4.3 Baseline Identification and Evaluation of Valuable Ecological Components (VECS)

4.3.1 The first objective of an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcoIA) is to review the existing ecological resources and receivers that may be affected by the development and to identify those that are Valuable Ecological Components (VECs) (Treweek 1999). This has therefore been carried out, using the information sources described above, for habitats and then for individual Species of Conservation Importance following the guidelines for the evaluation of ecological importance of habitats and species given in the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EPD). This section provides an update of the existing ecological conditions of the area through additional information collected and additional field surveys to supplement existing data, as required in Clauses 3.5.2 (i), (ii) and (iii) of the Study Brief.

Habitats

4.3.2 The Study Area contains 17 habitat types characterised with respect to their vegetation and other physical and environmental attributes as follows:

· Fung-shui Forest - forest found around rural villages comprising native species or a mix of native species and fruit trees;

· Lowland Secondary Forest - forest dominated by native tree species and not located behind villages;

· Plantation Forest - landscaping or ornamental plantations mainly found along roads and on cut‑slopes;

· Orchard - patches of fruit trees mainly found scattered among rural village areas;

· Active Wet Agricultural Land - permanently or seasonally inundated agricultural land on which a range of food crops is cultivated;

· Active Dry Agricultural Land - agricultural land on which a range of food crops and flowers is cultivated;

· Inactive Wet Agricultural Land - fallow or abandoned agricultural land which is unmanaged and has been invaded by herbaceous or shrubby vegetation and is permanently or seasonally undated;

· Inactive Dry Agricultural Land – fallow or abandoned agricultural land which is unmanaged and has been invaded by herbaceous or shrubby vegetation and which is not inundated under normal conditions;

· Managed Wetland – land which is seasonally or permanently inundated where water levels and vegetation are managed to meet nature conservation objectives;

· Active Fish Pond – fish ponds managed for commercial aquaculture production;

· Inactive Fish Pond – fish ponds where no management facilities were observed in the immediate vicinity of the pond, with emergent vegetation (typically) covering the edge of the pond bund;

· Bloodworm Pond - water bodies used for rearing bloodworms for fish food;

· Marsh - flooded areas comprising a mix of water‑dependent plants;

· Water-courses - include all riverine habitats such as rivers, drainage channels, nullahs and ditches;

· Grassland-shrubland mosaic - undisturbed areas with grassland comprising 80% of cover;

· Wasteland - secondary vegetative colonisation (mainly grasses and ruderals) on areas opened by human activities (excluding those grown on inactive agricultural land); and

· Developed area ‑ areas highly developed with no visible vegetation cover except road-side weeds.

4.3.3 Habitat categorisations are the same as those used in the previous EIA Report with the following exceptions:

· A category of “Managed Wetland” has been added to describe the former meander areas along the River Beas which are now being actively managed for nature conservation purposes.

· Three categories described in the previous EIA Report as Wet Agricultural Land, Dry Agricultural Land and Inactive Agricultural Land are now described as four categories: Active Wet Agricultural Land, Active Dry Agricultural Land, Inactive Wet Agricultural Land and Inactive Dry Agricultural Land. These revised categories better represent the physical appearance and ecological functions of the areas.

4.3.4 The distribution of these 17 habitat types within the Study Area is presented in Figure 4.1 and their respective coverage within the 200 m and 1 km corridor is shown in Table 4.1 below. This indicates that, excluding developed areas, fish ponds represent the most common habitat type within the 1 km study corridor, followed by grassland-shrubland mosaics and wasteland. Together active and inactive fish ponds represent the most common habitat within the 200 m corridor, followed by active wet agricultural land followed by wasteland.

Table 4.1

Coverage of Different Habitat Types within the Study Corridor

Habitat	Coverage within 1km corridor		Coverage within 200 m corridor
	Ha	%	ha	%
Fung-shui Forest	17.81	2.29	0.52	0.33
Lowland Secondary Forest	15.11	1.94	2.23	1.43
Plantation Forest	32.89	4.22	5.32	3.41
Orchard	10.91	1.40	5.67	3.63
Active Wet Agricultural Land	34.41	4.42	10.67	6.84
Active Dry Agricultural Land	14.25	1.83	4.34	2.79
Inactive Wet Agricultural Land	0.64	0.08	0.16	0.10
Inactive Dry Agricultural Land	19.42	2.49	5.44	3.49
Managed Wetland	2.36	0.30	0.25	0.16
Active Fish Pond	44.12	5.66	8.63	5.54
Inactive Fish Pond	48.03	6.17	18.33	11.76
Marsh	1.67	0.21	0.76	0.49
Pond	2.72	0.35	0.88	0.56
Grassland-shrubland mosaic	56.97	7.31	5.56	3.56
Water-courses	8.05	1.03	2.25	1.45
Wasteland	43.52	5.59	8.73	5.60
Developed Area	426.22	54.71	76.18	48.86
TOTAL	779.09	100	155.92	100

Note: Due to rounding up, the percentage total may not equal 100.

Sites of Conservation Importance

4.3.5 This section provides a review of all recognised sites of conservation importance in the Spur Line study area as required in Clause 3.5.2 (vi) of the Study Brief. The location of the proposed route of the railway in relation to existing protected areas of high ecological value is indicated in Figure 4.2. This indicates that the only protected area near to the study area is the Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site (a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention) and SSSI. The Deep Bay area comprises natural and man-made wetlands - including rivers, freshwater marshes, fish ponds, gei wais (tidal shrimp ponds), mangal, inter-tidal mudflats and the bay - which provide a wide range of habitats that support a high diversity of biota (plants, insects, reptiles, amphibians, birds and mammals).

4.3.6 The Ramsar Site is particularly important for waterbirds, including a number of globally threatened species (Collar et al. 1994), species which regularly have high proportions of their global or biogeographical wintering or passage populations within the site and species that are of regional or local conservation importance (Aspinwall Clouston & Wetlands International - Asia Pacific, 1997). Many of these species have been recorded within the study area, or are likely to occur (Table 4.2).

4.3.7 The fish ponds in the San Tin / Lok Ma Chau area are close to and contiguous with the Deep Bay Ramsar Site. Formerly included in the Deep Bay Buffer Zones, the importance of these fish ponds was demonstrated in the recent Fish Pond Study (Aspinwall & Co. 1999) and, following the completion of this study, they have been included in the redelineated Wetland Conservation Area (WCA) and Wetland Buffer Area (WBA) by the Town Planning Board (TPB PG-No 12B) (Figure 4.2).

4.3.8 The Town Planning Board has adopted a “precautionary approach” to development in the Deep Bay area in view of the known intrinsic value of fish ponds in ecological terms, and the complex response of birds to future landuse changes which has not been fully understood. The intention is to protect and conserve the existing ecological function of fish ponds in order to maintain the ecological integrity of the Deep Bay wetland ecosystem as a whole. This “precautionary approach” is formulated with the support of scientific surveys and analysis as provided in the Study on the Ecological Value of Fish Ponds in the Deep Bay Area. (Aspinwall 1997)

4.3.9 In considering development proposals in the Deep Bay Area, the Town Planning Board adopts the Fish Pond Study’s recommended principle of “no-net-loss in wetland” which provides for the conservation of continuous and adjoining fish ponds. The no-net-loss can refer to both loss in “area” and “function”.

4.3.10 The planning intention of the WCA is to conserve the ecological value of the fish ponds that form an integral part of the wetland ecosystem in the Deep Bay Area. It is noted that TPB PG-No 12B states that new development within the WCA should not be allowed unless it is required to support the conservation of the ecological value of the area or if the development is an essential infrastructure project with overriding public interest as in the case of the Spur Line. In the latter case, an ecological assessment for any such development is required to demonstrate that it will not result in a net loss of wetland function or negative disturbance impacts. Wetland compensation is required for any development requiring pond filling and mitigation measures against disturbance are also required.

4.3.11 It is recognised that the Spur Line, and especially the Lok Ma Chau Station, is the first major intrusion into the Wetland Conservation Area which forms the core wetland area of Inner Deep Bay between Tin Shui Wai in the west and the Lok Ma Chau Boundary Crossing in the east. Therefore, the long-term impacts to ecology and a practical ecological scheme have been considered at the outset. However, it is not intended to set a precedent, as ecological impacts and mitigation should consider the particular situation of individual projects. The Spur Line also encroaches into the Wetland Buffer Area (WBA) which requires an ecological assessment to ensure that negative impacts can be mitigated.

4.3.12 Though it has no formal conservation status, the Long Valley area, situated between the Rivers Beas and Sutlej, is widely recognised as being of high ecological value primarily due to the variety of freshwater wetland-dependant bird species that use its patchwork of agricultural habitats. Indeed, the need to ensure that adverse impacts on Long Valley were avoided was a principal reason for the decision by DEP and the Appeal Board not to approve the previous EIA.

Species of Conservation Importance

4.3.13 In accordance with Clause 3.5.2 (v) of the Study Brief, this section describes the wildlife of the Study Area. Following guidance given in Annex 16 (Note 3) of the EPD's Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment, species have been identified that are considered to be Species of Conservation Importance. These are defined as species that regularly occur in the Study Area in significant numbers and are:

• Globally threatened (BirdLife International 2000).

• Internationally protected species, i.e. protected by international conventions: (1) The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (the Bonn Convention), (2) listed under an agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People’s Republic of China for the Protection of Migratory Birds and their Environment, (3) listed under an agreement on the Protection of Migratory Birds and their Habitats between the Government of Japan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China.

Note that as all migratory birds are listed on Annex 1 of the Bonn Convention only those that also occur in internationally or regionally important numbers (see below) are considered to be of Species of Conservation Importance.

• Protected by Chinese laws and regulations: (1) The Wildlife Protection Law of the PRC, (2) The Wildlife Protection Implementation Regulation of the PRC, (3) The Guideline for Nature Reserves and Wildlife Species in the PRC, (4) The Nature Reserve Regulations (Provision 32), (5) The National Protection List of Important Wild Animals, (6) The Management Measures for Forests of Guangdong Province, (7) Guangdong Provincial Implementary Detailed Regulations for Nature Reserves of Forest and Wildlife Species (Section 12).

• Protected by Hong Kong legislation and guidelines: (1) The Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap 96), (2) The Forestry Regulations (subsidiary legislation of Cap 96), (3) The Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170), (4) The Animals and Plants (Protection of Endangered Species) Ordinance (Cap 187), (5) The Fisheries Protection Ordinance (Cap 171), (6) The Fisheries Protection Regulations (subsidiary legislation of Cap 171).

Note: All birds and bats are listed in the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance primarily to provide protection from hunting, persecution and trade etc. Therefore, only those that meet other criteria listed here or are Locally Important Species according to the ERM (1999b) criteria listed below are considered here to be Species of Conservation Importance.

• Endemic to Hong Kong or south China; if they are rare in the territory or have special conservation importance according to other scientific studies, e.g. for birds if they are of international importance (i.e. >1% of the biogeographical population) or regional importance (as listed in the Deep Bay Ramsar Conservation Strategy (Aspinwall Clouston & Wetlands International - Asia Pacific, 1997).

4.3.14 Species that occur within the Study Area in significant numbers according to the ERM study (1999b) or the baseline study conducted between April 2000 and May 2001 that are also considered to be Species of Conservation Importance are listed in Table 4.2. Since the ERM study included a literature review of records collated over a number of years it inevitably includes a number of species not recorded during the baseline study. Conversely, some species were recorded during the baseline study that were not known from the area the ERM study was prepared.

4.3.15 Birds have been divided into the following five categories of Species of Conservation Importance:

• Globally Threatened species.

• Regionally Important species.

• Restricted Range species in Hong Kong, i.e. species (including non-breeding species) which are found at fewer than three sites in Hong Kong.

• Declining species in Hong Kong, i.e. species (including non-breeding and locally extinct species) for which there is certain or probable long-term decline in Hong Kong.

• Locally Important species that occur regularly in the Study Area.

4.3.16 Note that whilst in Table 4.2 bird Species of Conservation Importance are listed in systematic order following Carey et al. (2001), in all other tables the species are listed hierarchically by category of Conservation Importance (i.e. Globally Threatened species are placed first and Locally Important species are placed last) and then within systematic order. The placing of Globally Threatened Species first reflects greater priority being attached to those species; however the systematic order reflects taxonomic status only and is not indicative of a hierarchy of importance within categories.

4.3.17 The assessment of the importance of populations is based on Rose and Scott's (1997) estimates of waterfowl populations world-wide and the 1% population levels for identifying wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention criteria. Using this 1% threshold, Carey and Young (1999) have identified 32 species occurring within the Mai Po Marshes and Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site that have wintering or passage populations that meet the Ramsar criteria for global or regional importance.

4.3.18 The latter three categories relate to species that have locally important populations and are regularly found within the Study Area. These were identified as species for which the highest annual count within Hong Kong was within the Study Area, in at least three years for either of the two five-year periods (1988-92 and 1993-7) under review. Although these species include some that are reasonably widespread in Hong Kong they are considered important in sustaining the long-term biodiversity of the territory. Hong Kong status of bird species is derived from Carey et al. (2001), together with the Hong Kong Bird Reports for the period from 1988 to 1997.

4.3.19 There is, as yet, no generally accepted baseline standard for the assessment of Hong Kong conservation status for animal taxa other than birds. Accordingly, baseline assessment has been based on Fellowes et al. (in press). It is acknowledged that it is not fully satisfactory to utilise an unpublished baseline source in this way, but it is considered preferable to the alternative option of making subjective judgements on individual taxa and groups.

Table 4.2

Species of Conservation Importance that are known or likely to occur

in significant numbers within 500 m of the proposed route between

Sheung Shui station and Lok Ma Chau station

Ö indicates that a species was recorded during the relevant study;

- indicates that a species was not recorded;

(Ö) indicates a species listed as likely to occur but not recorded by the study in question.

	Listed by ERM (1999b)	Recorded during baseline study and other field surveys conducted for this EIA	Protection status	Distribution	Rarity and threat status / HK conservation importance category
Mammals
Short-nosed Fruit Bat Cynopterus sphinx	-	Ö	HK	-	HK
Lesser Club-footed Bat Tylonycteris pachypus	-	√	HK	-	HK
Eurasian Otter Lutra lutra	-	√	HK	-	HK
Birds
Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo	√	√	HK	I	B
Grey Heron Ardea cinerea	√	√	HK	R	B
Great Egret Egretta alba	√	√	A, J, HK	I	B
Little Egret Egretta garzetta	√	√	HK	I	B
Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola bacchus	√	√	HK	I	B
Schrenck’s Bittern Ixobrychus eurhythmus	√	-	HK	-	C
Cinnamon Bittern Ixobrychus cinnamomeus	√	√	HK	L	E
Black-faced Spoonbill Platalea minor	-	√	C, HK	I	A
Common Teal Anas crecca	√	√	HK	R	B
Greater Spotted Eagle Aquila clanga	√	√	C, HK	-	A
Imperial Eagle Aquila heliaca	√	√	C, HK	-	A
Bonelli’s Eagle Hieraaetus fasciatus	√	-	HK	--	C
Northern Hobby Falco subbuteo	√	√	HK	-	C
Japanese Quail Coturnix japonica	√	√	HK	L	E
Watercock Gallicrex cinerea	√	-	HK	-	D
Eurasian Coot Fulica atra	√	√	HK	R	B
Pheasant-tailed Jacana Hydrophasianus chirurgus	√	-	HK	-	D
Greater Painted-snipe Rostulata benghalensis	√	√	HK	-	C
Black-winged Stilt Himantopus himantopus	√	√	HK	-	B
Pintail Snipe Gallinago stenura	√	√	HK	L	E
Swinhoe’s Snipe Gallinago megala	√	√	HK	L	E
Common Snipe Gallinago gallinago	√	√	HK	L	E
Eurasian Eagle Owl Bubo bubo	√	-	HK	-	C
Richard’s Pipit Anthus richardi	√	√	HK	L	E
Bluethroat Luscinia svecica	√	√	HK	L	E
Common Stonechat Saxicola torquata	√	√	HK	L	E
Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler Locustella certhiola	√	√	HK	L	E
Zitting Cisticola Cisticola juncidis	√	√	HK	L	E
Japanese Yellow Bunting Emberiza sulphurata	√	-	HK	-	A
Red-billed Starling Sturnus sericeus	√	√	HK	-	B
Black-naped Oriole Oriolus chinensis	√	√	HK	-	D
Reptiles
Burmese Python Python molurus	√	-	HK	-	HK
Reeve’s Terrapin Chinemys reevesii	-	√	HK	-	HK
Chinese Soft-shelled Turtle Pelodiscus sinensis	(√)	√	HK	-	HK
Amphibians
Chinese Bull Frog Rana rugulosa	√	√	-	-	HK
Butterflies
Halpo porus	√	-	-	-	HK
Baoris farri	√	-	-	-	HK
Horaga albimacula	√	-	-	-	HK
Castalius rosimon	√	-	-	-	HK
Taraka hamada	√	-	-	-	HK
Deudorix epijarbas	√	-	-	-	HK
Vagrans egista	√	-	-	-	HK
Parnara ganga	√	-	-	-	HK
Caltoris bromus	√	-	-	-	HK
Catochrysops strabo	√	-	-	-	HK
Horaga onyx	√	-	-	-	HK
Pachliopta aristolochiae	√	-	-	-	HK
Parnara ganga	√	-	-	-	HK
Potanthus trachala	√	-	-	-	HK
Euthalia lubentina	√	-	-	-	HK

Protection Status: B = listed on Appendix II of the Bonn Convention; A = listed under an agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People’s Republic of China for the Protection of Migratory Birds and their Environment; J = listed under an agreement on the Protection of Migratory Birds and their Habitats between the Government of Japan and the Government of the People’s Republic of China; C = protected in the People’s Republic of China; HK = protected in the Hong Kong SAR.

Distribution: E = endemic. For birds only: I = population of international importance, i.e. more than 1% of the biogeographical population occurs, at some point in their annual cycle, in Hong Kong (in the Deep Bay area); R = Hong Kong population of regional conservation importance (i.e. south China), (Source: Aspinwall Clouston & Wetlands International - Asia Pacific, 1997); L = Study Area population of local importance.

Rarity (and threat status): For birds only: A = Globally threatened species, B = Regionally Important Species, C = Restricted range species in Hong Kong, D = Declining species in Hong Kong, E = Study Area population locally important. For other groups: G = Globally threatened, R = Regionally threatened, L = threatened in Hong Kong, HK = Species of Conservation Importance (Fellowes et al. inpress).

Mammals

4.3.20 The ERM (1999b) review concluded that although a range of mammal species might be expected to occur within the common agricultural and fishpond habitats within the Study Area, the presence of only a few species could be verified by sightings or proxy records. The baseline survey conducted from April 2000 to May 2001 increased understanding of the mammal community of the Study Area (see Appendix A4.1). Three species of conservation importance, Short-nosed Fruit Bat, Lesser Club-footed Bat and Eurasian Otter, were recorded (Table 4.3). These were identified as species of conservation importance based on Fellowes et al. (in press). The location of the Livistonia chinensis clump utilised as a bat roost is indicated in Figure 4.1a.

Table 4.3

Mammal Species of Conservation Importance recorded within the Study Area

Species	Location	Notes
Short-nosed Fruit Bat Cynopterus sphinx	Chau Tau	Roosting in clump of Livistonia chinensis
Lesser Club-footed Bat Tylonycteris pachypus	Chau Tau	Probably roosting in clump of Livistonia chinensis
Eurasian Otter Lutra lutra	Lok Ma Chau / San Tin	Using fish ponds and river channels

4.3.21 Since mammals are shy and elusive and often occur at low densities, it is likely that other mammal species of conservation importance may occur. In addition to the species observed, it is likely that additional bat species of conservation importance are present. Other species of conservation importance present in the Deep Bay area (Reels 1996), notably Leopard Cat Prionailurus bengalensis, and Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes urva are also likely to occur. Small Asian Mongoose Herpestes javanicus was frequently recorded within the study area at Lok Ma Chau and has also been observed at Long Valley. However, in the light of recent evidence that this species is probably not native to Hong Kong (R. T. Corlett in litt.) it is not considered a species of conservation importance.

Birds

4.3.22 In total 227 species were reported within the Study Area during the period 1988 to 1998 (see ERM 1999b for full details). This figure represents 50% of the species recorded in Hong Kong since 1958, when the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society (HKBWS) started collecting records, and reflects the high habitat diversity and quality of some of the habitat types present within the Study Area. Among the 227 species, 179 (79%) were found within the 100 m corridor of the alignment and this represents 40% of the species recorded in Hong Kong. In Long Valley alone, over 200 species have been recorded.

4.3.23 In the previous EIA Report it was stated that, of these 227 species, 31 that were regularly recorded in the Study Area should be considered to be Species of Conservation Importance. The baseline study from April 2000 to May 2001 and other field surveys conducted for this EIA produced observations of 24 of these species as well as regular observations of an additional Species of Conservation Importance, the Black-faced Spoonbill (Table 4.2, Appendix A4.1). Three of these species, Black-faced Spoonbill, Greater Spotted Eagle and Imperial Eagle are currently listed as Globally Threatened (BirdLife International 2000, 2001). A fourth globally threatened species, Japanese Yellow Bunting, was listed from the Study Area by ERM (1999b) but was not recorded during the baseline study.[1] This species is a spring passage migrant in Hong Kong and is of irregular occurrence (Carey et al. 2001).

4.3.24 The 25 Species of Conservation Importance recorded in the Study Area during the baseline study period are the primary focus of this study in terms of assessing the major ecological impacts of the project. Those other Species of Conservation Importance listed by ERM (1999b) are also taken into account; however since they were not recorded during the baseline study period they do not meet the selection criterion of “regular” occurrence in the Study Area. Accordingly, impacts on these species, whilst still of significance, are afforded a lower level of importance.

4.3.25 The distribution of Species of Conservation Importance within the Study Area is indicated in Table 4.4. below.

Table 4.4

Species of Conservation Importance occurring within 500 m of the Spur Line during the Baseline Surveys and their distribution within the study area. (Sources: adapted from ERM, 1999b and baseline study April 2000 – May 2001).

Key Target Species are shown in bold

Common name	Long Valley	Kwu Tung	Chau Tau	Lok Ma Chau	San Tin	No. of sites
Globally Threatened Species
Black-faced Spoonbill				Ö	Ö
Greater Spotted Eagle	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Imperial Eagle	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö	4
Japanese Yellow Bunting	Ö			Ö		2
Regionally Important Species
Great Cormorant	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Grey Heron	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Great Egret	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Little Egret	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö	4
Chinese Pond Heron	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	5
Common Teal	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Eurasian Coot	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Black-winged Stilt	Ö				Ö	2
Red-billed Starling	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö	4
Restricted Range in Hong Kong
Schrenck’s Bittern	Ö					1
Bonelli’s Eagle	Ö		Ö			2
Northern Hobby	Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö	4
Greater Painted-snipe	Ö			Ö		2
Eurasian Eagle Owl			Ö			1
Declining in Hong Kong
Watercock	Ö					1
Pheasant-tailed Jacana	Ö			Ö		2
Black-naped Oriole	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Locally Important Species
Cinnamon Bittern	Ö					1
Japanese Quail	Ö			Ö		2
Pintail Snipe	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Swinhoe’s Snipe	Ö			Ö		2
Common Snipe	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö	4
Richard’s Pipit	Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö	4
Bluethroat	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Common Stonechat	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	5
Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler	Ö			Ö	Ö	3
Zitting Cisticola	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö	4
Total number of species recorded	213	49	55	124	113
Total number of Species of Conservation Importance recorded	29	7	6	26	21

Note: No Species of Conservation Importance were recorded in the Sheung Shui area.

4.3.26 The results of the analysis of the distribution of birds clearly show the high ecological importance of the Lok Ma Chau, San Tin and in particular, the Long Valley areas. The reason for this is primarily because the habitats containing the highest number of species and particularly Species of Conservation Importance are fish ponds, agricultural habitats and marshland (Table 4.6). The fish pond habitats are almost entirely restricted to the areas of Lok Ma Chau and San Tin whilst the small remaining areas of marshland and agricultural habitat are mostly restricted to the Long Valley area (Figure 4.1). The San Tin and Long Valley areas are particularly valuable because of their large unfragmented area which has the capacity to support relatively large populations of many of the Species of Conservation Importance in question.

4.3.27 The baseline surveys conducted during the period April 2000 to May 2001 give the most up to date status of the species of conservation importance recorded within the study area. Not all of the species of conservation concern detailed by ERM (1999b) were recorded during this period. This reflects annual variations in bird populations in the study area and Hong Kong, in particular for passage migrants. Further, Black-faced Spoonbills were found to occur regularly within the study area during the baseline surveys. Those species of conservation concern that were recorded during the baseline surveys are detailed in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5

Species of conservation importance recorded during the baseline surveys. Species regularly recorded are shown in bold

Common name	Long Valley	Lok Ma Chau	San Tin
Globally Threatened Species
Black-faced Spoonbill		Ö	Ö
Greater Spotted Eagle		Ö	Ö
Imperial Eagle		Ö	Ö
Regionally Important Species
Great Cormorant		Ö	Ö
Grey Heron	Ö	Ö	Ö
Great Egret	Ö	Ö	Ö
Little Egret	Ö	Ö	Ö
Chinese Pond Heron	Ö	Ö	Ö
Common Teal	Ö	Ö	Ö
Eurasian Coot			Ö
Black-winged Stilt	Ö	Ö	Ö
Red-billed Starling	Ö	Ö	Ö
Restricted Range in Hong Kong
Greater Painted-snipe	Ö
Declining in Hong Kong
Black-naped Oriole		Ö
Locally Important Species
Japanese Quail	Ö
Pintail/Swinhoe’s Snipe		Ö	Ö
Common Snipe	Ö	Ö	Ö
Richard’s Pipit	Ö	Ö	Ö
Bluethroat		Ö	Ö
Common Stonechat	Ö	Ö	Ö
Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler	Ö	Ö	Ö
Zitting Cisticola	Ö	Ö	Ö
Number of Species of Conservation Importance recorded	14	19	19
Number of Species of Conservation Importance regularly recorded	9	14	16

4.3.28 The fishponds in the San Tin / Lok Ma Chau area are of additional importance because these are close to and contiguous with the Deep Bay Ramsar Site and as described above are within the Wetland Conservation Areas (WCA) and Wetland Buffer Areas (WBA) adopted by the Town Planning Board (Figure 4.2). The baseline survey and counts carried out by the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society in the San Tin / Lok Ma Chau area of some waterbirds that are Species of Conservation Importance have shown that these ponds are frequently used by significant numbers of these birds (Appendices A4.1 and A4.3).

4.3.29 It should be pointed out that the analysis of the use of the Study Area through a literature review does not reflect recent changes in habitats or ecological value of those habitats. In particular, the historical records suggest that the Lok Ma Chau area formerly supported similar numbers of Species of Conservation Importance to the Long Valley area. However, the Lok Ma Chau area has lost a large proportion of its wet agricultural land and its ecological importance (e.g. for Greater Painted-snipe which no longer breeds at this site) has declined over the period under review. This decline in importance is illustrated by the annual waterfowl counts undertaken by the HKBWS. However, this decline in habitat quality is not reflected in the number of species using Lok Ma Chau and is therefore not reflected in Table 4.4. Consequently, although some areas of marshland and agricultural habitat remain in the Lok Ma Chau area these are now small and highly fragmented, and therefore now of only moderate ecological value.

4.3.30 In conclusion, the available data clearly show that Study Area is of international, regional and local importance in terms of the avian community it supports. Within the Study Area the large area of fishponds around San Tin and Lok Ma Chau and the extensive agricultural areas with remnant marshland habitats in Long Valley are of particular importance.

Table 4.6

Species of Conservation Importance occurring within 500 m of the Spur Line and their distribution with respect to habitat type (Source: adapted from ERM, 1999b and baseline and sectoral studies 2000 - 2001).

	Habitat Type
Species name	LSF	G-S	W	AWA	ADA	IWA	IDA	M	FP	IFP	WC	BP	N
Globally Threatened Species
Black-faced Spoonbill									√	√			2
Greater Spotted Eagle		Ö							Ö	Ö			3
Imperial Eagle		Ö							Ö	Ö			3
Japanese Yellow Bunting						Ö	Ö	Ö					3
Regionally Important Species
Great Cormorant									Ö	Ö			2
Grey Heron									Ö	Ö	Ö		3
Great Egret				Ö		Ö			Ö	Ö	Ö		5
Little Egret				Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	8
Chinese Pond Heron				Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	9
Common Teal						Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö		Ö	5
Eurasian Coot									Ö	Ö			2
Black-winged Stilt				Ö					Ö	Ö		Ö	4
Red-billed Starling				Ö	Ö	Ö			Ö	Ö	Ö		6
Restricted Range in Hong Kong
Schrenck’s Bittern						Ö		Ö					2
Bonelli’s Eagle		Ö							Ö				2
Northern Hobby	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö						6
Greater Painted-snipe				Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö					4
Eurasian Eagle Owl		Ö											1
Declining in Hong Kong
Watercock						Ö		Ö				Ö	3
Pheasant-tailed Jacana				Ö		Ö		Ö					3
Black-naped Oriole	Ö								Ö				2
Locally Important Species
Cinnamon Bittern						Ö		Ö					2
Japanese Quail			Ö		Ö		Ö						3
Pintail Snipe				Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö			6
Swinhoe’s Snipe				Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö					4
Common Snipe				Ö		Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö			6
Richard’s Pipit		Ö		Ö	Ö		Ö		Ö	Ö			6
Bluethroat				Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö					5
Common Stonechat		Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö		Ö	Ö			8
Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler				Ö		Ö		Ö		Ö			4
Zitting Cisticola				Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö	Ö			7
Total number of Species of Conservation Importance recorded	2	7	2	16	8	19	13	15	19	18	5	5

Habitat types: LSF – Lowland secondary forest; S-G – Grassland-shrubland mosaic, W-Wasteland, AWA – Active wet agricultural land; ADA – Active dry agricultural land; IWA – Inactive wet agricultural land; IDA – Inactive dry agricultural land; M – Marsh; FP – active fishpond; IFP – Inactive fishpond; WC- watercourses; BP- bloodworm pond.

Note: No Species of Conservation Importance occurred in fung-shui forest, plantation forest, orchard or developed areas. Managed wetland did not exist in the study area until September 2001 (i.e. after the main survey period).

Amphibians and Reptiles

4.3.31 A review of the importance of the Study Area for amphibians and reptiles was carried out by ERM (1999b) through a literature review, which also included unpublished personal records of local herpetologist, Dr Michael Lau. Subsequently, baseline surveys of the Study Area were carried out from April 2000 to May 2001 (see Appendix A4.1 and Table 4.7). The list of herpetofauna of Conservation Importance is based on those species listed by Fellowes et al. (in press).

Table 4.7

Reptiles and amphibians of conservation importance recorded in the Study Area. Species recorded during baseline surveys from April 2000 – May 2001

are shown in bold

Species	Lok Ma Chau / San Tin Fish Ponds	Lok Ma Chau Village / Chau Tau	Long Valley
Burmese Python	√	√	-
Chinese Soft-shelled Turtle	Not recorded during the baseline survey but found at Lok Ma Chau in November 2001	-	-
Reeves’ Terrapin	-	-	√
Chinese Bullfrog	√	-	√

4.3.32 Most of the herpetofauna of Long Valley are common and widespread species typical of lowland areas in Hong Kong (ERM 1999b, Appendix A4.1). However, one uncommon amphibians, the Chinese Bullfrog Rana rugulosa is present. Rana rugulosa was once considered to be the most common amphibian in Hong Kong (Boring, 1934) but has since declined considerably (Romer, 1979b; Karsen et al., 1986).This uncommon frog breeds in marshes within the Study Area and are also found in inactive or abandoned agricultural fields and wet agricultural fields. The Narrow-mouthed Frog Kalophrymus interlineatus is present in Long Valley and was listed in the previous EIA Report as a Species of Conservation Importance. This species was once considered to be rare (Lai & Ng, 1972) and was recorded from a few localities only (Romer 1979b). However, more recent studies indicate that this species is widely distributed in the lowlands, valleys and hills of the north-western, north-eastern and central New Territories (Lau, 1998). Accordingly, it is not listed by Fellowes et al. (in press) and is not treated as a Species of Conservation Importance in this EIA.

4.3.33 Reeves’ Terrapin Chinemys reevesii was formerly Hong Kong’s most frequently recorded chelonian but has now declined significantly, perhaps through competition with the introduced Red-eared Slider Trachemys scripta. This species is primarily an inhabitant of ponds, rivers and slow-moving lowland streams (Karsen et al. 1998).

4.3.34 There are relatively few published records of reptiles and amphibians from the Chau Tau, San Tin and Lok Ma Chau area. Despite this only a single additional species of Conservation Importance, the Chinese Bullfrog, was found during the baseline survey. This supports the suggestion made in the previous EIA Report (BBV 2000a) that the amphibian and reptile community in these areas appears to be less diverse than in Long Valley and the majority of recorded species are widespread. However, one snake species, the Burmese Python Python molurus listed by ERM (1999b) as occurring in the San Tin, Lok Ma Chau and Chau Tau areas is considered to be of Conservation Importance. This species is locally common in Hong Kong, where it is protected. It is considered to be of Conservation Importance as it is declining in much of its range. In addition, the regionally uncommon and protected Chinese Soft-shelled Turtle Pelodiscus sinensis was not recorded in the Study Area during the baseline survey but was found at Lok Ma Chau in November 2001. This species is more or less restricted to fishponds (Lau 1995) and fish ponds in the Deep Bay area may currently be the stronghold for this species in Hong Kong (Aspinwall Clouston & Wetlands International - Asia Pacific, 1997).

The Chinese Water Snake, Enhydris chinensis and the Buff-striped Keelback Amphiesma stolata, recorded from the Lok Ma Chau and San Tin areas, were listed as Species of Conservation Importance by ERM (1999b) and in the previous EIA Report. However, a review of their status led to their being excluded from Fellowes et al. (in press), hence they are not included in this EIA.

4.3.35 Thus, in conclusion, it is apparent that wetland habitats along the Spur Line route are of some ecological importance for reptiles and amphibians.The wide variety of lowland wetland habitats in Long Valley supports a diverse lowland amphibian fauna including one locally uncommon frog species and the declining Reeves’ Terrapin. Hence, the habitats in Long Valley, albeit influenced by humans to a varying extent, are still of ecological significance for amphibians and reptiles. The herpetofauna in the remaining areas are less diverse overall, but includes three Species of Conservation Importance including the Chinese Soft-shelled Turtle recorded at Lok Ma Chau in November 2001.

Fish

4.3.36 As described above, the Study Area contains extensive areas of fishponds and other open water wetland habitats including watercourses and ponds. The fishponds are mostly used for poly-culture of freshwater fish and contain high densities of various commercially stocked species (see Chapter 5 for a detailed assessment).

4.3.37 Other aquatic habitats tend to be grossly polluted, small in size, or isolated from any natural water courses of good water quality and are therefore unlikely to be able to support a diverse or abundant fish community. Consequently, the ERM (1999b) study found that only thirteen species of fish have been recorded within the Study Area and these are mainly commercially stocked species of fishpond habitats. Although none of these are considered uncommon or rare in Hong Kong (Chong and Dudgeon, 1992) and are consequently not Species of Conservation Importance, some are important prey for piscivorous birds, especially when ponds are drained down as part of normal management practices.

Dragonflies and Damselflies (Odonata)

4.3.38 The ERM (1999b) report found that although wetland habitats dominated the whole Study Area, only about 20% of the recorded Odonata in Hong Kong were reported and none of them could be considered to be rare or otherwise Species of Conservation Importance. No Species of Conservation Importance were found during the 2000 to 2001 baseline survey (Appendix A4.1). These findings are not unexpected given that characteristic Odonata habitats such as high quality freshwater streams or undisturbed marshes are absent within the Study Area.

Butterflies

4.3.39 Extensive butterfly surveys have been undertaken in Long Valley, primarily by M. Bascombe along Beas River at Ho Sheung Heung and at Tsung Pak Long. The total number of species reported from these surveys were 48 from the Beas River, 73 from Ho Sheung Heung and 83 at Tsung Pak Long (Maunsell, 1997). Among the 97 species recorded as a whole from the Long Valley area, five very rare species and ten rare species can be considered to be Species of Conservation Importance (Table 4.2) and their distribution among the three sites and the respective larval food plants are shown in Table 4.8 below.

Table 4.8

The location, larval food plant and status in Hong Kong of Butterfly Species of Conservation Importance

Species	Location	Larval Food Plant	HK Status
Halpo porus	Tsung Pak Long Ho Sheung Heung	Bambusa multiplex	very rare
Baoris farri	Beas River Ho Sheung Heung	Bambusa multiplex	very rare
Horaga albimacula	Ho Sheung Heung Tsung Pak Long	Unknown	very rare
Castalius rosimon	Ho Sheung Heung Tsung Pak Long	Paliurus ramosissimus	very rare
Taraka hamada	Tsung Pak Long	Unknown	very rare
Deudorix epijarbas	Beas River Tsung Pak Long	Litchi chinensis, Euphoria longan	rare
Vagrans egista	Beas River	Homalium cochinchinensis	rare
Parnara ganga	Ho Sheung Heung	Leersia hexandra	rare
Caltoris bromus	Ho Sheung Heung Tsung Pak Long	Bambusa sp.	rare
Catochrysops strabo	Ho Sheung Heung Tsung Pak Long	Desmodium heterocarpon Dunbaria villosa	rare
Horaga onyx	Ho Sheung Heung Tsung Pak Long	Litsea rotundifolia	rare
Pachliopta aristolochiae	Ho Sheung Heung	Aristolochia tagala	rare
Parnara ganga	Ho Sheung Heung	Leersia hexandra	rare
Potanthus trachala	Ho Sheung Heung	Macrosolon cochinchinensis, Scurrula parasitica	rare
Euthalia lubentina	Tsung Pak Long	Elytranthe cochinchinensis Loranthus parasiticus	rare

4.3.40 Despite butterflies being targeted during the 2000 to 2001 baseline survey none of these species (or any other butterfly Species of Conservation Importance) were found in the Study Area. It is notable that these species are all butterflies of fung shui woods or secondary woodland and, since the butterfly survey was concentrated within the 200 m study corridor which contains little woodland, it is possible that some of these may still be present but were missed during the baseline survey.

4.3.41 No butterfly Species of Conservation Importance were reported from the remainder of the Study Area in ERM (1999b) and, likewise, no butterfly Species of Conservation Importance were found at Chau Tau, San Tin and Lok Ma Chau during the 2000 to 2001 baseline surveys (Appendix A4.1). This is not unexpected, given the habitat characteristics of these areas.

Continue

---

[1] Note that two species listed as Globally Threatened in ERM (1999b) and the previous EIA Report, Schrenck’s Bittern and Red-billed Starling were listed as Globally Threatened by Collar et al. (1994) but not by BirdLife International (2000). These species are, however, retained as Species of Conservation Importance in the present EIA by virtue of their status as being of Restricted Range in Hong Kong and having a Regionally Important population in Hong Kong, respectively.