Report

8 Ecological Impact Assessment

8.1.1 Requirements of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study Brief

8.1.1.1 The EIA Study Brief (EIA SB) No.: ESB-306/2017 for the Project issued on 9 February 2018 has stipulated the technical requirements for ecological impact assessment (EcoIA), in Section 3.4.9 and Appendix G of EIA SB. The aim of the ecological impact assessment is to protect, maintain or rehabilitate the natural environment, in particular, to avoid as far as possible impacts on recognized sites of conservation importance and other ecological sensitive areas. The assessment is intended to identify and quantify as far as possible the potential ecological impacts associated from the Project, both directly and indirectly, on the natural environment and its associated wildlife and habitats or species.

8.1.2 Assessment Area for EcoIA

8.1.2.1 As stated in Section 3.4.9.2 of EIA SB, the assessment area for the purpose of the terrestrial ecological impact assessment shall include areas within 500 metres of the boundary of the Project and the works of the Project as well as any other areas likely to be impacted by the Project. For aquatic ecological impact assessment, the assessment area is the same as for water quality impact assessment (see Figure 5.1), i.e. include areas within 500m from the boundary of the Project and the works of the Project, and covers the Mirs Bay Water Control Zone and the water sensitive receivers outside the 500m boundary but in the vicinity of the Project.

8.1.3 Key Ecological Issues stipulated in EIA Study Brief

8.1.3.1 Key ecological issues stated in the EIA Study Brief included but were not limited to the following:

Wildlife groups/habitats of conservation interest

· Marine Park and associated marine habitats;

· coral communities; and

· any other habitats/species identified as having special conservation importance by this EIA study.

Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance in the 500m assessment area and its vicinity

· Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park;

· Tung Ping Chau Marine Park; and

· Ping Chau Sites of Special Scientific Interest.

8.2 Legislation, Standards and Guidelines

8.2.1 General

8.2.1.1 The relevant ordinances and regulations that are applicable to this Ecological Impact Assessment (EcoIA) include the followings:

· Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96) and its subsidiary legislation, the Forestry Regulations;

· Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170);

· Country Parks Ordinance (Cap. 208) and its subsidiary legislation;

· Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap. 476);

· Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 499) and the Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (TM-EIAO); and

· Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586) and its subsidiary legislation.

8.2.1.2 This EcoIA makes reference to the following guidelines and standards:

· Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) Chapter 10, "Conservation";

· PELB Technical Circular 1/97 / Works Branch Technical Circular 4/97, "Guidelines for Implementing the Policy on Off-site Ecological Mitigation Measures";

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 3/2010 – Flexibility and Enforceability of Mitigation Measures Proposed in an EIA Report;

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 6/2010 - Some Observations on Ecological Assessment from the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance Perspective;

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 7/2010 – Ecological Baseline Survey for Ecological Assessment;

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 10/2010 – Methodologies for Terrestrial and Freshwater Ecological Baseline Surveys; and

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 11/2010 – Methodologies for Marine Ecological Baseline Surveys.

8.2.1.3 This EcoIA also makes reference to the following Mainland legislation:

· List of State Protected Wild Animals, promulgated by the State Council 國家重點保護野生動物名錄; and

· List of Wild Plants under State Protection國家重點保護野生植物名錄(第一批).

8.2.1.4 Other international conventions and guidelines that are relevant to this EcoIA include the following:

· Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora ("CITES"). This Convention regulates international trade in animal and plant species considered to be at risk from such trade. Depending on the degree of threat posed by international trade, CITES classifies endangered species of animals and plants into three Appendices. Appendix I includes highly endangered species threatened with extinction. Commercial trade in these species is prohibited. Appendix II includes species which are not presently threatened with extinction but may become so unless trade is controlled. Trade of these species is allowed but is subject to licensing controls. Appendix III species are species identified by any Party to CITES as requiring cooperation in controlling their trade. Their trade is subject to permits or certificates of origin. Hong Kong's obligations under this Convention are enforced via the Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586). The CITES authority for Hong Kong SAR is the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation (AFCD).

· IUCN. The World Conservation Union maintains, through its Species Survival Commission, a “Red List” of globally threatened species of wild plants and animals (see http://www.iucnredlist.org). The Red List is considered the authoritative publication to classify species into nine groups as Extinct (EX) - No individuals remaining; Extinct in the Wild (EW) - Known only to survive in captivity, or as a naturalized population outside its historic range; Critically Endangered (CR) - Extremely high risk of extinction in the wild; Endangered (EN) - Very high risk of extinction in the wild; Vulnerable (VU) - High risk of extinction in the wild; Near Threatened (NT) - Likely to become endangered in the near future; Least Concern (LC) - Lowest risk. Does not qualify for a higher risk category. Widespread and abundant taxa are included in these two categories: Data Deficient (DD) – Knowledge of the species is inadequate to enable assessment its risk of extinction; and Not Evaluated (NE) – Species not yet evaluated against the criteria.

· United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. This convention requires parties to regulate or manage biological resources important for the conservation of biological diversity whether within or outside protected areas, with a view to ensuring their conservation and sustainable use. It also requires parties to promote the protection of ecosystems, natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity on 5thJanuary 1993. The HKSAR Government has stated that it is "committed to meeting the environmental objectives" of the Convention (PELB 1996).

· Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the "Ramsar Convention"), which requires parties to conserve and make wise use of wetlands, particularly those supporting waterfowl populations. The PRC ratified the Ramsar Convention on 31 July 1992, and various wetlands have since been listed as wetlands of international importance (i.e. Ramsar sites). One of these, Mai Po Marshes and Inner Deep Bay Ramsar site in Hong Kong SAR, was listed on 4 September 1995.

· Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (the Bonn Convention), which requires parties to protect listed threatened or endangered migratory species occurring within their boundaries.

8.2.2 Criteria of Evaluating Species of Conservation Importance

8.2.2.1 Species of flora and fauna with conservation importance were given special attention. In accordance with Table 3, Annex 8 of the TM-EIAO, the ecological value of species was assessed in terms of protection status, distribution, and rarity. For faunal species, the protection status (e.g. fauna protected under Cap. 170 (except birds as all wild birds are protected under the ordinance but their conservation importance is not equal), Cap. 586, and/or regional/global laws/conventions), the species distribution (e.g. endemic), and the rarity (e.g. rare or restricted, or level of concern highlighted in Fellowes et al. (2002)) were considered. Similarly, floral species of conservation importance are considered from protection status (e.g. listed under Forestry Regulations and Cap.586 in Hong Kong, listed by IUCN or CITES, or listed as Category I or II protected species in mainland China); species distribution (e.g. endemic); and rarity (e.g. considered rare or very rare by Corlett et al. (2000) and regarded as rare by Yip et al. (2010)). However, exotic invasive species, escaped cultivars or captive species, vagrants and introduced species are excluded.

8.2.2.2 The following laws/regulations and conventions for conservation were relevant with evaluation of the conservation importance of flora and fauna species.

· Forestry Regulations (Cap. 96A) which are subsidiary legislation of the Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96);

· Category I/II/III in List of Wild Plants under State Protection;

· Considered ‘Rare’ or ‘Very Rare’ plant species listed by Corlett et al. (2000) and regarded as ‘Rare’ plant species by Yip et al. (2010);

· China Plant Red Data Book;

· Threatened Species List of China’s Higher Plants (Qin et al., 2017);

· Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap 170);

· Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap 586);

· Category I or II State Protected Wild Animals;

· PRC Wild Animal Protection Law;

· China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals;

· China Species Red List;

· Red List of China’s Vertebrates;

· The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species (Species which are classified by IUCN as Least Concern (LC), Data Deficient (DD), or Not Evaluated (NE), and not covered by any other laws/regulations/conventions are not considered of conservation importance in the present EcoIA);

· The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); and

· Fauna species considered of concern in Fellowes et al. (2002).

8.2.2.3 The species identified from both literature review and the ecological surveys as having conservation importance are further categorized in accordance with their relevance to potential impacts, which were assessed in accordance with the TM-EIAO criteria.

8.3 Methodology for Baseline Establishment

8.3.1 Literature Review Methodology

8.3.1.1 A literature review was conducted to characterise the existing conditions within the 500m assessment area as well as Mirs Bay Water Control Zone and to identify habitats and species of potential importance in the area. The literature review covers Government and private sector reports, independent and Government published literature, academic studies, vegetation maps and land use maps.

8.3.1.2 Reviewed information includes, but is not limited to the following:

· Annual reports of Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong Kong;

· Hong Kong Biodiversity – Newsletter of Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD);

· Publications of AFCD;

· Development Permission Areas Plan and Outline Zoning Plans;

· Annual report and other publications of The Hong Kong Bird Watching Society;

· Memoirs of Hong Kong Natural History Society;

· Porcupine! Newsletter of Ecology & Biodiversity, The School of Biological Sciences, The University of Hong Kong;

· Ecological studies in the area;

· Project Profile PP-222/2004 “Improvement works to Tung Ping Chau Public Pier”; and

· Relevant EIA reports.

8.3.2 Ecological Survey Methodology

8.3.2.1 The methodology of the ecological surveys made reference to the technical guidelines of ecological assessment in Annex 16 of TM-EIAO and the relevant EIAO Guidance Notes (GN 7/2010, GN 10/2010, and GN 11/2010).

8.3.2.2 Ecological surveys were carried out within the 500m assessment area to verify the preliminary ecological baseline established from the reviewed literature, update baseline information, and fill identified information gaps to facilitate the establishment of a complete ecological baseline of the assessment area and to facilitate the ecological assessment.

8.3.2.3 As the Project mainly involves marine-based works, marine ecological surveys including intertidal, coral and benthic were conducted for the EcoIA. Terrestrial surveys were also conducted for the EcoIA so as to investigate and assess any potential indirect impact on terrestrial ecology due to the proposed construction works. The ecological survey programme covered terrestrial, intertidal and marine habitats, identified sites of conservation importance, and important habitats within the 500m distance during wet and dry seasons. The ecological surveys included habitat and vegetation, terrestrial mammal, bird, herpetofauna, dragonfly and butterfly, aquatic fauna, intertidal, subtidal and benthic biota. The ecological survey locations within the 500m assessment area of the Project are shown in Figure 8.1. Details of the survey methodology are discussed in the following sections.

8.3.2.4 The objectives of the baseline ecological surveys are as follows:

· To identify sensitive receivers (i.e. important ecological resources) present within the 500m assessment area;

· To establish an update general ecological baseline of the 500m assessment area in particular areas likely to be affected by the Project and describe the characteristics of each habitat and assemblage found;

· To update the distribution of flora/fauna of conservation importance identified from review literature; and

· To provide baseline ecological conditions for assessment of potential environmental impacts caused by the proposed Project activities and recommendation of mitigation measures to mitigate such impacts.

8.3.3 Terrestrial Survey

8.3.3.1 Habitat and Vegetation Survey: Habitats within the 500m assessment area were mapped based on government latest aerial photos and field ground-truthing. Representative areas of each habitat type and within the recognized sites of conservation importance (e.g. Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park) were surveyed on foot. Ravines only with transient water flow after raining and having no records of aquatic life were incorporated into adjacent habitats during habitat mapping. Plant species of each habitat type were encountered and their relative abundance was recorded with special attention to rare or protected species. Nomenclature and conservation status of plant species followed Hong Kong Herbarium (2019) and Corlett et al. (2000).

8.3.3.2 Terrestrial Mammal Survey: All sightings, tracks, and signs of mammals (including droppings) along sampling transects (Figure 8.1) were actively searched. The location(s) of any mammal species of conservation importance encountered was(were) recorded, along with notable behaviour. Night surveys were conducted to survey nocturnal mammal species (e.g. bats). Hand torch was used to search for the nocturnal mammals, bat detector was adopted to locate bats, if necessary. Nomenclature for mammals followed Shek (2006).

8.3.3.3 Avifauna Survey: The avifauna of each habitat types within the 500m assessment area were surveyed using transect count method (Figure 8.1). The presence and abundance of avifauna species at various habitats observed from transects were recorded visually and aurally. Bird species encountered outside sampling transects but within the 500m assessment area were also recorded. Night surveys were conducted to record nocturnal avifauna (e.g., owls). The location(s) of any avifauna species of conservation importance encountered was(were) recorded, along with notable behaviour. Ornithological nomenclature in this study followed Hong Kong Bird Watching Society List of Hong Kong Birds 2018.

8.3.3.4 Herpetofauna Survey: Herpetofauna surveys in selected sampling transects (Figure 8.1) were conducted through direct observation and active searching in all potential hiding places such as among leaf litter, inside holes, under stones and logs along the survey transects within the 500m assessment area. During the surveys, all reptiles and amphibians sighted and heard were recorded. Auditory detection of species-specific calls was used to survey frogs and toads during night surveys. The location(s) of any herpetofauna species of conservation importance encountered was(were) recorded, along with notable behaviour. The nomenclature and conservation status followed Karsen et al. (1998) and Chan et al. (2005).

8.3.3.5 Dragonfly and Butterfly Surveys: Dragonfly and butterfly surveys were conducted by transect count method (Figure 8.1). All the dragonflies and butterflies encountered were recorded and have their abundance recorded. Dragonfly and butterfly species encountered outside transects but within the 500m assessment area were also recorded. The location(s) of any dragonfly and butterfly species of conservation importance encountered was(were) recorded, along with notable behaviour. The nomenclature and conservation status for butterflies and dragonflies followed Chan et al. (2011) and Tam et al. (2011) respectively.

8.3.3.6 Freshwater Aquatic Assemblage Survey: Aquatic fauna, including freshwater macro-invertebrates (e.g. freshwater crabs, shrimps, freshwater molluscs and aquatic insect larvae) and fishes, in the watercourses were studied by direct observation and, active searching by hand nets, within relevant habitats of the 500m assessment area (Figure 8.1). Organisms were recorded and identified to the lowest possible taxon, and their relative abundance was reported. The location(s) of any freshwater species of conservation importance encountered was(were) recorded, along with notable behaviour. Nomenclature for fish followed Lee et al. (2004), while those for the macro-invertebrates followed Dudgeon (1999).

8.3.4 Marine and Intertidal Survey

8.3.4.1 Intertidal Survey: The intertidal surveys consisted of both qualitative walk-through surveys and quantitative transect surveys along the existing piers and accessible coastlines (e.g. natural and artificial softshore and hardshore) in the vicinity, so as to produce a comprehensive species lists as well as the corresponding relative abundance of the study areas. The surveys were conducted during low tide. The conservation status (including local, regional and international such as China Redlist and IUCN Redlist) of the recorded biota was provided. Organisms encountered were recorded and their relative abundance noted.

8.3.4.2 For quantitative transect surveys, one 50 m horizontal transect along the coastline was deployed at each of the three tidal levels: high, middle and low. On each transect, five quadrats (50 cm × 50 cm) were placed randomly to determine the abundance and diversity of flora and fauna. All organisms found in each quadrat were identified and recorded to the lowest possible taxonomic level. Sessile species, such as algae (encrusting, foliose and filamentous), barnacles and oysters, in each quadrat were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level and estimated as percentage cover on the rock surface, if absolute count cannot be made. In addition, should the transect locations proved to be soft shore, all organisms found in the top 50 cm × 50 cm × 5 cm layer (length x width x depth) of the substrate were recorded. However, the quantitative transect survey depended on the accessibility of the coastlines, as the piers are vertical or only contain piles, estimation of the relative abundance was made as qualitative walk-through survey. The sampling locations are shown in Figure 8.1.

8.3.4.3 Benthic Grab Survey: Benthic survey was conducted at 3 sampling locations including the Project Site and 2 offshore locations in the subtidal soft-bottom habitats within the 500m assessment area (Figure 8.1).

8.3.4.4 Prior to the benthic grab sampling, dive survey was conducted to identify sampling locations without coral coverage, in order to avoid any damage on coral colonies. At each sampling location, three grab samples were collected. Benthic sediments were sampled using a grab sampler to collect representative amount of sediments. Sediments from the grab samples were sieved on board of the survey vessel, washed onto a sieve stack (comprising 1 mm and 500 μm meshes) and gently rinsed with seawater to remove all fine material. Following rinsing any materials remaining on the two screens were combined and carefully rinsed using a minimal volume of seawater into pre-labelled thick triple-bagged Ziploc plastic bags. A 5% solution of formalin containing Rose Bengal in seawater was then added to the bag to ensure tissue preservation. Care was taken to ensure the concentration of solution is not adversely diluted through rinsing into the bags. Samples were sealed in plastic containers for transfer to the laboratory for sorting and identification.

8.3.4.5 Taxonomic identifications were performed using stereo dissecting and high-power compound microscopes. Taxa was identified to the lowest practicable level. The careful sampling procedure was employed to minimize fragmentation of organisms. If breakage of soft-bodied organisms occurred, only anterior portions of fragments were counted, although all fragments were retained and weighed for biomass determinations (wet weight).

8.3.4.6 Dive Survey: Dive surveys were conducted in the Project Site and the 500m Assessment Area to study corals and other marine organisms with conservation importance. Several types of dive surveys were conducted with different objectives, i.e. 1) reconnaissance spot check dives to check the site condition and to confirm the occurrence of corals as well as the major distributions; 2) Rapid Ecological Assessment (REA) transect survey to determine the general condition of coral and marine benthic communities within and in the vicinity of the Project Sites; 3) coral density survey to determine the coral density by 5m × 5m grid cells within the proposed works area; and 4) coral mapping to record the coral locations within the tentative pier improvement area for designing the layout of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension. While the coral communities were the key objectives, during all these dive surveys, attentions were also paid on any other marine organisms of conservation importance encountered. Indicative locations of dive surveys are shown in Figure 8.1.

8.3.4.7 Spot check dive surveys were first conducted within the 500m Assessment Area to observe the site conditions, to search for occurrence and distribution of coral colonies and any other marine organisms of conservation importance. REA were then performed at selected locations aiming at assessing the relative coverage of corals, other major benthic groups and taxon abundance, as well as providing an inventory of sessile benthic taxa for defining community types. It is noted that a coral mapping was previously conducted near the existing pier under the past Project Profile PP-222/2004 (DIR-103/2004) – “Improvement Works to Tung Ping Chau Public Pier” (Figure 8.2). Four REA transects (T1 to T4 in Figure 8.1) were deployed covering areas with various coral abundances as indicated in the results of the past coral mapping (Figure 8.2), in order to verify if the general pattern of coral distribution in the PP-222/2004 is still valid. Besides, further REA transects (T5 and T6) were also deployed within the 500m assessment area. The length of each REA transect was 100m and the rating of REA is shown in Annex 8.1.

8.3.4.8 In accordance with the findings from past surveys and REA survey, an extent for works area is proposed (i.e. the proposed works area), intending to cover the space required for manoeuvring of works vessels and construction works. The proposed works area has avoided the areas with abundant corals. A more detailed coral density survey was conducted. The proposed works area (Figure 8.1) in Tung Ping Chau was divided into a grid of 5m × 5m (i.e. 25m² per grid cell), and hard corals in grids were recorded and densities were calculated.

8.3.4.9 After a map of hard coral density within the proposed works area was produced, a tentative pier improvement area (i.e. an area within the proposed works area for designing the layout of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension and the temporary pier) on cells with lower density of hard coral was derived. The proposed TPC Public Pier extension and the temporary pier should be within the tentative pier improvement area. A coral mapping for the tentative pier improvement area was then conducted, in order to record the locations of corals for design of the footprint of the supporting structures as well as fine tuning the design, to avoid and minimize corals to be impacted by the pier improvement works. Hence, the proposed TPC Public Pier extension can be put in the area with lower impacts. Species, size and movability of coral colonies were recorded during the coral mapping. If the coral colonies could be manually moved underwater together with the substrates (such as corals on boulders), it is considered as “readily movable”. Otherwise, it is regarded as “not readily movable”. The aims of the coral mapping were to:

· Map out the distribution of hard coral colony;

· Identify the footprint of the supporting structures such as piles where direct impacts on the corals might occur; and

· Recommend mitigation measures such as fine tuning the footprints and/or translocation of corals to avoid impacts on the corals.

8.3.4.10 If any marine organisms of conservation importance other than corals were encountered during all these dive surveys, the species, sighting locations, and abundance would be recorded. Attentions were also paid on special features and observations such as habitat usage, behaviours, etc.

8.3.5 Survey Locations and Survey Programme

8.3.5.1 As the project elements are mainly marine-based, more survey effort was spent on the marine habitats around the existing pier. The areas covered by the ecological survey covered both terrestrial and marine habitats, primarily the impact areas, and secondarily on the areas adjacent to the impact areas.

8.3.5.2 Due to the sub-tropical climate in Hong Kong, there are mainly two distinct seasonal weathers in the area, namely “wet season” and “dry season”. Wet season is between April and October with higher monthly temperature and rainfall, and the activities of organism are more active. On the other hand, dry season is between November and March with lower monthly temperature and rainfall, and the activities of organisms are less conspicuous.

8.3.5.3 According to the Clause 2(iii) in Appendix G of the EIA Study Brief, ecological surveys were carried out for a duration of at least 12 months. The ecological surveys were undertaken between August 2018 and September 2019 (Table 8.1), covering both dry and wet seasons to collect ecological baseline information within and near the Project.

Table 8.1 Ecological Survey Programme

Survey Type	2018					2019
	Wet			Dry					Wet
	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep
Marine Ecological Surveys
Intertidal Community	√		√		√			√
Benthic Community			√				√
Coral Community		√		√							√	√	√	√
Terrestrial Ecological Surveys
Habitat Mapping & Vegetation	√							√
Avifauna	√			√			√			√
Avifauna	√			√			√			√
Terrestrial Mammal	√			√			√			√
Herpetofauna	√			√			√			√
Dragonflies & Butterflies	√			√			√			√
Aquatic fauna		√						√				√

8.3.6 Impact Assessment Methodology

8.3.6.1 The assessment identified and quantified as far as possible the potential ecological impacts, arising from the construction and operation of the Project and in combination with those cumulative impacts from associated works of the Project, both directly by loss of habitats or removal of vegetation, and indirectly by physical disturbance to animals.

8.3.6.2 Ecological impacts were identified and quantified as far as possible. Feasible mitigation measures were also identified, aiming to avoid and minimize the identified impacts.

8.4 Ecological Baseline Conditions

8.4.1 General descriptions of the Project Site and Assessment Area

8.4.1.1 Tung Ping Chau Public Pier was originally constructed in the 1960s and upgraded in 2006-2007 to address certain structural problems. The pier is around 98m long, comprising an about 14m long solid pier head, about 35m long catwalk and an about 49m long rubble causeway. The solid pier head is about 5.5m wide, and consists of a 1.1m wide flight of steps on each side of the pier head.

8.4.1.2 The 500m assessment area of the Project involves open sea within Tung Ping Chau Marine Park, rural area within Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park and residential villages including Tai Tong, Lei Uk & Chan Uk, Sha Tau and Lam Uk. The Mirs Bay Water Control Zone covers a vast area of the Hong Kong Eastern waters and Tung Ping Chau is located at the northeast corner of this water control zone and distant from other landmass.

8.4.2 Literature Review - Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance and Important Habitats

8.4.2.1 Tung Ping Chau Public Pier is within Tung Ping Chau Marine Park (Figure 8.3) which is designated in year 2001 and regulated under Marine Parks Ordinance (Cap. 476). Tung Ping Chau Marine Park occupies a sea area of about 270 hectares. The establishment of marine parks aims to protect and conserve the marine environment from anthropogenic threats, for the purpose of conservation, education and recreation. Tung Ping Chau Marine Park is well-known for the protection of coral communities, algal bed and unique geological features.

8.4.2.2 Tung Ping Chau Marine Park is one of the marine parks having the best coverage and diversity of stony corals in Hong Kong. 65 species out of 84 species of stony coral were recorded in Tung Ping Chau Marine Park (AFCD 2019). Two Core Areas with stricter management measures (i.e. prohibiting all fishing activities within the Core Area) located in Tai Tong Wan and A Ma Wan bays. Over 40 species of stony corals were recorded in the two Core Areas, and the co-dominant stony coral species of both Core Areas include Platygyra acuta, Platygyra carnosus and Leptastrea purpurea (AFCD 2019).

8.4.2.3 There are 3 sites of Hong Kong Reef Check in Tung Ping Chau Marine Park, namely A Ma Wan, A Ye Wan and Wong Ye Kok (Figure 8.3). The coral coverages in these 3 sites are considered high when compared with other Reef Check sites in Hong Kong. Coral coverages of these 3 Reef Check sites within Tung Ping Chau Marine Park in 2019 are shown in Figure 8.3.

8.4.2.4 About 5.86 hectares of land of Tung Ping Chau under the Draft Ping Chau Outline Zoning Plan No. S/NE-PC/1 is zoned as “Coastal Protection Area” (“CPA”) to conserve, protect and retain the natural coastlines and the sensitive coastal natural environment, including attractive geological features, physical landforms or areas of high landscape, scenic or ecological value, with a minimum of built development. The strip of land along the eastern coastline of Tung Ping Chau is zoned as “CPA”. The “CPA” is dominated by sandy beaches with coastal plant species and intersected by discontinuous sections of flat sedimentary rock stacks straddling the edge of the area.

8.4.2.5 The land area of Tung Ping Chau is partly within the boundary of Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park (Figure 8.3) under Country Parks Ordinance (Cap. 208). The northern extension of Plover Cove Country Park was designated in 1979, with an area of 630 ha covering Hong Kong northeastern coastlines and islands including a large portion of Tung Ping Chau. About 24ha of country park area is within the 500m assessment area. According to a study on the flora of Tung Ping Chau Island conducted between 1997 and 2008, a total of 207 vascular plant species was recorded. The vegetation types on this island are secondary broad-leaved forest, shrubland, and beach vegetation (Lin et al. 2009).

8.4.2.6 Tung Ping Chau Island is also designated as the Ping Chau Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) for its unique rock formations and geological features, which has high conservation value. Hence, Tung Ping Chau is also part of Hong Kong UNESCO Global Geopark.

8.4.2.7 The existing Tung Ping Chau pier lies in the Mirs Bay Water Control Zone (WCZ) as designated under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance. Besides Tung Ping Chau Marine Park, Yan Chau Tong Marine Park also lies within the Mirs Bay WCZ, but distanced over 10km away. Among all the 33 designated sites for Hong Kong Reef Check, 21 of them are located within the Mirs Bay WCZ. Beside the 3 sites that lies within the Tung Ping Chau Marine Park mentioned above, the remaining sites are located distant from the Project Site. Port Island is the closest one to Tung Ping Chau, over 8km away. Other sites such as Wong Chuk Kok Hoi, Crescent Island and Double Island are all over 10km away. According to Field Guide to Hard Corals of Hong Kong (AFCD, 2005), a list of coral hotspots was mentioned and highlighted for the high coral richness. Besides Tung Ping Chau, Port Island, Double Island, Kat O and Crescent Island were also coral hotspots, and these locations are all located at least 8km away from Tung Ping Chau.

8.4.2.8 According to AFCD website, 21 mangrove stands are located within the Mirs Bay WCZ, and Tung Wan is the closest one to Tung Pin Chau, over 10km. Other mangrove stands such as To Kwa Peng, Tai Tan and Chek Keng are located even farther away.

8.4.3 Literature Review - Species of Conservation Importance

8.4.3.1 According to Project profile for the previous pier improvement “Improvement works to Tung Ping Chau Public Pier” (PP-222/2004), a coral mapping was conducted in September 2002 and January 2004. The mapping covered the around the Tung Ping Chau Public Pier and its vicinity (Figure 8.2). A total of 23 genera of hard corals were recorded. The majority of the coral colonies were concentrated away from the pier. High density of corals was found in the areas with shallow water, with more corals found in the northeast than the northwestern side of the pier. The dominant coral genera included Platygyra, Porities, Favia, Leptastrea, Goniopora and Favities. A total of 41 coral colonies were translocated from the works area of piling locations as a mitigation measure. Among the 41 translocated colonies, 15 of them were selected for monitoring throughout the construction period. The monitoring results showed that the survival rate of the monitored colonies were 100%. Though slight decrease in the cumulative average value according to CoralWatch was observed, it was probably due to seasonal factor as similar changes were also observed in the control. Hence, the coral translocation is considered successful.

8.4.3.2 The PP-222/2004 also showed that the density of benthic organisms around the pier area was very low. The most important benthic organism other than corals was the sea urchin Salmacis sp.,

8.4.3.3 The waters near Tung Ping Chau are not the home range of marine mammals Chinese White Dolphin and Finless Porpoise according to Monitoring of Marine Mammals in Hong Kong Waters in the past years. However, Green Turtle Chelonia mydas was recorded in the northeast waters of Hong Kong (AFCD 2003). It is occasionally seen in southern and eastern parts of local waters. Sham Wan, Lamma Island is the only Hong Kong site at which a small population of Green Turtles known to nest regularly (AFCD website). There were occasional sightings of Green Turtle in Tung Ping Chau, but no breeding and nesting were reported (AFCD 2003).

8.4.3.4 Along the coast of Lung Lok Shui on the western side of Tung Ping Chau, it is dominated by brown, red and green algal beds which are considered as the best algal beds in Hong Kong. Over 65 species of marine algae could be found in Tung Ping Chau Marine Park. Nevertheless, macroalgae like Sargassum can also be found near the existing Tung Ping Chau Public Pier during winter time. Besides, Seaweed pipefish Syngnathus schlegeli, was also recorded in Tung Ping Chau in moderate abundance, hiding amongst Sargassum or nets and ropes (Sadovy & Cornish 2000). This species was also reported in Tung Chung Bay (ERC & Green Power 2012). Though not reported by the survey in Tung Ping Chau, corals are also considered as one of the habitats utilized by the Spotted seahorse Hippocampus kude, (Sadovy & Cornish 2000).

8.4.3.5 Horseshoe crab, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, has been recorded in Luk Keng and Lai Chi Wo in the northeastern New Territories, within the Mirs Bay WCZ with over 17km distance away from Tung Ping Chau (Li 2008).

8.4.3.6 Amphioxus Branchiostoma belcheri was recorded with high densities in Tai Long Wan and Pak Lap Wan from 2003 to 2004. Both locations are located over 13km away from Tung Ping Chau (Chen 2017).

8.4.4 Terrestrial Ecological Survey Results

8.4.4.1 Habitat and Vegetation Survey: Habitats within the 500m assessment area included developed area, woodland, watercourse, rocky shore, sandy shore, artificial vertical wall (intertidal part existing pier head) and sea (including water column and subtidal seabed) (Figure 8.4 and Figure 8.5). Habitat size within the 500m assessment area is shown in Table 8.2.

Table 8.2 Habitat Sizes within the 500m Assessment Area at Tung Ping Chau

Habitat types	Project Site		500m Assessment Area (including Project Site)
Habitat types	Area (ha)	Length (m)	Area (ha)	Length (m)
Developed Area	0.024	-	2.09	-
Woodland	-	-	34.83	-
Watercourse	-	-	-	288.63
Rocky shore	-	-	1.83	-
Sandy shore	-	-	2.79	-
Artificial vertical wall	-	40	-	40
Sea (including water column and subtidal seabed)	0.996	-	59.01	-

8.4.4.2 Developed Area mainly involved villages (Chan Uk, Lei Uk and Tai Tong to the northwest of the 500m assessment area and Sha Tau to the southwest of the 500m assessment area) and Tung Ping Chau Public Pier. The concrete-paved landscape is vegetated by weedy herbs and ornamented by landscape plantings.

8.4.4.3 An extensive woodland stand, ranging from the northwest to the southeast of the 500m assessment area, was identified. Though Acacia confusa was planted along the margin, the woodland was still established through planting and species dispersal across Ping Chau Hoi. Native tree species Celtis biondii, Celtis sinensis, Ficus microcarpa, Litsea glutinosa, Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa, Sapium sebiferum, Scolopia chinensis and Schefflera heptaphylla were commonly found in the woodland stands. Due to its proximity with the shore, seashore shrub species Atalantia buxifolia, Breynia fruticosa, Leucas mollissima var. chinensis, Plumbago zeylanica and Vitex negundo var. cannabifolia were frequently encountered. Climber species Tinospora sinensis and Zanthoxylum nitidum were abundant in the woodland. Most of the woodland within the 500m assessment area falls within the Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park.

8.4.4.4 Two major watercourses were identified within the 500m assessment area, both of which were natural, flew past villages but were polluted by domestic wastewater discharged from nearby villages. The substrate of the watercourses is sandy and silty. Both watercourses were observed to sparsely vegetated, with Ipomoea cairica and Wedelia trilobata being dominant due to their close adjacency to highly disturbed developed area.

8.4.4.5 An extensive intertidal shore belt comprising rocky shore and sandy shore stretched from the northwest to the southeast of the 500m assessment area and was dominated by sandy shore species tolerant of saline environment, such as Ipomoea pes-caprae, Sporobolus virginicus, Vitex rotundifolia and Wedelia biflora. No vegetation was found on the artificial vertical walls.

8.4.4.6 Ping Chau Hoi occupied northeast portion of the 500m assessment area and is not vegetated by terrestrial plant species. No mangrove and seagrass were also reported.

8.4.4.7 A total of 110 plant species, encompassing one plant species of conservation importance, was noted. Among them, 75 species are known to be native to Hong Kong, 34 of them are exotic species and one species is of uncertain origin. Among the recorded plant species, only Vitis bryoniifolia is considered species of conservation importance. Evaluation of this species of conservation importance is shown in Table 8.13.

8.4.4.8 Terrestrial Mammal: No mammal was found within the 500m assessment area during the ecological field survey for the present EIA Study.

8.4.4.9 Avifauna: A total of 25 species of bird were recorded in the 500m assessment area (Appendix 8.2). The recorded species were mostly common and widespread in Hong Kong. Of the recorded species, five species were considered of conservation importance. These included Crested Goshawk Accipiter trivirgatus, Black Kite Milvus migrans, Greater Coucal Centropus sinensis, Collared Crow Corvus torquatus and Plumbeous Water Redstart Phoenicurus fuliginosus (Figure 8.4). Evaluation of these species of conservation importance is shown in Table 8.13.

8.4.4.10 Herpetofauna: There was no significant finding for herpetofauna within the 500m assessment area (Appendix 8.3 & Appendix 8.4). All recorded species were common in Hong Kong. None of the recorded species was considered of conservation importance.

8.4.4.11 Dragonfly and Butterfly: There was no significant finding for dragonfly (Appendix 8.5) and butterfly (Appendix 8.6) within the 500m assessment area. Most recorded species were common or very common in Hong Kong. None of the recorded species was considered of conservation importance.

8.4.4.12 Freshwater Aquatic Assemblage: Freshwater habitat in Tung Ping Chau was not prominent and only three common aquatic species were recorded (Appendix 8.7).

8.4.5 Marine and Intertidal Survey Results

8.4.5.1 Intertidal Community (Qualitative Walk-through): Within the 500m assessment area, qualitative walk-through survey was conducted along the accessible shorelines of the survey locations, to record organisms encountered and their relative abundance.

8.4.5.2 Results of this qualitative survey showed that the shorelines along the survey locations mainly comprised of artificial vertical walls (existing pier head), sandy shore and rocky shore (natural intertidal shore).

8.4.5.3 Highly mobile fauna such as crab was recorded in the qualitative surveys. A total of 18 and 19 intertidal organisms were found in all the sampling locations during the qualitative surveys in wet season and dry season, respectively (Appendix 8.8A and Appendix 8.8B). Saccostrea cucullata was the dominant species recorded in the existing pier. Ralfsia expansa was the dominant algal species in sampling location I-A during dry season. While Thais clavigera was the dominant species in sampling location I-B. All species recorded were considered to be common and widespread as in other intertidal shores in Hong Kong. No species of conservation importance were recorded.

8.4.5.4 Intertidal Community (Quantitative): Transects were deployed at two locations near the Project Site (I-A and I-B). The transects covered high-shore, mid-shore and low-shore. Dominant species among the transects were found to be quite similar as in quantitative survey described above (Appendix 8.9A and Appendix 8.9B).

8.4.5.5 A total of 22 and 33 organisms were recorded during the quantitative surveys of wet season and dry season, respectively. Dominant species found were typical species in that particular site as described in the qualitative survey. No species of conservation importance were recorded.

8.4.5.6 Table 8.3 shows the number of species (S), density (D i.e. individuals/m²), evenness (J) and Shannon Diversity (H’) of intertidal organisms recorded in the survey locations (both qualitative and quantitative surveys are present). The number of species in dry season was higher than that in wet season for both sampling locations I-A and I-B. The evenness and Shannon Diversity were similar among different seasons and sampling locations.

Table 8.3 Number of Species (S), Density (D individual/m²), Evenness (J) and Shannon Diversity (H’) of Intertidal Organisms Recorded from Qualitative and Quantitative Surveys at the Survey Locations in Tung Ping Chau

Season	Site	Qualitative Survey	Quantitative Surveys
Season	Site	S	S	D	J	H'
Wet Season	Project Site	5	-	-	-	-
	I-A	12	16	38	0.67	1.86
	I-B	11	12	16	0.78	1.94
Dry Season	Project Site	9	-	-	-	-
	I-A	11	29	105	0.60	2.02
	I-B	17	17	53	0.71	2.00

8.4.5.7 Benthic Community: Subtidal benthic surveys at 3 sampling locations including the Project Site and 2 offshore locations in the 500m assessment area showed that 773 and 67 individuals of organisms in 10 and 7 phyla, 60 and 33 families, and 72 and 38 species in 18 grab samples during wet and dry seasons, respectively (Table 8.4). Full lists of benthic data for abundance and biomass are shown in Appendix 8.10A to Appendix 8.10D. All of the species recorded are common and widespread in Hong Kong except that there is a species of conservation importance amphioxus Branchiostoma belcheri recorded in sampling locations B2 and B3 which are over 250m away from the Project Site (Figure 8.4). However, no amphioxus was recorded in the sampling location within the Project Site.

8.4.5.8 Amphioxus is of conservation importance because of its primitive morphology and of its over-exploitation as a fishery resource in coastal waters of the South China Sea, especially near Xiamen (Lu et al. 1998). Amphioxus is classified as a Class II protected species in China (Huang 2006).

8.4.5.9 There were 7 and 2 individuals of amphioxus recorded in sampling location B2 during wet and dry seasons, respectively. In sampling location B3, 3 individuals were recorded in both wet and dry seasons. The density ranged from around 3-9 ind/m², which is considered very low compared to some specific locations in Tai Long Wan and Pak Lap Wan, with a maximum of 460 and 290 ind/m², respectively (Chen 2007).

8.4.5.10 Amphioxus is not likely to occur within the Project Site as the substrates within the Project Site were mainly composed of boulders and gravel embedded in sediments. It is not a typical habitat for amphioxus (which is usually found on sandy seabed). While amphioxus was recorded in both seasons sampling locations B2/B3 but none was found in the 6 grab samples of the sampling location within the Project Site during both wet and dry seasons.

8.4.5.11 In terms of infaunal abundance, the majority of the organisms recorded in the subtidal soft bottom habitat were from the phylum annelida in wet (~54%) and in dry (~63%) seasons (Table 8.4). Arthropoda Byblis sp. and Annelida Eusyllis sp. were the dominant species recorded in the wet season, while all recorded species in dry season were relative few in terms of abundance.

8.4.5.12 In terms of infaunal biomass, organisms from the phylum mollusca contributed to about 46% in wet season, and spongia contributed to about 60% of the total biomass in dry season (Table 8.4).

8.4.5.13 Benthic Shannon Diversity Index (H’) ranged from 2.08 – 2.48 during wet season and from 0.82 – 1.65 during dry season (Table 8.5). Pielou’s Evenness Index (J) was relatively high for all sampling locations for both seasons, which means the organisms were quite evenly distributed. Sampling locations B and C were away from the Project Site with higher Shannon Diversity Index than sampling location A which is within the Project Site.

8.4.5.14 The benthic assemblages within the 500m assessment area are relatively lower than that in Hong Kong waters. Previous studies of benthic surveys showed that value of value of H’ varied from 2.21 – 3.50 in the eastern waters, which is higher than Victoria Harbour (1.10 to 2.49), Tolo Harbour and Channel (1.51 – 1.85), western waters at outer Deep Bay (2.14 – 2.86) and southern waters (2.53 – 2.98) (CityU Professional Services Limited 2002).

Table 8.4 Benthic Fauna Composition in Grab Samples from Tung Ping Chau

Phylum	No. of families		No. of species		No. of individuals		% of abundance		Biomass (g)		% of biomass
Phylum	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry
Annelida	30	16	38	19	418	42	54.08	62.69	4.00	0.44	12.75	15.13
Arthropoda	12	3	12	3	273	13	35.32	19.40	0.69	0.06	2.20	2.15
Chordata	1	1	1	1	10	5	1.29	7.46	0.12	0.04	0.39	1.44
Cnidaria	1	0	1	0	1	0	0.13	0	0.002	0	0.005	0
Echinodermata	4	1	4	1	11	1	1.42	1.49	11.76	0.01	37.45	0.31
Echiura	1	0	1	0	1	0	0.13	0	0.04	0	0.12	0
Mollusca	8	3	11	3	43	4	5.56	5.97	14.56	0.56	46.37	19.26
Nemertinea	1	0	1	0	6	0	0.78	0	0.07	0	0.24	0
Plathyhelminthes	1	1	1	1	1	1	0.13	1.49	0.001	0.03	0.004	0.89
Sipuncula	1	0	2	0	9	0	1.16	0	0.15	0	0.47	0
Spongia	0	1	0	1	0	1	0	1.49	0	1.77	0	60.82
Total	60	26	72	29	773	67	100	100	31.39	2.91	100	100

Table 8.5 Summary Results of Subtidal Benthic Survey (Dry and Wet Seasons) in Tung Ping Chau*

Location	No. of species		Abundance		Wet weight (g)		Evenness		Shannon diversity
Location	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry	Wet	Dry
B1	37	7	156	10	4.30	0.71	0.84	0.97	3.05	1.89
B2	51	21	351	31	14.1	2.09	0.76	0.95	2.99	0.97
B3	38	13	266	26	13.0	0.10	0.66	0.93	2.39	0.95
* replicates of sub-station are pooled together

8.4.5.15 Coral Community: Several types of coral surveys were conducted, i.e. spot check dives for reconnaissance of site condition and distribution of corals, REA transect survey to determine the general condition of coral and marine benthic communities within and in the vicinity of the Project Site; coral density survey to determine the coral density within the proposed works area; and coral mapping to record the coral locations within the tentative pier improvement area. The results of various coral surveys are present below.

8.4.5.16 Reconnaissance spot check dives were initially conducted to observe the site conditions, the distributions of coral colonies and to initially verify the information reported in PP-222/2004 (DIR-103/2004). The entire coastline within the 500m Assessment Area is in natural conditions except the causeway of the existing pier. The existing pier is composed of a solid causeway, a walkway supported by piles and the solid pier head. While much of the causeway is situated in intertidal zone, corals colonies were observed on hard substrates (several old pillar remnants) beneath the walkway and on the artificial vertical wall of the existing pier head. Seabed near the existing pier head is mainly covered by mixture of sand and boulders. Corals were also found on some of the boulders. To the south of the pier and close to the shore, where is also a Reef Check site, a group of Platygyra colonies of significant sizes were observed. To the north of the pier, corals were also found along the natural coastline substrate. In general, there are more coral colonies close to the coastline than the seabed around and further outside the pier head.

8.4.5.17 A total of 29 species of hard corals and one species of black coral were recorded during the REA surveys (Appendix 8.11). Among the recorded hard coral species, Platygyra yaeyamaensis is considered rare (Chan et al. 2005), which is recorded from a few sites located mainly in northeastern and eastern waters of Hong Kong. The black coral Antipathes curvata is a very common species in Hong Kong (Chow et al. 2016). While all marine life in the Marine Park are protected under Cap 476, all hard corals and black corals are protected under Cap 586 and CITES.

8.4.5.18 Four REA transects (T1 to T4) (Figure 8.1) were deployed near the existing pier and covering the area previously surveyed under PP-222/2004 (DIR-103/2004). The REA results showed that T1 and T2 were of similar conditions with relatively high coral coverage ~35% and 30%, respectively, while T3 and T4 were of low coral coverage (<5%). The pattern is similar to the distribution of coral colonies shown on the map under PP-222/2004 Study (Figure 8.2).

8.4.5.19 REA transects T5 and T6 are away from the Project Site (Figure 8.1). The coral coverage in T5 was about 10%, while T6 is close to the Reef Check site “A Ye Wan” in which coral coverage was about 40%.

8.4.5.20 Hence, the proposed works area (which cover both the temporary area for construction works as well as the area of the permanent footprint of the piles) for the present study avoided the high coral coverage areas according to Hong Kong Reef Check, the distribution of coral colonies from PP-222/2004 Study as well as the REA survey for the present study. Detailed coral survey was then conducted within the proposed works area.

8.4.5.21 The proposed works area was divided into grid cells of 5m × 5m (a total of 396 grids cells). Hard corals in grids were recorded and densities were calculated. Figure 8.6 shows the density of coral colony in each grid cell. Most of the grids (342 grids out of 396 grids) are with less than 1 coral colony per meter square, and about 70% of the coral colonies recorded within the proposed works area were less than or around to 30cm in size. A relatively higher density area (5-9 and 9-12 coral colony/m²) is located in the southeast of the existing pier. There are about 10 grids with hard coral density larger than 5 coral colonies per meter square. Therefore, the tentative pier improvement area (i.e. an area within the proposed works area for designing the layout of proposed TPC Public Pier extension and temporary pier) has to avoid the relatively higher density area, and is deployed in the area with low coral density (Figure 8.7). Besides hard corals, two individuals of common black coral Antipathes curvata were also recorded within the proposed works area (Figure 8.4). This species is distributed in western central Pacific including Indonesia (SeaLifeBase 2019).

8.4.5.22 Coral mapping was then conducted within the tentative pier improvement area. A total of 531 coral colonies from 43 species were recorded on the seabed within the tentative pier improvement area (Appendix 8.12 and Figure 8.8). Among the 531 coral colonies on the seabed, there were 237 coral colonies that were readily movable, the remaining are considered as not readily movable. It was observed that most of the coral colonies on seabed that are not readily movable were attached on boulders that may also be movable if with suitable equipment. Among the coral colonies recorded within the tentative pier improvement area, only 28 colonies were larger than 30cm (Figure 8.9). Six colonies of the rare species Platygyra yaeyamaensis were recorded near the existing pier (Figure 8.10). No other rare species were recorded.

8.4.5.23 In addition to the 531 coral colonies recorded on the seabed within the tentative pier improvement area, coral colonies were also found locating on the artificial vertical structures i.e. the vertical walls of the existing pier head (23 colonies) and the old pillars under the existing catwalk (84 colonies). Only 5 colonies on the existing pier head and the old pillars were larger than 30cm, no rare species were found (Appendix 8.12). The colonies on the vertical walls of existing pier head and old pillars were non-movable.

8.4.5.24 Other Marine Organisms of Conservation Importance: During the dive surveys, diverse marine organisms were observed such as snails, sea urchins, sea cucumber, swimming crabs, and marine fish. However no marine species of conservation importance was recorded other than corals. According to literature review there were occasional sightings of Green turtles in Tung Ping Chau but it was not recorded during the present study. Other marine species of concern that might potentially occur such as Seaweed pipefish or Spotted Seahorse was not found either.

8.4.6 Evaluation of Ecological Values

8.4.6.1 The ecological importance of the habitats within the 500m assessment area was evaluated in accordance with the criteria stipulated in Annex 8 of TM-EIAO (Table 8.6 to Table 8.12).

Table 8.6 Evaluation of Developed Area within the 500m Assessment Area

Criterion	Description
Naturalness	Man-made habitat
Size	2.09 ha
Diversity	Low flora diversity Low diversity for bird, very low diversity of dragonfly and butterfly
Rarity	No flora or fauna species of conservation importance
Re-creatability	Readily re-creatable
Fragmentation	Two separate village settlements were observed within the assessment area
Ecological linkage	Not linked to habitats of conservation importance
Potential value	Limited
Nursery/breeding ground	No significant observation
Age	N/A
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low abundance for bird, very low abundance of dragonfly and butterfly
Overall ecological value	Low

Table 8.7 Evaluation of Woodland (including the area inside Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park) within the 500m Assessment Area

Criterion	Description
Naturalness	Natural and most of the area fall with Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park
Size	34.83 ha
Diversity	Moderate flora diversity Low to moderate diversity of bird and butterfly, very low diversity of dragonfly
Rarity	One flora species of conservation importance: Vitis bryoniifolia Three fauna species of conservation importance: Black Kite, Crested Goshawk and Greater Coucal
Re-creatability	Re-creatable given sufficient time for succession in the absence of significant disturbance
Fragmentation	No fragmentation observed
Ecological linkage	Not functionally linked to habitats of conservation importance
Potential value	Limited
Nursery/breeding ground	May provide breeding habitats for terrestrial fauna
Age	At least 20 years
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low to moderate abundance of bird and butterfly, very low abundance of dragonfly
Overall ecological value	Medium

Table 8.8 Evaluation of Watercourse within the 500m Assessment Area

Criterion	Description
Naturalness	Mostly natural
Length	288.63 m
Diversity	Low flora diversity Low diversity of butterfly, very low diversity abundance of bird and dragonfly
Rarity	Plumbeous Water Redstart
Re-creatability	Difficult to re-create
Fragmentation	Not fragmented
Ecological linkage	Connected to Ping Chau Hoi
Potential value	Low
Nursery/breeding ground	May provide breeding habitat for freshwater and/or estuarine fish and invertebrates
Age	N/A
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low abundance of aquatic fauna, butterfly, very low abundance of bird and dragonfly
Overall ecological value	Low to medium

Table 8.9 Evaluation of Natural Intertidal Shore (Rocky Shore and Sandy Shore) within the 500m Assessment Area

Criterion	Description
Criterion	Rocky shore	Sandy shore
Naturalness	Natural	Natural
Size	1.83 ha	2.79 ha
Diversity	− Low diversity of butterfly, very low diversity of dragonfly − Low diversity of intertidal fauna	− Low diversity of butterfly, very low diversity of dragonfly − Very low diversity of intertidal fauna
Rarity	None	One fauna species of conservation importance: Collared Crow
Re-creatability	Difficult to recreate	Difficult to recreate
Fragmentation	No fragmentation observed	No fragmentation observed
Ecological linkage	Connected to Ping Chau Hoi	Connected to Ping Chau Hoi
Potential value	Moderate	Low
Nursery/breeding ground	Breeding and nursery ground for intertidal organisms	Breeding and nursery ground for limited intertidal organisms
Age	N/A	N/A
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low abundance of intertidal organisms and butterfly, very low abundance of dragonfly	Low abundance of butterfly, very low abundance of intertidal organisms and dragonfly
Overall ecological value	Medium	Low

Table 8.10 Evaluation of Artificial Vertical Wall (Intertidal zone of Existing Pier Head) within the 500m Assessment Area

Criterion	Description
Naturalness	Man-made
Size	40m
Diversity	Low diversity of intertidal organisms
Rarity	None
Re-creatability	Easy to re-create
Fragmentation	N/A
Ecological linkage	Connected to Ping Chau Hoi
Potential value	Low
Nursery/breeding ground	Breeding and nursery ground for limited intertidal organisms
Age	N/A
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low
Overall ecological value	Very low

Table 8.11 Evaluation of Marine Waters (including water column and subtidal seabed) within the 500m Assessment Area

Criterion	Description
Naturalness	Mostly natural except the existing pier
Size	59.01 ha
Diversity	Low diversity of bird High diversity of hard corals on seabed, medium diversity for water column, low diversity of coral on artificial vertical walls
Rarity	One terrestrial fauna species of conservation importance: Black Kite Marine species of conservation importance: Branchiostoma belcheri, hard corals, black coral Antipathes curvata and Green Turtle (from literature)
Re-creatability	Difficult to re-create except the artificial vertical walls
Fragmentation	N/A
Ecological linkage	Connected to other marine waters and intertidal habitats
Potential value	Medium for seabed and water column as it has been managed for years, medium for artificial vertical walls as it can provide hard substrate for coral colonization
Nursery/breeding ground	Nursery grounds for fishes and invertebrates
Age	N/A
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low abundance of bird High coverage of coral colonies on seabed, low coverage on artificial vertical walls, medium for water column
Overall ecological value	High for seabed, Medium to High for water Column, Low for artificial vertical walls

Table 8.12 Evaluation of the Project Site

Criterion	Description
Naturalness	Mostly natural except the existing pier
Size	0.89 ha (including proposed works area, the plan view area of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension and that of the temporary pier.)
Diversity	Medium diversity of coral colonies
Rarity	Different species of hard corals and black coral Antipathes curvata
Re-creatability	Difficult except the existing pier
Fragmentation	N/A
Ecological linkage	Connected to other marine waters and intertidal habitats
Potential value	High except the existing pier
Nursery/breeding ground	Nursery grounds for fishes and invertebrates
Age	N/A
Abundance/richness of wildlife	Low to Medium coverage of hard corals
Overall ecological value	Medium for seabed, Low to Medium for water column, Low for artificial vertical walls given higher disturbance level at and near the existing pier

8.4.6.2 In accordance with Table 6, Annex 8 of the TM-EIAO, the ecological value of species was assessed in terms of protection status (e.g. fauna protected under WAPO (except birds), and flora and fauna protected under regional/global legislation/conventions), species distribution (e.g. endemic), and rarity (e.g. rare or restricted). Flora and fauna of conservation importance recorded within the 500m assessment area are evaluated according to the TM-EIAO in Table 8.13. The locations of those fauna species of conservation importance (except hard corals) recorded during survey are presented in Figure 8.4.

Table 8.13 Evaluation of Flora and Fauna Species of Conservation Importance

Common names	Locations	Protection status ^{1, 2}	Distribution ¹	Rarity ^{1 3}
Vascular plant
Vitis bryoniifolia	Woodland outside the Project Site	-	Coastal areas	Rare
Terrestrial fauna*
Crested Goshawk	Woodland outside the Project Site	Cap 586 and Appendix 2 of CITES; Class 2 Protected Animal of China; China Red Data Book Status: (Rare)	Widely distributed in woodlands and shrublands throughout Hong Kong.	Uncommon resident
Black Kite	Soaring over woodland and seas surface outside the Project Site	Cap 586 and Appendix 2 of CITES; Class 2 Protected Animal of China; Fellowes et al. (2002): RC	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common resident and winter visitor
Greater Coucal	Woodland outside the Project Site	Class 2 Protected Animal of China; China Red Data Book Status: (Vulnerable)	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common resident
Collared Crow	Rocky shore outside the Project Site	IUCN Red List Status: NT Fellowes et al. (2002): LC	Found in Inner Deep Bay area, Nam Chung, Kei Ling Ha, Tai Mei Tuk, Pok Fu Lam, Chek lap Kok, Shuen Wan, Lam Tsuen.	Uncommon resident
Plumbeous Water Redstart	Watercourse outside the Project Site	Fellowes et al. (2002): LC	Widely distributed in rocky streams throughout Hong Kong.	Scarce winter visitor
Marine fauna**
Branchiostoma belcheri	Marine water outside the Project Site and the proposed works area	Class 2 Protected Animal in China	Sai Kung waters include Tai Long Wan and Pak Lap	Recorded in limited sites in Hong Kong
Hard corals	Within and in the vicinity of the Project Site and the proposed works area	Cap 586 and CITES Appendix II	Widely distributed in Hong Kong waters in particular northeastern, eastern and southeastern waters	See Appendix 8.12
Antipathes curvata (black coral)	Within the proposed works area but outside the proposed pier	Cap 586 and CITES Appendix II	Mainly distributed in east, northeast, southeast and southern parts of Hong Kong	Very common
Green Turtle (from literature)	Northeast waters including Tung Ping Chau	Cap 170 and Cap 586; IUCN Red List Status: Endangered; China Red Data Book Status: Critically Endangered; Fellowes et al. (2002): GC	Occasionally seen in southern and eastern part of local waters	Occasion
Seaweed pipefish (from literature)***	Previously recorded in Sargassum at Tung Ping Chau	IUCN: Least concern	Western North Pacific	Locally abundant

1: AFCD (2020), 2: Wang (1998), 3: Corlett et al. (2000).

Level of concern in Fellowes et al,.2002: LC = local concern, PRC = potential regional concern, RC = regional concern, GC = global concern; Letters in parentheses indicate that the assessment is on the basis of restrictedness in breeding and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

* : All wild birds are protected under Cap 170, and all wild life inside Country Parks are protected under Cap 208.

** : All wildlife inside Marine Parks are protected under Cap 476.

***: Spotted seahorse was not reported in Tung Ping Chau Marine Park in Sadovy & Cornish 2000 but corals are considered habitats to be utilised by this species

8.5 Identification of Ecological Impacts

8.5.1 Construction Phase

Identification of Key Works

8.5.1.1 Option selection process was performed based upon the basic requirements and safety standards for Public Pier, the occurrence and distribution of ecological resources in Tung Ping Chau Marine Park, pros and cons of different forms and options of pier improvement works, engineering and environmental constraints. After considering different locations, forms and sizes, a preferred option with small footprint and associated impacts was derived (details see Section 2). The proposed TPC Public Pier improvement will integrate and extend from the existing pier head and the extension will be supported by piles. The piled deck structure will be of a length of about 26m and widths ranging from 5.5m to 6m. The width will increase to 15m at the pier head to accommodate both traditional pier head and floating pontoon as barrier-free facility. The outermost part of the existing pier head (about 3m) will be demolished to integrate with the new pier structures. An above-seabed downstand wall will be constructed at the new pier head to reduce wave actions against the floating pontoon.

8.5.1.2 A temporary pier will also be deployed to connect to the existing pier and will be about 20.5m long and 5.5m wide to maintain the pier operation during construction. The temporary pier might be in different forms such as floating pontoon. In the present EIA, to take a conservative approach, it is assumed the temporary pier is of prefabricated steel structures supported by piled foundation (the form involved more construction works). The temporary pier will be demolished after the completion of a new berth of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension.

8.5.1.3 The areas required for the piles of proposed TPC Public Pier extension and temporary pier are about 0.002 ha and 0.0005 ha respectively. No construction works will be conducted on terrestrial habitats except the outermost part of the existing pier head.

8.5.1.4 The Project comprises the following works which may potentially give rise to ecological impacts during the construction phase. No specific activity during the operational phase is anticipated to bear ecological impacts as change of vessel types or increase in vessel frequency will not be expected.

· Carrying out site investigation works for detailed design (anticipated jack-up barge to be the main working vessel);

· Installation of piles for the temporary pier (anticipated derrick barge to be the main working vessel);

· Installation works of temporary berthing and mooring facilities (temporary pier) using working barge and/or steel structures supported by piles;

· Installation of piles for the proposed TPC Public Pier extension (anticipated derrick barge to be the main working vessel);

· Construction of the new pier structures for provision of the new berth of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension;

· Installation of remaining piles for the new pier and demolition/modification works of the existing pier and temporary pier;

· Construction of the remaining new pier structures; and

· Construction of associated facilities on the new pier.

Direct Impacts – Terrestrial

8.5.1.5 Except the small portion of the existing pier head being demolished, the pier improvement works will not directly impact or cause loss of terrestrial habitat or Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park. There will be no significant direct impact on terrestrial ecology.

Direct Impacts – Marine

Habitat Loss - Permanent Loss

8.5.1.6 The proposed TPC Public Pier extension involves construction of a new pier head with floating pontoon as well as a gangway in the marine waters. Piles will be constructed along the walkway and the new pier head, thus direct encroachment of seabed is expected. For supporting the new pier structures, there would be about 27 nos. bored piles of approximately 0.8m diameter and 6 nos. bored piles of approximately 1m diameter. Although the plan view of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension to be constructed would cover a total area of about 0.056 ha, the estimated marine habitats loss will be much smaller, about 0.002 ha of seabed (due to piles) and about 0.004 ha of water column (due to piles and downstand wall). Only the piled foundation will directly encroach the marine habitats, while the downstand wall will be suspended from the new pier head without touching the seabed and no encroachment of seabed will occur.

8.5.1.7 In addition, the outermost 3m section of the existing pier head (about 18m² providing about 12m artificial vertical walls) will be demolished for the modification work and connection with the new pier extension. After the pier improvement works are completed, there will be a reduction of about 6m artificial vertical walls, with about 18m² marine waters to be restored.

8.5.1.8 The permanent marine habitat loss is ranked as Minor given the small sizes.

Habitat Loss - Temporary Loss

8.5.1.9 Though the proposed TPC Public Pier extension will only cause the loss of a small area of seabed (i.e. about 0.002 ha) and a small area of water column (i.e. about 0.004 ha), some temporary habitat loss during construction phase might occur. By adopting outer casing during piling, silt curtains will not be needed for the works area (see Section 2 and below sections on mitigation measures). The waters within the works area will not be separated from the outside, it is however expected that during construction phase, the waters at the proposed TPC Public Pier extension will still be disturbed by the activities of construction works and might be temporarily avoided by marine life. To take a conservative approach, it should be considered as a temporary habitat loss of about 0.056 ha (plan view area of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension) during the construction.

8.5.1.10 There will be a temporary pier during the construction phase and its size is about 0.011 ha (around 20.5m long and 5.5m wide). The temporary pier might also be supported by piles which will occupy about 0.0005 ha of seabed. This small area of waters (i.e. about 0.011 ha) covered by the temporary pier will, taking a conservative approach, also be considered as part of the temporary habitat loss.

8.5.1.11 The outermost 3m section of the existing pier head will be demolished for modification work to the existing pier, and during this there will be a minor (about 12m) temporary reduction of artificial vertical seawall.

8.5.1.12 As the duration of the impact is temporary and only occupies small area, the temporary marine habitat loss is ranked as Minor.

8.5.1.13 Estimated loss of area of each habitat type is summarized in Table 8.14.

Table 8.14 Estimated Habitat Loss for the Proposed Tung Ping Chau Public Pier Extension

Habitat Loss		Permanent Loss (ha)	Temporary Loss (ha)
Proposed TPC Public Pier extension	Extension Structure	~0.004 (water column) ~0.002 (seabed)	~0.056 (water column and seabed)
Proposed TPC Public Pier extension	Existing Pier Head	~6m (artificial vertical walls)	~12m (artificial vertical walls)
Temporary Pier		-	~0.011 (water column and seabed)
Total		~0.004 (water column) ~0.002 (seabed) ~6m (artificial vertical walls)	~0.067 (water column and seabed) ~12m (artificial vertical walls)

Direct Impacts to Coral – Direct Encroachment

8.5.1.14 Throughout the site selection and option selection process, which is based upon all available information including coral dive survey for the present EIA, the coral survey conducted for PP-222/2004, and annual Hong Kong Reef Check, the proposed works area and the proposed TPC Public Pier extension layout have already avoided areas with high coral density and coverage. With avoiding reclamation, the proposed TPC Public Pier extension and temporary pier will also be supported by piles, where the pile locations could be refined as far as practicable, direct encroachment to corals due to the project has much been avoided.

8.5.1.15 The only exception is at the existing pier head, of which the outermost 3m section (covering 18m²) will be demolished for connecting to the proposed TPC Public Pier extension. On this section of the existing pier, there are 12 coral colonies (which are all below 20cm diameter and do not include rare species, see the highlighted corals of Existing Pier Head of Appendix 8.12) and they will be affected. As it is difficult to dismantle the existing pier head while keeping these coral colonies intact, it is likely these 12 colonies will be directly impacted. As these 12 colonies did not constitute large size colonies and did not constitute rare species, the impact is considered Minor to Moderate. Coral translocation is recommended as mitigation measure. Except these 12 coral colonies on the existing pier head, no other coral colonies on the existing pier head, old pillars or seabed will be directly affected.

Physical Disturbance of Seabed by Jack-up Barge and Concrete Mooring Sinkers of Derrick Barge

8.5.1.16 Piles are required to support the proposed TPC Public Pier extension and the temporary pier, while marine based site investigation, which would involve working procedures similar to those of the piling works except no permanent seabed loss will be caused, would be required near the proposed pier extension before the actual construction to facilitate the detailed design. Derrick barge will be the main working vessel for piling, and several concrete mooring sinkers will be deployed on the seabed within the proposed works area for mooring, to avoid using anchors. For the site investigation works, jack-up barge would be used and the barge would need to fix its position by standing four legs on seabed and jacking up the barge to certain level and forming a working platform. Some areas of the seabed would be transitionally disturbed by the sinkers of derrick barge as well as the legs of jack-up barge, and may potentially encroach coral colonies on the seabed if there are any. As the legs of jack-up barge for site investigation are of limited sizes, and only several concrete mooring sinkers will be required for the derrick barges during construction phase, the area sizes of seabed to be physically disturbed will be very small, and the chance of encroaching corals would be very low given the low coral density inside the proposed works area, to take a precautionary approach however, the disturbance on the seabed is ranked as Minor to Moderate, and mitigation is required. The locations for the legs of jack-up barge and the concrete mooring sinkers will be inspected by dive survey to ascertain no coral colony will be affected.

Indirect Impacts - Terrestrial

8.5.1.17 No land works except modification of the existing pier head will be conducted. The construction, and associated human activities, for modifying the existing pier head and building the new pier head with floating pontoon will be conducted on working barges located in marine waters and away from terrestrial habitats. No glare will occur as there will be no night time works during construction phase. Hence, the potential indirect impact on terrestrial habitats and fauna or recognised sites of conservation importance including Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park due to human disturbance, noise and dust will be ranked as Insignificant.

Indirect Impacts - Marine

Disturbance by Working Barges

8.5.1.18 During site investigation works and construction, working barges (i.e. jack-up barge and derrick barge) will also be present within the proposed works area. Compared with normal vessels currently utilizing the piers, these working barges will stay and manoeuvre in the waters near the pier for longer durations (e.g. for a few days at each location during piling works), and there will be machines on board for the construction works, and might potentially cause more disturbance than other vessels which would use the TPC Public Pier. However, the number of working barges would not be high (expected to be two or three barges), and the movement of those working barges will also be slow and limited. Most of the time these working barges would be stationed at a location for a few days for construction work and then mobilized to the next location. Disturbance from the working barges is expected to be transient. The impact is thus ranked as Minor.

Indirect Impacts on Coral – Reduction of Sunlight

8.5.1.19 As hard corals require light for photosynthesis of the symbiotic algae, completely cut off from sunlight may cause severe impacts to hard corals. Experiments on corals under complete darkness conditions revealed that hard corals might show impacts from suspension of growth to bleaching, subject to the duration (DeSalvo et al., 2012), though complete darkness condition is rarely occurred naturally.

8.5.1.20 For corals on the seabed beneath the plan view area of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension, the pier structures will block some of the direct sunlight and the light received by corals will be reduced. In the new pier extension, most of the structures will be above sea level and at the same level of the existing pier (with sufficient clearance distance from the water surface) to allow light penetration from the sides. There will be a floating pontoon with ramps connecting the catwalk and pontoon, light can also arrive to the seabed under the structures. Coral colonies under floating pontoon and ramps (in particular the section near the floating pontoon) will be subject to higher reduction of light. Certain reduction of light is anticipated for corals within the plan view area of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension and the influence would be permanent after the pier improvement work is completed. A total of 73 coral colonies on the seabed under the plan view area of proposed TPC Public Pier extension will be affected. It should however be noted that over 80 coral colonies were found on old pillars below the catwalk of the existing pier, which indicated that even with the above catwalk light can still reach the seabed from the sides and maintain the coral communities. Due to the number of coral being impacted potentially by sunlight reduction, the impact for the colonies under the plan view area of proposed TPC public pier is considered Moderate. Mitigation measures of coral translocation is required.

8.5.1.21 A temporary pier will be required during the construction phase, which will be located in the area with relatively fewer coral colonies (Figure 8.11). Only 5 coral colonies were recorded on the seabed under the plan view area of temporary pier, direct encroachment of the colonies on seabed can be avoided by fine tuning the location of piles for supporting the temporary pier, i.e. the exact location of the piles should avoid encroaching the coral colonies as far as practicable during the detailed design stage. However, sunlight reaching the seabed beneath would still be reduced as the temporary pier will be present for about 2 years. Due to the number of coral being impacted potentially by sunlight reduction, the impact for the colonies under the plan view area of temporary pier is considered as Minor to Moderate. Mitigation measures of coral translocation is required.

8.5.1.22 Adoption of piled foundation to support the proposed pier is one of the common approaches in pier improvement projects. The marine based site investigation would also involve barges and equipment similar with those for piling works except jack-up barge will only be used for site investigation. Similar with other pier improvement projects which involve bored piles to support the new pier structures, a jack-up barge or a derrick barge (typically covering 0.14 ha water surface for jack-up barge and about 0.1 ha for derrick barge) will be mobilized to the works area for site investigation or construction works. These barges which mobilize to each site investigation area or piling location will be stationed by jack-up legs or concrete mooring sinkers, and then perform site investigation or piling works. Sunlight reaching the seabed beneath the jack-up barge and the derrick barge will be transitionally reduced due to the presence of the barges. For site investigation works, it generally takes a few weeks at each location, while it generally takes about 4 to 5 days to complete each piling works. Although the site investigation works will take longer time at each location than the piling works, the platform of the jack-up barge can however be lifted up above water surface to allow more light reaching the seabed. Those barges will then move to another location for another work cycle, the seabed underneath the barges will be re-exposed to direct sunlight. Hence, the effect of reducing sunlight to the seabed and any corals upon will be transient during the pier improvement works.

8.5.1.23 Piling works by similar construction method were also previously carried out at Tung Ping Chau Public Pier. In the previous improvement works conducted in 2006-2007, two piles were constructed to support the widened catwalk, near the area with relatively higher density of coral colony was recorded from the density map of the present study (the southern corner of the survey area in Figure 8.6), which implied that the construction method for the two piles (will be adopted for the present study) did not significantly affect the coral colonies nearby. Therefore, the impact of the transitional reduction of sunlight for corals by the construction vessels near the proposed TPC Public Pier extension are considered Minor. Nevertheless, it is recommended to take precautionary measures such as planning the works programme of the construction vessels to avoid extended shading effect caused by the barges, given the plan view area of proposed TPC Public Pier extension will cover a relatively larger area with more piles. For the site investigation works, the jack-up barge should be lifted up as much above water surface as practicable to allow more light reaching the seabed.

8.5.1.24 According to the reviewed literature, corals can tolerate episodic periods of low light conditions on shorter time scales of days to weeks through a range of behavioural and physiological responses. These include photoadaptation of the symbionts and changes in the sub-saturation point for photosynthesis (Anthony and Hoegh-Guldberg 2003), and in some species switching from phototrophic to heterotrophic feeding (Anthony 1999; Anthony and Fabricius 2000). Corals can also temporarily rely on energy reserves (Chalker et al. 1983), rapidly replenishing reserves when conditions become more favourable (Anthony 2000). Hence, the effect from reduction of sunlight by construction barges would be reversible, if it generally takes about 4 to 5 days to complete each piling cycle.

8.5.1.25 Black coral Antipathes curvata was recorded within the proposed works area (but outside the plan view area of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension) will not be directly encroached. Black coral does not require light as hard coral does, and reduction of sunlight by construction vessels will not pose significant threats to this species. For the coral colonies on old pillars below the catwalk and the remaining few ones on the artificial vertical walls of the existing pier, as they are away from the majority of the new structures of the proposed pier extension (i.e. the new berth and the downstand wall), no considerable reduction of sunlight is anticipated. The ramp which are closer to these corals is narrow in form and with certain clearance from water surface, and it is thus not expected to cause significant reduction of sunlight. Sunlight should still reach the seabed from the sides and maintain these corals.

Disturbance from Piling Process

8.5.1.26 Disturbance impact caused by piling process was a concern in some local marine development projects in which marine percussive piling was adopted. In the present project however, bored piling method will be adopted instead of the percussive piling method. Bored piling method does not involve application of driven hammer on steel pile (which is the source of the noise and vibration impacts caused by percussive piling), and thus high disturbance impact would not occur. Instead, during bored piling works, sediment will be removed (in the present project by a closed grab system) and concrete will be filled into to form the pile. The construction procedures would not involve highly impacting action and thus the noise and vibration concerned would not occur.

8.5.1.27 In addition, similar bored piling method was also adopted in the previous improvement works conducted in 2006-2007. The piling operation was carried out at the spawning seasons of hard corals (i.e. May to October (Lam 2000; Storlazzi et al., 2004; and Chui et al., 2004)). In view of the coral monitoring conducted in 2006-2007, 15 impact coral colonies which are adjacent to the piling operation were selected for monitoring throughout the construction period. The results showed that no adverse impact was found on the impact coral colonies during the construction period. This monitoring demonstrated that the bored piling method could be conducted without causing significant indirect impacts to corals nearby. Therefore, disturbance caused by the piling process is considered as Insignificant.

8.5.1.28 Among all the locations involving bored piling works for the present project, those for the temporary pier would be located closer to the southern end of the proposed works area (i.e. where the relatively higher coral density area where recorded and shown in Figure 8.6). Although no significant noise and vibration impacts are expected from the bored piling works as explained above, to take a conservative approach, the pile construction works for temporary pier (if it is confirmed that floating pontoon option is not feasible) could be scheduled to avoid the spawning seasons of hard corals (i.e. May to October) as a precautionary measure.

Water Quality Deterioration

8.5.1.29 High suspended solid level might cause blockage of the gill of fish and other marine organisms and would affect the gaseous exchange, while high turbidity would affect the foraging of organisms relying on eye sights. High sedimentation rate could also affect sessile benthos including subtidal ones such as coral and even the species on intertidal habitats. Hard corals are known to be at particular risk of deleterious impacts on respiration and feeding from sedimentation through smothering and clogging. Similarly, more turbid water may reduce the amount of light reaching beneath the water surface, which may also detrimental to hard corals. A lower oxygen level would affect stationary species, while mobile species would tend to temporarily avoid the area. The results could be a temporary reduction in aquatic life abundance. Nutrients and/or contaminants in the seabed sediment might be released into the marine waters when the sediment is disturbed, and might have negative effects on water quality such as increasing the chances of algal bloom or accumulation of contaminants inside organisms.

8.5.1.30 Since piled foundation will be adopted to support the structures of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension, large scale release of suspended solids due to excavation or dredging would not occur. Site investigation or pier improvement construction works of the Project would cause much less disturbance on sediment. While the areas with relatively higher density of coral colony shown in Figure 8.2 and Figure 8.3 are away from the pile locations, other coral colonies within the proposed works area as well as the tentative pier improvement area (including the colonies on the existing pier head and the old pillars) would also encounter much lower risk on any transient increase of suspended solids.

8.5.1.31 The foundations of the proposed pier extension and the temporary pier will be composed of in-situ bored piles or similar pile types. A casing will be installed into the seabed, and removal of sediment as well as construction of piles will be conducted inside the casing. The casing will also form a barrier and separate the sediment from the adjacent water body thus avoiding polluting the water. Closed grab excavator will be deployed inside the pile casing to minimize the leakage of materials collected during the grabbing process. The impacts to water quality are thus contained. The site investigation will involve similar types of works but without the construction of a pile after removal of sediment. No adverse water quality impact is anticipated that affect marine organisms including corals.

8.5.1.32 The suspended solids would be further minimized and localized with the use of double casing system (i.e. with an outer casing to surround the bored casing) during the works. The insertion and removal of the outer casing would only lead to minor disturbance to the seabed covered by substrates with boulder and gravel embedded in sediments and thus insignificant release of suspended solids is expected, as any suspended solids generated would settle quickly to the seabed.

8.5.1.33 Furthermore, prefabricated approach will first be considered when designing the above-water structures for the temporary and proposed piers. This could directly avoid on-site casting activities and further reduce the risk of water quality issues. Hence, the potential impacts to marine organisms due to water quality would be Minor.

8.5.1.34 Pollutants or chemical spillage from the working barges might occur, but the magnitude is not expected to be significant and should be transient. The potential water quality impacts due to works including runoff, sewage from workforce, wastewater from various construction activities, and accidental spillage would be controlled through the implementation of suitable site facilities, and no adverse water quality impacts would be anticipated due to spillage, sewage from works forces and waste water from works, and is ranked as Insignificant.

Demolition of the Temporary Pier:

8.5.1.35 The temporary pier will be demolished after the completion of a new berth of the pier. The temporary pier will be cut into parts and shipped away by vessels. Piled foundations of temporary pier will be cut by wire saw, blade saw or similar method as close to the seabed as possible, and the demolished portions of the pile foundations will be removed off site. The portions of the piled foundations embedded in the seabed sediment will be left untouched. Neither dredging works nor disturbance to seabed is anticipated. Therefore, no adverse water quality impact or disturbance impact that affects marine ecology is anticipated.

Marine Traffic due to the construction works:

8.5.1.36 The construction works would require deployment of works vessels and transportation of the construction materials and the C&D waste from the demolished pier head, and thus will produce marine traffic. As no dredging, reclamation and filling works will be conducted and a prefabrication approach will be firstly considered for the construction works, it is expected that the number of trips will be very limited. As all works vessels will need to comply with the speed limit of the marine park, the impact of marine traffic is considered Insignificant.

Impact on Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance

8.5.1.37 While the proposed TPC Public Pier, the temporary pier and the proposed works area have selected at areas with lower coral density, and impacts on those corals have been addressed, significant impacts to recognised coral communities with high coral coverage/density (e.g. Hong Kong Reef Check locations and the Core Area of the Tung Ping Chau Marine Park) have been avoided and no impacts are expected due to the distance from the Project Site. The geological features in the Ping Chau SSSI, Geopark and Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park will not be affected neither.

Impact on Species of Conservation Importance

8.5.1.38 Direct impacts to hard corals include direct encroachment, the coral colonies on the existing pier head will be directly affected. Indirect impacts to hard coals include reduction of sunlight (e.g. those within the plan view areas of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension and temporary pier will be subject to reduction of sunlight for a longer duration and those within the proposed works area which will be subject to transient reduction of sunlight), water quality to marine ecology and disturbance from working barges. The impacts on coral communities in different areas are summarized in Table 8.15.

8.5.1.39 Indirect impacts by water quality to marine ecology will be Minor including the coral communities with high coral density/coverage and the amphioxus due to the scale of the works (i.e. water quality impacts will be localized) and the distance between the Project Site and amphioxus.

8.5.1.40 Low density (4-6 ind/m²) of amphioxus Branchiostoma belcheri of conservation importance was found in sampling locations B2 and B3 (outside the proposed works area) during both wet and dry seasons, but not in B1 (within the proposed works area). The species recorded was in very low density compared with the abundance recorded in its preferred habitat in Tai Long Wan and Pak Lap Wan, with a maximum of 460 and 290 ind/m², respectively. It is considered that amphioxus is not likely to occur inside the Project Site due to the substrates with boulder and gravel embedded in sediments as observed from the dive survey within the proposed works area. As the sampling locations B2 and B3 were over 250m away from the proposed works area, the potential direct impacts on this species of conservation importance are not anticipated.

Table 8.15 Summary of the Impacts on Coral Communities during Construction Phase

	Proposed Works Area *	Proposed Temporary Pier	Proposed TPC Public Pier
Direct Impact – Direct Encroachment	Not Anticipated, given the locations of the barge legs and sinkers will be inspected by divers before deployment	5 coral colonies on the existing pier head will be impacted	7 coral colonies on the existing pier head will be impacted
Indirect Impact – Reduction of Sunlight	Areas near the pile locations and site investigation locations will have transitional reduction of direct sunlight due to construction barges	5 coral colonies on seabed will be affected by reduction of sunlight temporarily by the temporary pier	73 coral colonies on seabed will be affected by reduction of sunlight permanently by the proposed pier extension
Indirect Impact – Water Quality	Minor impacts on water quality due to adoption of outer casing to confine the sediment
Indirect Impact – Disturbance from Working Barge(s)	Insignificant for marine life including corals given the small number of construction vessels
* - Plan view areas of the Proposed TPC Public Pier extension and Temporary Pier are excluded

8.5.1.41 Although Green Turtle was occasionally reported in Tung Ping Chau, direct or indirect impacts to this species, or on other marine species of concern such as seaweed pipefish or spotted seahorse are not likely due to the scale of the proposed works, and the types of construction activities involved. No silt curtain will be deployed to envelop any marine waters and thus there will be no risk for trapping marine life. Major marine works are piling which will be confined inside the outer casing system and would not pose risks of physical injury to marine life. It is expected underwater noise generated during construction of piles would be insignificant as there will be no percussive piling. Hence, there will be no adverse impacts to Green Turtle during construction phase, mitigation measures specifically designed to minimize the potential impacts are not considered necessary.

8.5.2 Operational Phase

Direct Impacts - Terrestrial

8.5.2.1 The Project will provide a new pier head with a floating pontoon. There will be no loss of terrestrial habitat including the Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park during operational phase.

Direct Impacts - Marine

8.5.2.2 Permanent marine habitat loss occurs during operational phase due to the presence of piles (0.002 ha of seabed and the above water column) and downstand wall (0.002 water column), and modification of the existing pier head (6m of vertical seawall). The permanent loss of marine habitats is considered Insignificant.

Indirect Impacts - Terrestrial

8.5.2.3 The operation of the improved pier will be similar to the existing one, i.e., providing berthing facility for getting on and off from vessels. Aiming for improving the safety, it is not expected that frequency and size of vessels during operational phase will increase due to the proposed extension, and thus significant increase of visitors is not anticipated. Hence, no adverse disturbance impact on terrestrial habitats and associated wildlife as well as Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park due to human activities is anticipated.

8.5.2.4 There will be additional lightings in the improved pier during operational phase. The lighting will be installed at the new pier head for safety purpose and will not be strong. In addition, the new pier head will be further away from terrestrial habitats than the existing one. The potential impact of increase of lighting level is ranked as Insignificant.

Indirect Impacts - Marine

8.5.2.5 As only a limited number of piles and a small above-seabed downstand wall will be constructed in the marine habitats, change in hydrodynamics is not expected. No maintenance dredging would be required for the public pier, and therefore no water quality impacts could be induced. No significant impact is also expected for the water sensitive receivers in the vicinity.

8.5.2.6 It is not expected that frequency of vessels during operational phase will increase due to the proposed pier extension, and thus significant increase of marine traffic in Tung Ping Chau Marine Park, or pollution due to increase of marine traffics to marine waters, is not anticipated. Hence, no operational phase impacts are anticipated from the Project.

Impact on Recognized Sites and Species of Conservation Importance

8.5.2.7 The terrestrial fauna species of conservation importance listed in Table 8.13 mainly utilise terrestrial habitats. The Project will not affect any terrestrial habitat and Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park, or other recognised sites of conservation importance. No potential direct or indirect impacts to these fauna species is anticipated.

8.5.2.8 During the operation phase, the new piles and downstand wall for the pier will provide new hard substrates for coral colonization. As no maintenance dredging would be required for the public pier, impacts to amphioxus during operational phase are also not anticipated.

8.5.2.9 As the frequency of vessels will not increase due to the proposed pier extension, the potential impacts from increased marine traffic to Green Turtle or other marine species of concern such as Seaweed pipefish or Spotted seahorse are not anticipated.

8.6 Mitigation Measures

8.6.1 Considerations for Impact Avoidance

Avoidance of Country Park, Geopark and Ping Chau SSSI

8.6.1.1 Based on the selection of option to extend the existing pier instead of building a new pier, the need of having new access road or conducting works in backshore has been avoided. The proposed works area only covers marine habitats, and no terrestrial habitats or recognized sites of conservation importance such as Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park, Geopark, and the Ping Chau SSSI will be encroached.

Avoidance of natural coastline

8.6.1.2 The pier improvement will be carried out by extension of the existing pier. The existing causeway will be utilized and no need to construct structures over the intertidal zone connecting the land area and the berth area. This will avoid the encroachment of any natural coastline should the new pier be constructed at a new location, and also reduce the scale of construction works involved.

8.6.2 Considerations for Impact Minimization

Avoiding areas with high coral coverage

8.6.2.1 As discussed in Section 2, different potential locations for pier improvement/new pier have been considered, it is concluded that extension at the existing pier would cause the least impact to coral communities as the Core Area of Tung Ping Chau Marine Park and reef check sites of Hong Kong Reef Check are avoided, and it is also feasible to avoid area with higher coral coverage.

8.6.2.2 By making reference to information from REA survey results, Hong Kong Reef Check and the survey on distribution of coral colonies near the existing pier conducted for PP-222/2004, the proposed works area has already avoided the areas with relatively higher coral coverage near the existing pier. The tentative pier improvement area has also considered the grid cells with relatively higher coral density as recorded by coral density survey.

Selecting an Option affecting Fewer Corals

8.6.2.3 Section 2 of this EIA report presents the design option selection for the proposed pier extension. The layout of the proposed pier extension was also adjusted to further reduce corals to be affected. The design shown in Figure 8.1 is the option with lower impacts to corals by minimizing the number of coral colonies within plan view area, reducing from 148 colonies to 80 colonies. It is expected that the detailed design would be based on the present survey results to avoid encroaching the corals as far as possible.

Avoiding Reclamation and open Dredging

8.6.2.4 Construction impacts to marine ecological resources have largely been avoided by adopting piling method instead of reclamation method for pier improvement. By adopting the piling method, the seabed loss can greatly be reduced to about 0.002 ha and water quality will not be affected significantly as there will be no reclamation and the associated dredging of the seabed.

Adoption of Piled Foundation

8.6.2.5 Hard corals are known to be at particular risk of deleterious impacts on respiration and feeding from sedimentation through smothering and clogging. Similarly, more turbid water may reduce the amount of light reaching beneath the water surface, which may also detrimental to hard corals. The foundations of the proposed pier extension and the temporary pier will be composed of in-situ bored piles or similar pile types (e.g. Rock socketed Steel H-pile). A casing will be installed into the seabed and removal of sediment as well as construction of piles will be conducted inside the casing. The casing will also form a barrier and separate the drilling fluids from the adjacent water body thus avoiding polluting the water. Closed grab excavator and Y-shaped funnel will be deployed inside and atop the casing to minimize the leakage of materials collected during the grabbing process. The impacts to water quality are thus contained. No adverse water quality impact is anticipated that affect marine organisms including corals.

Further Minimizing water quality impact by Adoption of Outer Casing

8.6.2.6 In order to further minimize the increased suspended solid from the site investigation works and piling works, outer casing to confine the works shall be provided around the bored casing to prevent the accidental release of muddy water to the surrounding marine waters during site investigation works and piling construction. The use of outer casing to confine the sediment is effective in local examples such as Kat O Chau Public Pier and the improvement works to Tung Ping Chau Public Pier in 2006-2007.

Treatment of Wastewater and Effluent

8.6.2.7 Water contaminated with slurry rock fragment should be stored in the barge and recycled for use again in the piling works. Wastewater coming from the grouting of piles shall be treated in sedimentation tank placed in a barge before discharging offsite with a valid discharge license under the Water Pollution Control Ordinance.

Adopting pre-fabrication Approach

8.6.2.8 Besides, prefabrication approach will first be considered when designing concrete superstructures. This can directly avoid on-site casting activities that could have potential impact on water quality. Moreover, this approach can minimize the extent and duration of on-site construction activities. As a result, the water quality impacts associated with these construction activities including site run-off, accidental spillage of chemical and sewage from workforce could thus be avoided or minimized.

Other Measures

8.6.2.9 Emergency Spillage Plan should be established during the construction phase as a precautionary measure so that appropriate actions to prevent or reduce risks to sensitive receivers in the vicinity can be undertaken in the event of an accidental spillage.

8.6.2.10 Besides a no-dumping policy which prohibits dumping of wastes, chemicals, oil, trash, plastic, or any other substance that would potentially be harmful to marine habitats, it is also mandatory that an educational program of the no-dumping policy be made available to all construction-site personnel for all project-related works. The policy needs to be strictly enforced and there need to be stiff fines for infractions. Unscheduled, on-site audits will also generally be required.

8.6.2.11 Marker buoys shall be set up to demarcate the works area. All construction vessels shall be restricted to the marked areas. Besides, no overloading of the working barges during operation should be allowed, and movement of the construction vessels close to the shallow waters particular during low tide should be avoided.

8.6.3 Impact Mitigation

Coral Translocation

8.6.3.1 The coral colonies within the plan view area of the proposed pier extension will potentially be impacted by direct encroachment (if they are located on the artificial vertical walls at the outermost part of the existing pier head to be demolished), or by permanent/temporary reduction of sunlight due to the pier extension structures and the temporary pier. A coral translocation plan is recommended as ecological mitigation and it should be prepared during the detailed design stage and prior to commencement of the construction works. The coral translocation plan should include a detailed pre-translocation survey at the donor and recipient sites, substrate type, coral composition, REA transect surveys, coral health condition etc. Monitoring on the translocated corals at the recipient sites should also be included in the coral translocation plan, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the translocation task.

8.6.3.2 Coral translocation is a common mitigation measure for marine ecology, and there are many successful cases in Hong Kong. For example, it had been previously conducted in 2006 inside Tung Ping Chau Marine Park for the previous pier improvement work. A total of 41 coral colonies had been translocated from the pile locations to A Ma Wan as a mitigation measure, given the smaller scale of works involved. Among the 41 translocated colonies, 15 of them had been selected for monitoring throughout the construction period. Besides the monitoring of the 15 translocated colonies, 15 selected colonies at each the impact area (i.e. close to works area) and control site (i.e. 100m away from the works area) had also been monitored before, during and after the construction works. The monitoring results had showed that the survival rate of the translocated colonies were 100%. Though slight decrease in the cumulative average value according to CoralWatch had been observed, (The cumulative average value after the construction works was 3.98, which is considered moderate in terms of health), the decreased value probably due to seasonal factor as similar changes had also been observed in the control. Hence, the translocation exercise in 2006 is considered successful. While the health of the selected coral colonies at the impact area and control site are also considered moderate after the construction works, no matter what the cumulative average values were decreased 13.57% and 7.16% respectively in the impact area and the control site.

8.6.3.3 Coral translocation was also conducted in the EIA study “Tseung Kwan O – Lam Tin Tunnel and Associated Works” (AEIAR – 173/2013) and “Proposed Extension of Public Golf Course at Kau Sai Chau Island, Sai Kung” (AEIAR-091/2005). A total of 43 coral colonies was translocated in AEIAR – 173/2013, while a total of 89 coral colonies was translocated in AEIAR – 091/2005. The majority of the translocated corals from both projects were found in good health condition, in terms of sedimentation and bleaching, at the end of monitoring programmes, except the few which were lost probably due to adverse weather and currents.

8.6.3.4 According to the coral mapping results, a total of 90 hard coral colonies were recorded within the plan view area of the proposed pier extension and temporary pier (73 colonies on seabed beneath the proposed pier extension, 12 colonies on the existing pier head to be modified and 5 colonies on seabed beneath the proposed temporary pier). The detailed coral translocation plan should consider all coral colonies within these two areas, including those directly encroached (those on the pier head) and to be indirectly affected by reduction of light permanently or for an extended duration (for those on the seabed beneath the pier extension and the temporary pier). In the approved EIA study “Tseung Kwan O – Lam Tin Tunnel and Associated Works” (AEIAR – 173/2013), coral translocation was also adopted as a mitigation measure for the coral colonies that beneath the proposed superstructures above water and to be impacted indirectly by light reduction. The only exception is the two colonies of Oulastrea crispata (see Appendix 8.12) which is a very common species and highly tolerant for low light conditions and adverse environment, and thus normally would not require translocation as mitigation, in particular when they are not subject to direct impacts. Translocation of these two Oulastrea crispata colonies will be subject to the recommendation in the detailed coral translocation plan.

8.6.3.5 Among the 73 corals recorded on the seabed within the proposed pier extension, 39 colonies have been identified during the mapping survey as readily movable (colonises together with the substrates able to be moved by divers manually). Within the temporary pier plan view area, there were 5 hard coral colonies recorded on the seabed, with 2 of them readily movable.

8.6.3.6 For the remaining colonies not found readily movable, it was observed from the coral surveys that most of these colonies were attached on boulders which may require equipment to move or isolate (such as by digging the seabed, or hammering the part of the attaching substrates from the bedrock). Alternatively, feasibility of removing coral colonies from the original substrates (often by hammer and pry, to careful separate the corals from their attaching substrates) and then attaching to new substrates in the recipient site could be considered. Similar method was applied in 2006 coral translocation of the Improvement Works to Tung Ping Chau Public Pier. Translocation of encrusting/fragile coral colonies or species tolerant to low light environment however should be carefully considered, as it is possible that they need to be separated from the substrates part by part. The detailed approach and method of translocating these colonies should be recommended in the coral translocation plan. The objective is to translocate coral colonies within the plan view area of pier extension and temporary pier as far as practicable.

8.6.3.7 Regarding the 12 coral colonies on the existing pier head and to be directly encroached, it is unlikely to have them translocated with the substrates, and the coral translocation plan should consider the feasibility to remove them from the original substrates and then attaching to new substrates in the recipient site.

8.6.3.8 The whole stretch of eastern coast of Tung Ping Chau is generally suitable as recipient site for coral translocation. For example, the Reef Check locations in Tung Ping Chau (i.e. A Ma Wan, A Ye Wan and Wong Ye Kok) (see Figure 8.3) could all be considered as potential recipient sites for coral translocation. It is anticipated that one recipient site is enough for the translocation exercise of about 90 coral colonies in the present study. Both direct and indirect impacts to the coral communities at the three Reef Check locations are not expected. The recipient site at the previous 2006 coral translocation was A Ma Wan, where coral coverage was 60% according to the Hong Kong Reef Check results in 2019. The final recommendation of recipient site will be determined in the detailed coral translocation plan, but it should be located at a reasonable distance away from the proposed works area.

8.6.3.9 The detailed coral translocation plan and marine ecologists involved in coral translocation should be submitted to relevant authorities including AFCD for approval prior to commencement of the coral translocation. The plan should include brief description on pre-translocation coral survey, translocation methodology, identification of coral recipient site and post-translocation monitoring methodology. Competition between the corals from the donar site and in the recipient site and conditions of the recipient site (such as hydrographic condition and bathymetry, and vulnerability to storm/typhoon damage) should be considered when formulating the coral translocation plan. Pre-translocation survey of corals would be focused on identifying and mapping the coral colonies within the final plan view area of the proposed TPC Public Pier extension, and investigating the translocation feasibility of these coral colonies (e.g. health status of coral colony and nature of the attaching substrata). Coral translocation should be carried out during the period (November – April) in order to avoid the coral spawning period (i.e. May to October) (Lam 2000; Storlazzi et al., 2004; and Chui et al. 2014).

8.6.3.10 With the implementation of the coral translocation programme, the direct encroachment impact and indirect impacts of sunlight reduction on coral colonies within the plan view area of the proposed pier extension can be reduced to Minor.

Inspection of Seabed

8.6.3.11 Before marine-based site investigation works, the position of the jack-up barge will be fixed by extending its 4 legs and standing on seabed. Concrete mooring sinkers will also be deployed within the proposed works area to allow the derrick barge for piling works to position, The locations of the boring points, where the legs standing and where the concrete mooring sinkers deployed should be inspected by divers with knowledge about corals, to ascertain no coral colony will be affected.

Water Quality Mitigation

8.6.3.12 The mitigation measures for water quality impacts have been stated in the section of water quality assessment. Besides outer casing to confine the sediment, good site practices for water quality in marine works should be strictly followed:

l Water quality monitoring shall be implemented to ensure effective control of water pollution and recommend additional mitigation measures required;

l Barges or hoppers shall not be filled to a level which will cause overflow of materials or pollution of water during loading or transportation;

l Excess materials shall be cleaned from the decks and exposed fittings or barges before the vessels are moved;

l Plants should not be operated with leaking pipes and any pipe leakages shall be repaired quickly;

l Adequate freeboard shall be maintained on barges to reduce the likelihood of decks being washed by wave action;

l All vessels should be sized so that adequate clearance is maintained between vessels and the seabed in all tide conditions, to ensure that undue turbidity is not generated by turbulence from vessel movement or propeller wash; and

l The works shall not cause foam, oil, grease, litter or other objectionable matter to be present in the water within and adjacent to the works site.

8.6.4 Precautionary Measures

8.6.4.1 Planning of Piling Works Locations: Indirect impacts on corals are considered minor. After completion of each work cycle for site investigation or piling, the barges will move to another location for the next work cycle. The seabed underneath the barges will be re-exposed to direct sunlight. Similar piling works were previously conducted in 2006-2007 at TPC Public Pier and no adverse impacts on corals were reported by monitoring survey. It is suggested that as a precautionary measure the programme of the site investigation and piling works could be planned in a way that where practicable there would be no overlapping of the positions for construction vessels between two sequential work cycles, to limit the duration with reduced sunlight reaching seabed. The site investigation works will take longer time at each location than the piling works, the jack-up barge should be lifted up as much above water surface as practicable to allow more light reaching the seabed.

8.6.4.2 Scheduling Temporary Pier Piling Works: Scheduling the pile construction works for the temporary pier (if it is confirmed that floating pontoon option is not feasible) to avoid the spawning seasons of hard corals (i.e. May to October (Lam 2000; Storlazzi et al., 2004; and Chui et al., 2004)) could be adopted as a precautionary measure, in view of its closer distances among piling locations with the southern end of the proposed works area (where the relatively higher coral density area within the proposed works area is located).

8.6.5 Enhancement Measures

8.6.5.1 Mitigation measures to ameliorate against specific impacts and precautionary measures to further protect the marine ecology have been detailed above. However, notwithstanding these, exploring further measures to enhance the marine ecology are also recommended.

8.6.5.2 There will be a vertical above-seabed downstand wall and piles to support the new pier extension. The subtidal portion of many man-made structures could provide hard substrates for colonization of corals or other epibenthos. The armour ‘Dolosse’ on the east main cofferdam of the High Island Reservoir is known for the diverse coral communities and is now one of the locations for Reef Check in Hong Kong, with a considerable coral coverage. On the old pillars beneath the existing catwalk of Tung Ping Chau Public Pier, over 80 colonies of hard corals were recorded during the dive survey of the present EIA study. The submerged structures in the future new pier extension could also provide hard surface for colonization of marine sessile epibenthos including corals. It is also known that by suitable design, the colonization of epibenthos would be promoted and/or faster, and the ecological functions of epibenthic communities on the subtidal portions of these structures could be further enhanced.

8.6.5.3 It is proposed that the future design of the downstand wall and piles should take into account the enhancement of ecological functions. One of the approaches is to provide uneven surface or selected patterns on the future downstand wall and piles (either incorporating on the structures or installing additional panels/ tiles with such features). The enhanced surface could provide microhabitats for various marine organisms to colonise and grow, and develop into communities to provide feeding and hiding habitats for juveniles of marine fauna, and thereby effectively enhance biodiversity and ecological functions of the new man-made structures.

8.6.5.4 It is therefore recommended that during the detailed design of the pier improvement, a study should be conducted to explore and confirm the feasible enhancement designs to be adopted, to investigate the proper form of enhanced surface of the hard structures to be adopted for the above-seabed downstand wall and piles. The study report covering the recommendations of the proper form of design to be adopted, the detailed design and the implementation programme will be submitted to the authority for approval before commencement of the construction works.

8.6.5.5 A summary of the impacts in construction and operational phases, with sources, receivers, nature, significance and mitigation required, are provided below in Table 8.16.

Impact	Sources	Receivers	Nature of impacts						Significance of Ecological Impact	Mitigation Required
Impact	Sources	Receivers	Habitat quality	Species affected	Size / abundance	Duration	Reversibility	Magnitude	Significance of Ecological Impact	Mitigation Required
Construction Phase – Direct Impacts
Permanent marine habitat loss	Submerged structures of the Proposed TPC Public Pier extension	Water column of coastal waters and subtidal seabed occupied in the close proximity of the existing pier	Medium ecological value	Marine organisms may utilise the habitats (except coral colonies which will be avoided)	0.002 ha (seabed) 0.004 ha (water column)	Permanent	Non- reversible	Small	Minor	The design (pile supported) has minimised the habitat loss. No mitigation is required
Permanent marine habitat loss	The outer most part of the existing pier head, demolished for modification work	Intertidal and subtidal portions of the existing pier head	Very low for intertidal zone Low for subtidal zone	Common intertidal species and common coral species	~6m artificial vertical walls at the existing pier head to be demolished, with Low abundance of intertidal fauna and low coverage of coral	Permanent	Non- reversible	Small	Minor	New vertical hard surface will be provided by the piles. No mitigation is required
Temporary marine habitat loss	Structures of the Proposed TPC Public Pier extension	Water column of coastal waters and subtidal seabed in the close proximity of existing pier	Medium ecological value	Marine organisms may utilise the habitats (except coral colonies which will be avoided)	0.056 ha (marine waters)	Temporary	Reversible, except those occupied by the pier extension structures	Small	Minor	No
	Structures of the temporary pier	Water column of coastal waters and subtidal seabed in the close proximity of existing pier	Medium ecological value	Marine organisms may utilise the habitats (except coral colonies which will be avoided)	0.0005 ha (seabed) 0.011 ha (water column)	Temporary	Reversible	Small	Minor	No
	30m² of existing pier head, demolished for modification work	Intertidal and subtidal portions of the existing pier head	Very low for intertidal zone and low for subtidal zone	Common intertidal species and common coral species	Low abundance of intertidal fauna and low coverage of coral	Temporary	Will be replaced by water column or piles	Small	Minor	No
Direct impacts on Corals	Demolishing 30m² of existing pier head for modification work	Coral colonise on artificial vertical wall	Low subtidal zone of artificial vertical wall	Common species	12 coral colonies, all below 20 cm diameter	Permanent	Non- reversible	Small to medium	Minor to Moderate	Not readily for translocation but feasibility of alternative translocation method to be further explored during detailed design
Physical disturbance of seabed	Legs of jack-up barge and concrete mooring sinkers of derrick barge	Seabed within the finalised works area	Medium for natural seabed	Marine epibenthos	Small	Transient	Reversible	Small	Minor to moderate	Inspection by divers prior to deploying footings and sinkers
Construction Phase – Indirect Impacts
Disturbance of working vessels within the works area	Movement of working vessels	Marine waters within the works area	Low to medium for water column	Mobile marine fauna	Small, 1.02 ha	Transient	Reversible	Small	Minor	Site practice to be checked by ET
Reduction of sunlight	Presence of the structures of pier extension and temporary pier	Corals on seabed within the plan view areas of pier extension and temporary pier	Medium	Hard corals	73 corals within the proposed pier, 5 corals within the temporary pier	Long term for proposed pier Temporary for temporary pier	Non-reversible for proposed pier given longer time duration considered as non-reversible	Small to Moderate	Moderate for the 73 corals within the proposed pier extension; Minor to moderate for the 5 corals within the temporary pier	Yes. coral translocation plan is recommended
Reduction of sunlight	Deployment of barges during site investigation works and pier improvement construction work	Corals on seabed within the works area and near the site investigation and piling locations	Medium	Hard corals	Various	Transient	Reversible	Small (less than 0.14 ha for a few weeks for site investigation locations, and about 0.1 ha for about 5 days for each piling works cycle)	Minor	No, given the transient nature. As a precautionary measure, the next location of the construction vessels for piling should have no overlap with its original location. And lift up the jack-up barge during site investigation.
Disturbance during piling process	Noise and vibration from piling process (in particular if percussive piling is adopted)	Marine habitats including subtidal and intertidal habitats)	Low/moderate for intertidal habitats, moderate/high for subtidal habitats	Intertidal and subtidal organisms	Low abundance in intertidal habitats, high diversity of hard coral in subtidal habitat	Transient	Reversible	Very small as bored piling method is adopted	Insignificant	No
Marine water quality (suspended solids, dissolved oxygen depletion, nutrients, contaminants)	Site investigation works and construction of piles	Marine habitats including subtidal and intertidal habitats)	Low/moderate for intertidal habitats, moderate/high for subtidal habitats	Intertidal and subtidal organisms	Low abundance in intertidal habitats, high diversity of hard coral in subtidal habitat	Temporary	Reversible	Small	Minor	Follow water quality mitigation measures (e.g. outer casing to confine the sediment)
Pollutants (sewage from works forces and waste water) and chemical spillage	From working barge(s)/ vessel(s)	Marine habitats including subtidal and intertidal habitats)	Low/moderate for intertidal habitats, moderate/high for subtidal habitats	Intertidal and subtidal organisms	Low abundance in intertidal habitats, high diversity of hard coral in subtidal habitat	Temporary	Reversible	Small	Insignificant	Follow water quality mitigation measures
Disturbance of seabed from demolition of temporary pier	Disturbance of seabed sediment during demolition of temporary pier process	Marine habitats including subtidal and intertidal habitats)	Low/moderate for intertidal habitats, moderate/high for subtidal habitats	Intertidal and subtidal organisms	Low abundance in intertidal habitats, high diversity of hard coral in subtidal habitat	Transient	Reversible	Very small as the portions of the piled foundations embedded in the seabed will be left untouched.	No adverse impact anticipated	No
Marine Traffic	Traffic of Works vessels	Marine waters inside Tung Ping Chau Marine Park	Medium to high for water column	Mobile marine fauna	Medium abundance of marine fauna	Occasional during construction phase	Reversible	Small	Insignificant	Follow speed limit of Marine Park
Impact on Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance	Construction works and associated impacts	Tung Ping Chau Marine Park (in particular the Core Area and Hong Kong Reef Check locations) Ping Chau SSSI, Geopark and Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park	500m Assessment Area (High for seabed and medium to high for water column, low for artificial vertical wall) Project Site (Medium for seabed, low to medium for water column, low for artificial vertical wall)	Species present in these sites	Medium to high for marine fauna Medium for terrestrial fauna	Construction	Reversible	Insignificant	Not identified	Addressed in impacts above
Impact on Species of Conservation Importance	Construction works and associated impacts	Species of Conservation Importance present near the Project Site	500m Assessment Area (High for seabed and medium to high for water column, low for artificial vertical wall) Project Site (Medium for seabed, low to medium for water column, low for artificial vertical wall)	Amphioxus Corals Sea turtle	Low for amphioxus and sea turtle, For corals, high in reef check site and Core Area; low to medium within Project Site	Construction	Reversible for amphioxus and sea turtle Not for corals within plan view areas	Insignificant for amphioxus and sea turtle Small to medium to corals	Not identified for amphioxus and sea turtle For corals, addressed in impacts above	Yes for corals, addressed in impacts above
Operational Phase – Direct Impact
Permanent habitat loss	Piling locations and the above-seabed downstand wall	Water column of coastal waters and subtidal seabed	Moderate ecological value	Marine organisms including coral colonies	About 0.004ha of marine waters and 0.002 ha of seabed	Permanent	Non-reversible	Small	Insignificant	No
Operational Phase – Indirect Impact
Hydro-dynamic and water quality	Piles and downstand wall; operation of the pier	Marine waters in the vicinity	Moderate ecological value	Marine organisms including coral colonies	About 0.004ha of marine waters	Permanent	Non-reversible	Very small	Insignificant	No
Artificial lightings	Lights at the new pier head	Nocturnal fauna	Vary with habitat types	Mostly common species	Vary with locations	Permanent	Reversible	Insignificant	Insignificant	No
Disturbance due to vessels and visitors	Operation of the pier and visitors	Marine and terrestrial habitats in the vicinity	Vary	Species present	Vary	Permanent	Reversible	Insignificant	Not identified	No
Impact on Recognized Sites of Conservation Importance	Operation of the pier and visitors	Tung Ping Chau Marine Park (in particular the Core Area and Hong Kong Reef Check locations) Ping Chau SSSI, Geopark and Plover Cove (Extension) Country Park	Vary	Species present in these sites	Vary	Permanent	Reversible	Insignificant	Not identified	No
Impact on Species of Conservation Importance	Operation of the pier and visitors	Species of Conservation Importance present near the Project Site	Vary	Amphioxus Corals Sea turtle Seaweed pipefish	Vary	Permanent	Reversible	Insignificant	No	No. New hard substrates for corals

Concurrent Projects	Project Proponent	Programme		Potential cumulative impacts (Construction Phase)	Potential cumulative impacts (Operational Phase)
Concurrent Projects	Project Proponent	Start	Complete	Potential cumulative impacts (Construction Phase)	Potential cumulative impacts (Operational Phase)
Present Project	CEDD	2020	2026	-	-
Solar Power and Small Wing Turbines Project	CLP	NA	NA	No information	No information
Desalination Project at Tung Ping Chau	Environmental Association Ltd.	Q3 2020	Q4 2020	No information	No information