not including those for non-residential uses), would completely destroy the landscape and also severely impact the ecology of the area. Within the application site and its surroundings, active and fallow farmlands as well as watercourses can be found; these habitats provide foraging and roosting grounds for various open country bird species of conservation importance (including globally Critically Endangered Yellow-breasted Bunting (Emberiza aureola), Vulnerable Japanese Yellow Bunting (Emberiza sulphurate)). Furthermore, the existing She Shan Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which is located less than 10 m from the proposed development boundary and largely covers the She Shan fung shui woodland (FSW), also provides habitats for many plants and fauna of conservation interest (e.g., Blake’s Oak (Cyclobalanopsis blakei), Brown Wood Owl (Strix leptogrammica), Malayan Night Heron (Gorsachius melanolophus)). The legally protected Illigera (Illigera celebica), which is a larval food plant for the rare butterfly – White Dragontail (Lamproptera curius), also inhabits the periphery of this FSW. A recent study has already indicated that street lighting would impose significant impacts on local insect populations (it has also been clearly demonstrated that street lighting can have serious impacts on other animal groups also). Thus it is not unreasonable to expect that the proposed development, in view of its scale, height and location, would greatly disturb local wildlife populations (e.g., insects, nocturnal birds, and bats).

4. We believe that both LSPS-002 and LSPS-003 would also significantly increase the wildlife road-kill occurrence and bird collisions in the areas of concern, thus imposing another direct impact on wildlife and the local biodiversity.

 

Planning issues

5. As aforementioned, the application site of LSPS-002 is within WBA, and development in this area is governed by the Town Planning Board (TPB) guidelines no. 12c3. The proposed development would cover some ponds and a watercourse. As shown in the plans attached to the application gist1, it seems that a section of the watercourse and also some pond areas would be lost. According to the TPB guidelines no. 12c, there is a ‘no-net-loss in wetlands’ principle in considering development proposals for the Deep Bay Area. Although the applicant claimed in a recent newspaper article that this principle will be followed, we cannot see, at present, from the only available official document of LSPS-002 (i.e., the gist) how the principle can be adequately upheld under the current development proposal.

6. The application site of LSPS-003 and Lam Tsuen Valley are covered under the Approved Lam Tsuen Outline Zoning Plan (OZP). The general planning intention section of this OZP states the following:

Development within the Area is guided by the Territorial Development Strategy Review (TDSR) and the North East New Territories Development Strategy Review (NENT DSR). According to the TDSR and the NENT DSR, the Area is not identified for strategic growth development. The general planning policies for the long-term development in NENT emphasize conservation and landscape protection of the rural hinterland with minimum population growth other than those accommodated in existing new towns and committed urban development. The existing and committed transport and infrastructural networks will not be capable of sustaining additional growth up to 2011.

In view of the development constraints in NENT and the need to conserve/preserve the rural character, the natural landscape and the ecological interest of the Area, it is intended not to encourage open storage uses, nor informal industrial development and residential development in the Area. The planning intention for the Area is, therefore, to retain the rural character of the Area by controlling development and promoting agricultural activities, and to allow village expansion in areas where development is considered appropriate……

7. Looking at the proposed development parameters at She Shan with reference to the above, we consider that the current proposal is simply contrary to the original planning intention of Lam Tsuen Valley.

 

Public engagement and transparency issues

8. Regarding the issue of public engagement and transparency of LSPS, we can see from various relevant documents the following:

Legislative Council Brief for LSPS(DEVB(PL-CR)1-55/127/1):

 ……LSPS strives to build confidence and safeguard public interest, with transparent mechanism involving third-party opinion offered by the Panel of Advisors to be set up specifically for LSPS. All relevant statutory procedures on town planning and road/sewerage works gazettal, as well as the existing public participation channels under these processes, would continue to apply……

……Development Bureau (DEVB) has since the 2019 PA engaged key stakeholders including the Legislative Council (LegCo) Panel on Development, the Real Estate Developers Association of Hong Kong (REDA), the Land and Development Advisory Committee (LDAC), development-related professional institutes, Heung Yee Kuk (HYK), etc. on the proposed framework. The LegCo Panel on Development also convened meeting to receive views from deputations in January 2020……

Legislative Council Panel on Development Discussion Paper (LC Paper No. CB(1)160/19-20(03)):

……To uphold transparency, information on LSPS, applications received and progress of each case would be released to the public at different stages. We would publish details of the applications upon receipt and opinions of the Panel of Advisors on individual cases after its deliberation. The existing public participation channels under various statutory procedures in the planning, environment, land resumption and/or works authorisation regimes, etc. would continue as applicable……

9. We agree that building confidence, safeguarding public interest and upholding transparency are all important components of LSPS as claimed. However, at present we could only find extremely limited information regarding the proposals (i.e., from the gists only) and could not find any detailed technical assessments relating to the potential impacts of the proposal. Without further information, how can the public comment appropriately on the proposals in such environmentally sensitive areas?

 

‘Destroy First, Build Later’ issue

10. Some may remember that a case was raised previously as the application site at She Shan was impacted by serious environmental destruction (i.e., land filling), and the ‘Notes for Agriculture (AGR) zone’ on Outline Zoning Plans were even revised as a result of this case to tackle the problem of filling on AGR-zoned land and to strengthen planning control.

11. The TPB has also announced that:

The Board is determined to conserve the rural and natural environment and will not tolerate any deliberate action to destroy the rural and natural environment in the hope that the Board would give sympathetic consideration to subsequent development on the site concerned……

12. We urge all relevant parties to thoroughly consider whether it is still appropriate to propose any large-scale development at the She Shan site.

 

Conclusion

13. Under the LSPS there is a criterion called ‘Minimum Housing Gain’; its ultimate aim is to boost the gross floor area of each application8. While this experimental approach may increase housing supply in some places, we consider that applications with extraordinary high rise and high density development parameters should never appear in totally unsuitable locations, which is an incorrect way to achieve the LSPS criteria. The LSPS is not designed to over-ride all previous Government measures and controls on development but to facilitate a process which still requires careful and fair consideration for the existing communities and sensitive biodiversity.

14. Although the very limited information now available regarding the captioned proposals makes fruitful or fact-based discussion very difficult, our conclusion, based on the information we have in hand, is that the captioned localities, Nam Sang Wai and She Shan, are definitely not suitable for developments of such ‘extraordinary’ scale. We also cannot comprehend how the clear potential impacts that would be caused by the proposed developments can be addressed, as detailed assessment reports are lacking from the available information.

15. While we fully understand the public housing need of the underprivileged community in Hong Kong, it is unclear how building houses in fairly remote, rural locations is helpful to the immediate needs, given that they are lacking of basic infrastructures (e.g., adequate public transportation system), and have sensitive surroundings. It is also uncertain how such development can help to sustain the invaluable natural resources for our future generations. We would like to reiterate and emphasise that there are still many suitable land resources for public housing development and many options to increase housing supply, which have already been repeatedly pointed out by various sectors in the society.

16. In view of the above and in order to ensure that the environment for future generations is not to be impacted irreversibly, we, the signatories below, wish to make it clear that we do not support the two captioned proposals.

 

Co-organised groups (in alphabetical order):

The Conservancy Association
Designing Hong Kong
Green Power
Hong Kong Bird Watching Society
The Hong Kong Countryside Foundation
Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden
World Wide Fund For Nature Hong Kong

31 May

Nam Sang Wai Conservation Poll Result 保育南生圍投票結果公佈

南生圍記招合照20180502
八成三市民支持南生圍保育
環圍呼籲政府著手研究保育方案

今年三月南生圍的蘆葦床起火,南生圍的保育狀況及威脅再度受到關注。環保團體創建香港、綠色和平、綠色力量、長春社、香港觀鳥會及香港地球之友早前委託香港大學民意研究計劃進行全港性抽樣問卷調查,成功訪問一千零三名市民有關南生圍保育的意見。

民調指當中八成三的市民支持保育南生圍的自然景觀;六成一的市民支持根據法例向土地業權人收地、或以非原址換地等方式,長遠保育南生圍的自然環境。長春社公共事務經理吳希文指從民調中清晰可見,市民希望保育南生圍毋庸置疑,民調結果亦顯示有不少聲音支持政府出手保育南生圍,過往政府在新自然保育政策下認為不少保育方案並不切實可行,然而新自然保育政策自2004年推行至今已超過十年,政府宜再檢討當中各保育方案。

香港觀鳥會高級保育主任胡明川又指南生圍有獨特的生態及景觀,在2004年被加入新自然保育政策須優先加強保育地點清單之中,其重要性不比清單中的其他項目低。南生圍毗連具國際保育地位的米埔內后海灣拉姆薩爾濕地,亦位於「濕地保育區」內,是后海灣濕地生態系統不可劃割的一部分。南生圍的生態環境豐富,有魚塘、泥灘、潮澗帶等,其大片的蘆葦床更是全港數一數二。這為不少具保育價值的雀鳥及野生動物提供覓食及棲息地,包括全球瀕危的黑臉琵鷺、受區域關注的中華攀雀、受本地關注的黃葦鳽,以及全球近危的歐亞水獺。該區魚塘旁邊的樹木也是冬候鳥普通鸕鷀在后海灣地區重要的晚棲地。因此,南生圍的生態環境及必須要被保育。

兩位立法會議員鄺俊宇及朱凱廸亦分別指出南生圍的公眾價值,面對破壞,政府不應坐視不理。南生圍鄰近元朗市中心,除了擁有具高生態及保育價值的生境,南生圍也是不少電影及電視劇的取景地方,假日時亦吸引不少遊人前來踩單車、野餐、郊遊等,是受市民喜愛的鄉郊休閒地點。近十年來已有七次火災,然而未有一人被捕,再加上發展項目的威脅,不禁令人懷疑政府是否故意縱容環境破壞。

綠色力量總監鄭睦奇博士表示民調中見出市民對於收回南生圍、或以非原址換地等長遠保育方案並不抗拒,甚至支持,政府應著力研究南生圍的長遠保育方案。短期內,政府亦應出招以防南生圍再被火燒和各種破壞威脅,制訂管理協議令現時的生境得以被保護和管理,讓市民和下一代都可以享受這片自然環境。

問卷調查結果:
 https://www.hkupop.hku.hk/english/report/nsw_2018/index.html

83% Citizens support Nam Sang Wai Conservation
Green Groups call for Government Conservation Proposal

In March of this year, the reed beds in Nanshangwai caught fire, and the state of conservation and threats in Namshangwai give rise to concerns again. A number of green groups Designing Hong Kong, Greenpeace, Green Power, The Conservancy Association (CA), Hong Kong Bird Watching Society (HKBWS) and Friends of the Earth (HK) entrusted the Public Opinion Program of the University of Hong Kong (HKU POP) to conduct public opinion survey on the conservation of Nam Seng Wai and successfully interviewed 1,300 citizens.
According to the poll result, 83% of citizens supported the conservation of the natural landscape in Nam Sang Wai. 61% of citizens support land resumption from landlord with reference to law and the non-in-situ exchange etc, in hopes of continuously protect and conserve the natural environment of Nam Seng Wai. Mr. Hei Man Ng, the Campaign Manager of CA, pointed out that citizen’s determination on conserving Nam Seng Wai is undoubted based on the poll’s result. It also showed that Hong Kong government should put effort on conserving Nam Seng Wai from the public’s perspective. He further supplemented that the conservation measures under the New Nature Conservation Policy are no longer practical as the policy has been implemented since 2004. Government should review the conservation measures under the policy again.
Ms. Ming Chuan Woo, the senior conservation officer in HKBWS, stated that Nam Sang Wai has its unique ecology and natural landscape. Nam Sang Wai has been listed as one of the priority sites for enhanced conservation under the New Nature Conservation Policy since 2004. Its importance is at similar level of other priority site. Moreover, Nam Sang Wai is adjacent to the Ramsar Site, which is well-known in the world, and inside the Conservation Area. It is an important part of the Deep Bay Wetland Ecosystem that cannot be separated.
She pointed out that there is a rich ecological environment in Nam Sang Wai, including fish ponds, mudflats and tidal belts. Its large reed beds are one of the best in Hong Kong. This provides forage and habitat for many conservative species of birds and wildlife, including the globally endangered Black-faced Spoonbill, Chinese Penduline Tit that are of regional concern, Yellow Bittern that are of local concern, and Eurasian Otter. The trees next to the fish ponds in this area are also important habitats for common migratory birds Great Cormorant in the Deep Bay area. Therefore, the ecological environment in Nam Sang Wai must be conserved.
Mr. Chun Yu Kwong and Mr. Hoi Dick Chu, the two legislators, also pointed out the recreational value of Nam Sang Wai among general public. The government should take action to confront the land destruction. Nam Sang Wai is close to the Yuen Long Town Hall. Apart from having a high ecological and conservation value, Nam Sang Wai is also a location for many movies and TV dramas production. It attracts many tourists to cycle, relax and have picnic during holidays. It is a very popular rural leisure spot. In the past ten years, there have been seven fires. However, no one has been arrested. Couple with the private development threats, it is suspicious that the government intentionally indulge the destructive behavior.
Dr. Luk Ki Cheng, the director of the Green Power, said that the citizens are not reluctant to, or even support, the land resumption or the non-in-situ exchange etc as long-term measures in Nam Sang Wai Conservation. The government should make efforts in studying the long-term conservation program of Nam Sang Wai. In the short term, the Government should also take measures to prevent the fire and various threats of destruction, and formulate a management agreement so that the existing habitat can be protected and managed. Meanwhile, public and the next generation can enjoy this natural environment

Poll result:
https://www.hkupop.hku.hk/english/report/nsw_2018/index.html

16 May

Joint statement regarding dumping and land filling by concern groups and environmental NGOs 關注團體及環保組織就傾倒泥頭和填土問題的聯署信

13072059_10153685842154397_1680669160_o

Dumping and land filling on land reserved for conservation and agricultural uses continues to impact Hong Kong’s habitats, ecology and biodiversity. Concern groups and environmental NGOs are deeply concerned over the lack of preventive and enforcement action by government against unauthorized and unintended land uses.

Today, Designing Hong Kong together with other concern groups urge government to remove the obstacles in legislation, establish a public and transparent land database and set up a Conservation Enforcement Task Force.

Joint statement by concern groups and environmental NGOs regarding dumping and land filling:

English: Joint statement regarding dumping and land filling by concern groups and environmental NGOs 

Chinese: 關注團體及環保組織就傾倒泥頭和填土問題的聯署信

 

在保育地區和農地上傾倒泥頭和填土的行為,一直影響香港的自然生境、生態及生物多樣性。關注團體及環保組織對此深切關注,但政府缺乏預防和執法的措施去阻止這些未經批准和規劃的土地用途。今日,創建香港和其他關注團體在立法會環境事務委員會討論”天水圍嘉湖山莊附近堆積泥頭及疑涉非法堆填的事宜”前,在立法會門外示威,要求政府移除就法例上的漏洞,設立公開和透明度高的數據庫及設立保育執法專責小組等。

關注團體及環保組織就傾倒泥頭和填土問題的聯署信:

英文版: Joint statement regarding dumping and land filling by concern groups and environmental NGOs

中文版: 關注團體及環保組織就傾倒泥頭和填土問題的聯署信

5 April

Protect HK’s nature. BSAP Consultation deadline 7 April 2016 保護香港自然生態 《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》諮詢4月7日截止

bsap enews

(中文往下)

Government is preparing a Biodiversity Action and Strategy Plan.

The objective is to better safeguard Hong Kong’s biodiversity, and to contribute to safeguarding the world’s biodiversity.

Our concern is the absence of a comprehensive debate.

Hong Kong’s land supply strategy and conserving biodiversity need to be looked at as one and not two discussions in separate rooms.

There is also an urgent need to reform legislation to protect habitats on private land, as proven by the ongoing land filling and tree felling throughout rural areas and country parks.

The BSAP consultation will conclude mid-nite 7 Apr 2016.

Below are links to the Government website as well as suggestions and form letters to aid your timely response.

 

Designing Hong Kong form letter for your use. 

Click here: 

An effective Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (by Paul Zimmerman, CEO of Designing Hong Kong)

 

Other Petitions

1. WWF – Hong Kong – Petition for an effective BASP (English)

2. Conservancy Association – Express your opinion about BASP (Chinese only)

3. Kadoorie Farm& Botanic Garden – A Better World: Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (English)

4. Land Justice petition to United Nations Environment Programme/The Convention on Biological Diversity Secretariat- Protect Hong Kong’ Biodiversity NOW(English and Chinese)

 

References

1. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department – Public Consultation – Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (BSAP) for Hong Kong (English)

2. Presentations Public forum – BSAP: Charting a sustainable future for Hong Kong – held on 19 March.

Introduction 

Why HK needs BSAP? 

Convention on Biodiversity

Sustainable use

Land

Water

 

政府正在制訂《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》。

計劃的目標是保護香港的生物多樣性,由此為保護全球的生物多樣性作出貢獻。

但我們擔心有關的計劃缺乏共同的辯論。

香港的土地供應策略和生物多樣性的保育需要作為一個整體看待,不可能分開討論。

同時,我們急須修改法例去保障私人土地上的生境,以阻止現時在鄉郊和郊野公園發生傾倒和斬樹的破壞情況。

《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》將於4月7日晚上11:59分前截止。

附註的網址是政府相關網頁和各個環團和關注團體的建議和聯署信,希望各位能及時回應。

 

創建香港就《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》發起的聯署

按此:

An effective Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (by Paul Zimmerman, CEO of Designing Hong Kong)

 

其他聯署

1. 世界自然基金會-香港分會-把握關鍵時機!為環境保育加把勁!(中文)

2. 長春社-向漁護署表達你對《香港生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》的意見(中文)

3. 嘉道理農場暨植物園-《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》公眾諮詢(中文)

4. 土地正義聯盟向聯合國環境規劃署/生物多樣性公約秘書處發出的聯署信-保護生物多樣性(英文及中文)

 

參考資

1. 漁農自然護理署-公眾諮詢-香港《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》(中文)

2. 公眾論壇的演講「《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》—計劃香港的永續藍圖」(3月19日)

簡介

為何香港需要《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》?

生物多樣性的保育

可持續運用自然資源

土地

水體

8 October

東涌河流自然公園計劃 Tung Chung River Nature Park Proposal

 

數個關注東涌發展的組織已向政府提議沿東涌河和河口設立河流自然公園。計劃希望政府能收購沿東涌河的私人土地。這些私人土地,根據規劃署2014年公佈的東涌新巿鎮建議發展大綱圖,大部份會劃作自然保育區和海岸保護區。

收購方案建基於公眾利益,希望能達致東涌河防洪和保育的目的。我們更建議以防洪為優先的準則下,於東涌河流自然公園設立公眾休閒設施,享受自然環境。

我們相信此計劃能為土地持有人、本地居民和遊客帶來益處。河流自然公園既能為東涌日漸增加的人口,提供高質素的自然環境,又能保護當地社區免受洪水威脅。

東涌河流自然公園聯署信按此(只有英文版本)

關注東涌發展的組織包括: 創建香港、生態教育及資源中心、綠色力量、香港觀鳥會、Hong Kong Outdoors、大嶼山愛護水牛協會、長春社、世界自然(香港)基金會

 

An alliance of concern groups has submitted a proposal to Government for a River Nature Park covering the Tung Chung River and Estuary.

The proposal is for Government to resume the private land along the Tung Chung River, most of which will be zoned for conservation and coastal protection uses according to the Tung Chung New Town Recommended Outline Development Plan published by the Planning Department in 2014.

It is proposed that the land is resumed for public purposes including flood control andnature conservation. We further propose that the Tung Chung River Nature Park will be managed as a public amenity for leisure, recreation and appreciation of nature, as well as for flood hydraulics.

We believe this proposal will benefit land owners, as well as local residents and visitors. The park will provide a quality nature experience for the growing population of Tung Chung and for visitors, while protecting the community from flooding.

Click here for joint letter about Tung Chung River Nature Park Proposal

Alliance of concern groups includes: Designing Hong Kong, Eco-Education and Resource Centre,Green Power, Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong Outdoors, Lantau Buffalo Association, The Conservancy Association, WWF – Hong Kong

18 July

3rd Runway Concerns
有關機場擴建第三條跑道

Currently Hong Kong has over 80% of the international flights out of the Pearl River Delta. With the 3rd Runway proponents hope to maintain a large share of this growing market. But with only 7% of the population and manufacturing moving ever further land inwards, how sensible is that? The economic gains benefit a few, while the rest of the community pays. It is not just the money: Air pollution, noise, loss of marine habitat, and traffic – lots of it.

現在香港肩負珠角三角洲80%的國際航班,市場不斷擴大,機管局希望藉著擴建來增加利潤。但我們只有7%的人口,而本地工業持續北移,代表著甚麼?我們只有少數人受惠,所有卻為此而負上沉重的代價:空氣污染、噪音、失去海洋生態、交通流量大增……甚至更多

(more…)