8 ECOLOGY (TERRESTRIAL)

8.1 Introduction

8.1.1 This section presents the baseline ecological profile within the Assessment Area, and the assessment results of the potential ecological impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the Project.

8.1.2 According to the EIAO-TM, the baseline conditions for the ecological components of the terrestrial environment were evaluated based on the available information from relevant literature and field surveys conducted for the purposes of this EIA. Measures required to mitigate any identified adverse impacts are recommended, where appropriate, and residual impacts are assessed.

8.2 Environmental Legislation, Standards and Guidelines

8.2.1 This assessment made reference to the following Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) Government ordinances, regulations, standards, guidelines, and documents when identifying ecological importance of habitats and species, evaluating and assessing potential impacts of the Project on the ecological resources:

· Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance (EIAO) (Cap. 499)

· Technical Memorandum on Environmental Impact Assessment Process (EIAO-TM) Annexes 8 and 16

· EIAO Guidance Note No. 3/2010, 6/2010, 7/2010, and 10/2010

· Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96)

· Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170)

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

· Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131)

· Water Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 358)

· Chapter 10 of the Hong Kong Planning Standard and Guidelines (HKPSG)

· Development Bureau (DEVB) TC(W) No. 4/2020 Tree Preservation; and

· Drainage Services Department Practice Note No. 1/2015 Guidelines on Environmental and Ecological Considerations for River Channel Design

8.2.2 This assessment also made reference to the following international conventions and national legislation:

· The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species

· The List of Wild Plants and Wild Animals Under Special State Protection under the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Wildlife; and

· The Convention on Biological Diversity (the CBD), and an associated city-level Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (BSAP) developed by Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) under the CBD.

8.3 Assessment Methodology

Assessment Area of TME Alignment

8.3.1 In accordance with the EIA Study Brief No. ESB-332/2020, the Assessment Area (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/101) for the purpose of the terrestrial ecological impact assessment covered the areas within 500 m distance from the boundary of the Project including the proposed alignment and associated facilities, and other areas likely to be impacted by the Project (i.e. the proposed works sites and works areas).

8.3.2 Although the Tuen Mun Egretry is located at about 800 m northeast from the nearest Project site boundary, the ardeids utilising the egretry may fly over the Project site during breeding season. Therefore, ecological survey and ecological impact assessment focusing on the egretry were conducted.

8.3.3 No marine works would be required for the Project and there will be no impact on marine waters within the Assessment Area. Therefore, the marine waters were scoped out from ecological survey and impact assessment.

Assessment Area of Offsite Works Area

8.3.4 An offsite temporary works area at Mong Wing Street, which is currently used as a site office for the project “Tuen Mun - Chek Lap Kok Link (TM-CLKL),” is proposed to support the construction of the Project (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/107). This works area would be handed over by Highways Department in 2024 tentatively. This offsite works area will only be used during construction phase as site office, material storage for pre-cast unit (non-dusty material) and temporary tree nursery, while there would be no excavation works, earthworks and stockpiling of dusty materials. Under this EIA Study, the Assessment Area would include an area within 500 m distance from this offsite temporary works area.

Literature Review

8.3.5 The ecological characteristics of the Assessment Area were identified through a comprehensive review of the available relevant literature, as shown in Table 8.1 below.

Table 8.1 Baseline Information of Ecological Resources within the Assessment Area

Relevant Literature	Terrestrial Ecology
Relevant Literature	Habitat and Vegetation	Avifauna	Butterfly	Odonate	Herpetofauna	Mammal
(1) EIA-263/2020 Development at San Hing Road and Hong Po Road, Tuen Mun (CEDD, 2020)	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü
(2) EIA-174/2009 Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (HyD, 2009)	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü
(3) EIA-158/2008 Traffic Improvements to Tuen Mun Road Town Centre Section (HyD, 2008)	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü
(4) EIA-142/2007 Widening of Tuen Mun Road at Tsing Tin Interchange (HyD, 2007)	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü
(5) Foothills Bypass, Tuen Mun Road/Wong Chu Road Interchange and Other Road Junction Improvement Works (TDD, 1999)	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü
(6) EIA-149/BC West Rail – West Kowloon to Tuen Mun Centre (KCRC, 1998)	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü	ü
(7) Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site Waterbird Monitoring Programme, Egretry Counts in Hong Kong, Summer Report 2016-2020 (Anon, 2017; 2018; 2020; 2021a; 2021b)		ü
(8) Hong Kong Biodiversity: Issue No. 26 (AFCD, 2020)		ü

Ecological Survey Methodology

8.3.6 Based on the review of the findings of relevant studies and available information, ecological surveys were carried out to fill the information gaps identified, to verify the information collected, and to fulfill the requirements of the EIA Study according to the EIA Study Brief No. ESB-332/2020. Site visit was conducted in December 2020 to preliminarily check the general site conditions and ecological resources within the Assessment Area. A six-month ecological field survey (covering both dry and wet seasons) was undertaken from January to June 2021 (Table 8.2 refers). Details of the ecological surveys, including habitat mapping and vegetation survey, avifauna survey, egretry survey, ardeid night roost and pre-roost survey (including their flight line), butterfly and odonate survey, herpetofauna survey, terrestrial mammal survey and aquatic community survey, are discussed below. The walk transects, vantage points for flight line survey, and aquatic communities survey locations for the ecological surveys are shown in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/101.

8.3.7 Considering the small size of the offsite temporary works area at Mong Wing Street (Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/107 refers), the existing land use (i.e. construction site office) and the availability of relevant information identified from desktop study, no information gap was identified for the offsite works area, and the existing information was considered adequate for the purpose of the EIA Study.

Habitat Mapping and Vegetation Survey

8.3.8 Based on the review of relevant aerial photographs and previous literature, terrestrial habitats within the Assessment Area were preliminarily identified, sized and mapped. A habitat map of suitable scale (1:1000 to 1:5000) showing the types and locations of terrestrial habitats within the Assessment Area was prepared accordingly. Ground truthing exercise was undertaken in accessible areas to check and verify each identified habitat, with particular attention to the Project site. Ecological characteristics of each habitat type, including size, vegetation type, species presence, dominant species found, species diversity and abundance, community structure, ecological value and inter-dependence of the habitats and species, and presence of any features of ecological importance were defined and characterised. Binoculars and aerial photographs were used to observe ecological structure and supplement habitat information where accessibility was limited. Representative photographs of the habitat types and/or any important ecological features identified were taken.

8.3.9 Potential watercourses within the Assessment Area were identified from maps published by the Survey and Mapping Office of the Lands Department. The identified watercourses were checked and mapped out during ground truthing, with particular attention to their potential seasonal patterns as evidenced by the presence of surface flowing water.

8.3.10 Vegetation surveys were conducted by direct observation to record diversity and dominance of the plant species present in different types of habitat. The location of any plant species of conservation importance was recorded. Identification of flora species and status in Hong Kong were made with reference to Corlett et al. (2000), Hu et al. (2003), Hong Kong Herbarium (2012), and Hong Kong Herbarium and South China Botanical Gardens (2007; 2008; 2009; 2011).

Avifauna Survey

8.3.11 Avifauna within the Assessment Area was surveyed during daytime (between early morning and late evening) and night-time using transect count method. The presence and abundance of avifauna species at various habitats were recorded visually and aurally and were identified to species level, while night-time observation included active search with spotlight and aural identification. The location of any avifauna species of conservation importance encountered was recorded, along with notable behaviour (e.g. breeding behaviour such as nesting and presence of recently fledged juveniles, roosting, and feeding activities). Ornithological nomenclature in this report follows Carey et al. (2001), Viney et al. (2005) and the most recently updated list from the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society.

Egretry Survey

8.3.12 The Tuen Mun Egretry were surveyed during the ardeid breeding season to record status of the egretry and its nesting activities. The extent of the egretry was mapped and the physical environment was described including identification of trees that supported nests (including tree sizes and their crown spread) and any presence of human disturbance within or near the egretry. The distribution and abundance of nests from all ardeid species were identified as close to the egretry as possible from ground level using binoculars. The species of the breeding ardeid, nest status (vacant or occupied), notable breeding behaviours (e.g. brooding, feeding of chicks), and presence of adult/juveniles were recorded.

8.3.13 Flight line surveys for the breeding ardeids that took off from the egretry were undertaken at least half an hour prior to the time of sunrise, and the observation of ardeids was conducted continuously for two hours at the vantage points for egretry (VE1 and VE2) during the peak activity of the ardeids. The flight line of ardeid individuals was observed by means of high-power binoculars, while their landing locations were also recorded, as far as possible. Where the ardeids fly out of sight prior to landing, the location at which they were lost from sight were recorded.

Ardeid Night Roost and Pre-Roost Survey

8.3.14 The trees at banks of Tuen Mun River Channel (TMRC) and in Tuen Mun Park were reportedly utilised by ardeids as a roosting site. As such, ecological field surveys along the TMRC and in the Tuen Mun Park were undertaken to ascertain the presence and location of the potential night roosting and pre-roosting site(s) of ardeids within the Assessment Area. Species, abundance, flight line, returning time, location, and the tree species utilised by the night roosting ardeids were recorded; while observation of their flight line and returning time were undertaken at the selected vantage points (VR1 – VR3). The survey covered the peak period of ardeid activities, starting from approximately an hour before sunset and lasted until nightfall when observation of ardeid was no longer possible. The exact time of sunset on the date of survey were made reference to the website of Hong Kong Observatory.

Butterfly and Odonate Survey

8.3.15 Butterflies and odonates (dragonflies and damselflies) within the Assessment Area were surveyed using transect count method, while larvae and pupae of butterflies were also actively searched. For odonates, special attention was given to their potential habitats such as watercourse and water bodies. The surveys were conducted in suitable weather condition to avoid rainy and overcast weather when the butterflies and odonate were less active. Relative abundance of butterfly, dragonfly and damselfly were recorded. Nomenclature of butterfly follows Lo and Hui (2010) and nomenclature of dragonfly and damselfly follows Reels (2019) and Tam et al. (2011).

Herpetofauna Survey

8.3.16 Herpetofauna within the Assessment Area were surveyed using transect count method, including direct visual observation and active searching of their potential microhabitats (e.g. leaf litter, underneath of rotten logs). All reptiles and amphibians sighted or heard were recorded.

8.3.17 Amphibian survey were conducted whenever possible on evenings following periods of rainfall, focusing on areas suitable for amphibians (e.g. woodlands, water bodies, and watercourses, if any). The bulk of the data were formed by records of calling amphibians, as well as visual observation of eggs, tadpoles and adults.

8.3.18 During reptile surveys, careful searches of appropriate microhabitats and refugia (e.g. stones, pond bunds, crevices, leaf litter/debris, rotten logs) were undertaken. In addition to active searching, observation of exposed, basking or foraging reptiles were also recorded.

8.3.19 Nomenclature of amphibian and reptile follows Chan et al. (2005) and Karsen et al. (1998), respectively.

Mammal Survey

8.3.20 Surveys were conducted on areas which might potentially be utilised by terrestrial mammals. The surveys focused on searching for field signs such as droppings, footprints, diggings or burrows left by larger terrestrial mammals. Survey for nocturnal mammal species was also undertaken at night-time by active searching with spotlight. Mammal identification were made as accurate as possible from the field signs encountered. In addition, any mammal directly observed were identified and recorded. Flying mammals (e.g. bat species) were also taken into account during the mammal survey. Nomenclature of mammal follows Shek (2006).

8.3.21 Bat surveys were undertaken by an experienced surveyor equipped with an ultrasonic bat detector at potential roosting, commuting, foraging and drinking sites, with calls recorded for later analysis with computer software. The bat species were also located by direct sighting, and field observation (e.g. their behaviour, such as flying pattern and height, size of bat species, nearby habitats, etc.) were recorded to aid in the identification of the bat species.

Aquatic Community Survey

8.3.22 Aquatic communities were surveyed at representative aquatic survey locations (SP1 to SP3) within the Assessment Area, with emphasis placed on the watercourse (i.e. TMRC) in close proximity to the Project site boundary which are subject to potential impacts arising from the construction of the Project. Surveys of aquatic fauna were undertaken by bankside observation with the aid of binoculars and fish cage deployment. Organisms encountered were recorded and identified to the lowest possible taxon level. Nomenclature of aquatic communities follows Lee et al. (2004) and Williams (2004).

8.3.23 The schedule of the ecological surveys is provided in Table 8.2 below.

Table 8.2 Ecological Survey Schedule

Survey	Dry Season			Wet Season
Survey	Jan 2021	Feb 2021	Mar 2021	Apr 2021 ⁽¹⁾	May 2021	June 2021
Habitat and Vegetation	✓				✓
Avifauna (Day)	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Avifauna (Night)	✓		✓		✓	✓
Ardeid Night Roost and Pre-Roost Survey	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Egretry Survey			✓	✓	✓	✓
Butterfly and Odonate			✓	✓	✓	✓
Herpetofauna (Day)			✓	✓	✓	✓
Herpetofauna (Night)			✓	✓	✓	✓
Mammal (Day)	✓		✓			✓
Mammal (Night)	✓		✓		✓	✓
Aquatic Communities	✓				✓

Note: (1) Transitional month

Assessment Approach

8.3.24 The criteria and guidelines as stated in Annexes 8 and 16 of the EIAO-TM were followed for evaluating and assessing ecological impact arising from the construction and operation of the Project. Potential direct/indirect, on-site/off-site, primary, secondary, cumulative and residual ecological impacts arising from the construction and operation of the Project were identified and evaluated where possible. Mitigation measures and monitoring and audit programme were recommended, where necessary.

8.4 Description of the Environment

Recognised Sites of Conservation Importance (TME Alignment)

Tuen Mun Egretry

8.4.1 The Tuen Mun Egretry is located approximately 800 m northeast to the nearest Project site boundary (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/101). This egretry is situated at a narrow plot of roadside plantation between roads and TMRC, and subjected to regular disturbance from urban areas. A total of 12 nests of Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) was recorded utilising an exotic tree species Lebbeck Tree (Albizia lebbeck) for nesting in 2021 (Anon, 2021b). Breeding season of egretries usually fall between March to August in Hong Kong (Lee et al., 2007), while the active months of Tuen Mun Egretry was recorded up to July in 2021 (Anon, 2021b). Previous records of nesting activities at Tuen Mun Egretry from 2017 to 2021 are presented in Table 8.3.

Table 8.3 Maximum Number of Nests Recorded at Tuen Mun Egretry (2017 – 2021)

Species	2017 ⁽¹⁾	2018 ⁽²⁾	2019 ⁽³⁾	2020 ⁽⁴⁾	2021 ⁽⁵⁾
Little Egret (Egretta garzetta)	17	20	14	9	12

Notes:

(1) Anon, 2017; (2) Anon, 2018; (3) Anon, 2020; (4) Anon, 2021a; (5) Anon, 2021b.

Recognised Sites of Conservation Importance (Offsite Works Area)

8.4.2 No site of conservation importance was identified within the vicinity of the offsite temporary works area at Mong Wing Street.

Literature Review (TME Alignment)

Habitat and Vegetation

8.4.3 The assessment areas of other EIA studies including the EIAs for Development at San Hing Road and Hong Po Road, Tuen Mun (CEDD, 2020), Traffic Improvements to Tuen Mun Road Town Centre Section (HyD, 2008), and Widening of Tuen Mun Road at Tsing Tin Interchange (HyD, 2007), Foothills Bypass, Tuen Mun Road/Wong Chu Road Interchange and Other Road Junction Improvement Works (TDD, 1999), and West Kowloon to Tuen Mun Centre (KCRC, 1998) partially overlapped with the Assessment Area of the Project along TMRC and its vicinity. Majority of the Assessment Area was urbanised, with four habitats previously recorded (i.e. woodland, village, developed area and watercourse). No floral species of conservation importance was recorded in these habitats (KCRC, 1998; TDD, 1999; HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020).

8.4.4 Developed area habitat only supported limited vegetation, which included exotic plantation such as Bauhinia spp., Paper-bark Tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia) and Sunshine Tree (Senna surattensis) (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020). This habitat was highly disturbed with low ecological value.

8.4.5 The village habitat was characterised by village housing interspersed with area of vegetation. Commonly recorded vegetation included fruit trees Common Banana (Musa x paradisiaca), Longan (Dimocarpus longan); ornamental plants Hoop Pine (Araucaria cunninghamii) and Lawson cypress (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana) (HyD, 2007). This habitat was considered as low ecological value.

8.4.6 The TMRC was channelised with concrete substrate and supported scarce riparian vegetation with moderate water flow in poor to moderate quality. Common plant species recorded included tree Chinese Banyan (Ficus microcarpa) and White Popinac (Leucaena leucocephala); shrub Lantana (Lantana camara L.); herb Chinese Silvergrass (Miscanthus sinensis) and Bidens alba (HyD, 2007). This habitat was considered of low ecological value.

Avifauna

8.4.7 Low diversity of avifauna was recorded within the assessment areas in other EIA studies (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020). All recorded species were common and widespread in Hong Kong, such as Chinese Bulbul (Pycnonotus sinensis), Eurasian Tree Sparrow (Passer montanus) and Japanese White-eye (Zosterops japonicus). Only one species of conservation importance, Little Egret, was recorded in these EIA studies and TMRC was found to be the foraging ground for this species.

8.4.8 According to a territory-wide study of ardeid roosting sites in Hong Kong conducted by AFCD between 2019 and 2020, a total of 26 roosting sites were identified within Hong Kong. These night roosting sites showed fluctuation in terms of both locations and abundance of roosting ardeids. Some of the night roosts were observed to shift in location, while some were observed to be regularly abandoned and re-occupied in different years. The numbers of roosting ardeids also showed fluctuation in different times (e.g. Tai Po Night Roost with 1,200 ardeids in December 2018, and 428 ardeids in December 2019) (AFCD, 2020).

8.4.9 The north-western corner of Tuen Mun Park, near Entrance B of TUM Station, was identified as one of the ardeids night roosting site, which is around 850 m south of the Tuen Mun Egretry. According to a territory-wide study on ardeid roosting site in winter 2019/20, a total of 259 night-roosting ardeids were observed during the survey, mostly comprising Little Egret with a few individuals of Great Egret (Ardea alba) and Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus). Majority of the ardeids arrived at the night roost within 15 minutes before sunset or after sunset. The tree species Big-leaved Fig (Ficus virens) and Chinese Banyan (Ficus microcarpa) were used as roosting substrate. Some Black-crowned Night Heron were also observed using the Park as day roost (AFCD, 2020).

Butterfly and Odonate

8.4.10 Low diversity of butterfly species was recorded within the Assessment Area. All recorded species are very common in Hong Kong, such as Common Grass Yellow (Eurema hecabe) and Red-base Jezebel (Delias pasithoe pasithoe). No butterfly species of conservation importance was recorded. No odonate species was found during the previous EIA studies (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020).

Herpetofauna and Mammal

8.4.11 No herpetofauna and mammal was recorded during previous EIA studies (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020).

8.4.12 Territory-wide surveys conducted by the Herpetofauna Working Group of AFCD recorded two amphibian species, Brown Tree Frog (Polypedates megacephalus) and Gunther’s Frog (Rana guentheri), around Tuen Mun area. Both species are widely distributed in Hong Kong.

8.4.13 Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx) was commonly found and widely distributed at lower elevations in the urban areas of Hong Kong (Chan and Shek, 2006). Recent study recorded this bat species roosting in Chinese Fan-palm (Livistona chinensis), Queen Palm (Syagrus romanzoffiana) and Royal Palm (Roystonea regia) in Tuen Mun Park (Seeburrun, 2019). Short-nosed Fruit Bat is a species of conservation importance protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170).

Aquatic Community

8.4.14 No aquatic community survey was conducted in the previous studies (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020).

Literature Review (Offsite Works Area)

8.4.15 The assessment area under the approved EIA for Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link (TM-CLKL) (Register No.: AEIAR-146/2009) overlaps with the majority of the current Assessment Area for the offsite temporary works area at Mong Wing Street. The ecological findings from the EIA for TM-CLKL are therefore considered adequate for the purpose for the current EIA Study, verified and supplemented with review of the latest aerial photographs.

Habitat and Vegetation

8.4.16 A total of four terrestrial habitat types were identified within the current Assessment Area, dominated by developed area, while other habitats include watercourse, plantation, and tall shrubland. All four habitats were previously evaluated to be of low ecological value (HyD, 2009).

8.4.17 The Mong Wing Street offsite works area is completely made up of developed area and is currently used as a construction site office. Little to no vegetation and wildlife was recorded within the works area. Other developed areas within the Assessment Area include roads (e.g. TM-CLKL and Lung Mun Road), Pillar Point Fire Station, and Pillar Point Sewage Treatment Works, mainly on the south of the Assessment Area. This man-made habitat comprised low diversity and abundance of common vegetation species (e.g. Cuban Bast Hibiscus tiliaceus and Taiwan Acacia Acacia confusa), with no species of conservation importance recorded. The habitat was considered to be of low ecological value (HyD, 2009).

8.4.18 A watercourse habitat was identified to the west of Mong Fat Street. The watercourse originated from the north (passing through Pillar Point Valley Landfill) and flows southward, ending at an underground culvert under Lung Mun Road. The watercourse was recorded with low diversity and abundance of vegetation, with no species of conservation importance recorded. The watercourse was considered to be of low ecological value (HyD, 2009).

8.4.19 Plantation was recorded near developed area, with low to moderate diversity of vegetation and low richness of wildlife, with vegetation dominated by the pioneer exotic species Taiwan Acacia (HyD, 2009). This habitat occupies a portion of the Pillar Point Valley Landfill, which is located on the north of the Mong Wing Street offsite works area, partly within the Assessment Area. A vegetation species of conservation importance Red Azalea (Rhododendron simsii) was recorded within this plantation habitat, adjacent to the watercourse west of Mong Fat Street (Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/107 refers). The plantation was considered to be low ecological value (HyD, 2009).

8.4.20 Tall shrubland was recorded on hillslopes on the north, comprising a mix of native tree and shrub such as Yellow Cow Wood (Cratoxylum cochinchinense) and Wax Tree (Rhus succedanea). Moderate diversity of vegetation and low richness of wildlife was recorded, with a species of conservation importance Pitcher Plant (Nepenthes mirabilis) recorded north of the existing TM-CLKL Tunnel (Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/107 refers). The tall shrubland was considered to be low ecological value (HyD, 2009).

Fauna

8.4.21 Generally low diversity and abundance fauna was recorded within the Assessment Area for the Mong Wing Street offsite works area, including some avifauna and butterfly recorded near developed area and plantation, and low richness of other fauna such as herpetofauna, odonate, and mammals. Fauna species of conservation importance recorded within the Assessment Area only include three avifauna and a mammal species (HyD, 2009), as presented in Table 8.4.

Summary of Species of Conservation Importance

8.4.22 Summaries of species of conservation importance recorded from literature review within the current Assessment Areas for both TME Alignment and the Mong Wing Street offsite works area are provided in Table 8.4.

Table 8.4 Species of Conservation Importance Recorded from Literature Review for TME Alignment and the Mong Wing Street Offsite Works Area

Species	Recorded Habitat ^{(8) (9)}		Protection Status	Distribution in Hong Kong ⁽²⁾	Rarity ⁽²⁾
Flora
Pitcher Plant (Nepenthes mirabilis)	-	TS ⁽⁹⁾	Cap. 96 ⁽³⁾; Cap. 586 ⁽³⁾; Vulnerable ⁽⁴⁾	Wet, open places on granite and sedimentary rocks	Common
Red Azalea (Rhododendron simsii)	-	PL ⁽⁹⁾	Cap. 96 ⁽³⁾	Shrubland	Very Common
Avifauna
Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) ⁽¹⁾	DA ⁽⁸⁾	WC⁽⁹⁾	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; (LC)⁽⁵⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus) ⁽¹⁾	DA ⁽⁸⁾	-	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC)⁽⁵⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Great Egret (Ardea alba) ⁽¹⁾	DA ⁽⁸⁾	-	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC)⁽⁵⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Little Egret (Egretta garzetta)⁽¹⁾	MWC, DA ⁽⁸⁾	WC, DA⁽⁹⁾	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC) ⁽⁵⁾	Widely distributed in coastal area throughout Hong Kong.	Common
Black Kite (Milvus migrans) ⁽¹⁾	-	DA ⁽⁹⁾	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; Cap. 586 ⁽³⁾; (RC) ^(5);Class II⁽⁶⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Mammal
Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx)	DA ⁽⁸⁾	-	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; Near Threatened ⁽⁷⁾	Very widely distributed in urban and countryside areas throughout Hong Kong.	Very common
Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus)	-	DA ⁽⁹⁾	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Very common

Notes:

(1) Wetland-dependent species (including wetland-dependent species and waterbirds).

(2) Distribution in Hong Kong and Rarity follows:

Flora: Wu and Lee (2000); Xing and Chau (2000); Siu (2000).
Fauna: AFCD (2021); Shek (2006a).

(3) Cap. 96: Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap. 96).
Cap. 170: Protected under Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170).

Cap. 586: Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap.586).

(4) Qin, et al. (2017).

(5) Fellowes et al. (2002): LC=Local Concern; RC=Regional Concern; PRC=Potential Regional Concern. Letters in parentheses indicate that the assessment is on the basis of restrictedness in nesting and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

(6) List of Wild Animals Under State Protection (promulgated by State Forestry Administration and Ministry of Agriculture on 14 January, 1989).

(7) Jiang et al. (2016).

(8) Location as recorded from previous studies within the Assessment Area for TME Alignment (AFCD, 2020; CEDD, 2020; HyD, 2007, 2008; Seeburrun, 2019).
Abbreviation for Habitats: MWC=Modified Watercourse; DA=Developed Area.

(9) Location as recorded from previous studies within Assessment Area for Mong Wing Street offsite works area (HyD, 2009).
Abbreviation for Habitats: WC=Watercourse; DA=Developed Area; PL=Plantation; TS=Tall Shrubland.

8.5 Survey Findings

8.5.1 As described in Section 8.3.7 and 8.4.15, existing baseline information for the Mong Wing Street offsite works area is considered adequate from desktop review, and no information gap was identified. The findings presented in the following sections would focus on the Assessment Area for the TME Alignment.

Habitat and Vegetation

8.5.2 A total of five habitat types were identified within the Assessment Area, namely modified watercourse, developed area, mixed woodland, plantation, and village / orchard. Habitat maps and representative photographs of the habitats recorded within the Assessment Area are shown in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/102 and Appendix 8.1, respectively. The sizes of these habitats within the Assessment Area are shown in Table 8.5. The flora recorded during the ecological surveys are listed in Appendix 8.2. One flora species of conservation importance were recorded within the Assessment Area (Table 8.10 refers). The indicative locations and representative photographs of the species of conservation importance are presented in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/102 and Appendix 8.1, respectively.

8.5.3 Only aboveground works would be conducted during the construction of the Project, extending from the existing viaduct at TUM Station to a new elevated terminus at TMS Station located near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier, with provision of an elevated intermediate station (A16 Station) at Tuen Mun Area 16. The Project footprint lies within habitats with high level of human disturbance, including modified watercourse and developed area.

Table 8.5 Habitats Identified within the Assessment Area

Habitat Type	Project Site		Assessment Area
Habitat Type	Size of Area (ha)	Percentage of Area (%)	Size of Area (ha)	Percentage of Area (%)
Developed Area	18.7	78.6%	293.5	89.7%
Modified Watercourse	5.1	21.4%	16.9	5.2%
Mixed Woodland	-	-	9.1	2.8%
Village / Orchard	-	-	4.9	1.5%
Plantation	-	-	2.7	0.8%
Total	23.8	100%	327.1	100%

Developed Area

8.5.4 Developed area dominated majority (about 90%) of the Assessment Area and part of this habitat falls within the Project boundary. This habitat mainly comprises residential areas, as well as other urban land uses such as urban parks (e.g. Tuen Mun Park and Wu Shan Recreation Playground), industrial area (mainly west of TUM Station), as well as roads and other public facilities. Majority of wildlife (including both vegetation and fauna) were recorded in urban park and garden areas, where artificial planting was prominent, along with other artificial features within parks and garden such as grassy areas and artificial ponds. Part of a planted area within Tuen Mun Park was reported to be utilised as ardeid night roost, which is situated adjacent to TMRC and artificial ponds, and distant from major highways. This planted area forms a continuous vegetation patch within Tuen Mun Park, and was subject to relatively less disturbance at night (e.g. lack of heavy traffic and decreased human activities).

8.5.5 Other developed areas such as residential areas and roads supported very limited wildlife. Common plant species within this habitat included tree species Taiwan Acacia (Acacia confusa), Chinese Banyan (Ficus microcarpa), Big-leaved Fig (Ficus virens) and Paper-bark Tree (Melaleuca cajuputi cumingiana), and perennial herb species Wedelia trilobata. This habitat was frequently subject to human disturbance such as park users, traffic noise, utilities maintenance works, residential activities nearby, etc. No flora species of conservation importance was recorded within this habitat.

8.5.6 Part of the developed area habitat also supported Tuen Mun Egretry. While the location of the egretry was outside the Assessment Area, the plot of roadside plantation utilised by the breeding ardeids were similar as the roadside plantation within the Assessment Area, with mainly Lebbeck Tree (Albizia lebbeck) planted. This roadside plantation was situated adjacent to TMRC, but subject to relatively higher disturbance (e.g. from adjacent traffic in San Wo Lane, lighting and noise disturbance from adjacent residential and recreational areas). The condition of the Egretry is further discussed in Section 8.5.15.

Modified Watercourse

8.5.7 A modified watercourse, i.e. TMRC, runs in the middle of the Assessment Area. The TMRC is a concrete channel of approximately 100 m wide with consistent water flow from north to south, flowing into Tuen Mun Typhoon Shelter. Littering were often observed along the channel. The downstream section (southern end) of TMRC connects to the sea and numerous boats parked near its southern end, and was also subject to tidal influence, thus showing signs of an estuarine environment. Part of the downstream section of the TMRC falls within the Project site boundary. This habitat has low diversity and abundance of vegetation. Flora species recorded occasionally included climber Climbing Bauhinia (Bauhinia glauca) and trees Cuban Bast (Hibiscus tiliaceus) and Elephant's Ear (Macaranga tanarius var. tomentosa). No flora species of conservation importance was recorded within this habitat.

Mixed Woodland

8.5.8 Four patches of mixed woodland were found inside the Assessment Area. The largest patch of mixed woodland was located between Tin Hau Road and Yip Wong Road next to the Tin Hau Temple. Another patch was located in Wu Shan Recreation Playground, while the remaining two were located at the western edge of the Assessment Area near Tuen Mun Golf Centre. These mixed woodlands were mainly developed from plantation through natural succession. Most of them were adjacent to developed area or village area and subjected to relatively high level of human disturbance (e.g. traffic emission and noise).

8.5.9 The canopy height of this habitat approximately ranged between 12 and 15 m, which was dominated by a mix of native and exotic tree species including Chinese Hackberry (Celtis sinensis), Ivy Tree (Schefflera heptaphylla) and Rose Apple (Syzygium jambos). The understory was mainly consisted of Wild Coffee (Psychotria asiatica), Microcos (Microcos nervosa) and Dichotomy Forked Fern (Dicranopteris pedata). One locally very common flora species of conservation importance Luofushan Joint-fir (Gnetum luofuense) was recorded at the mixed woodland in Wu Shan Recreation Playground.

Village / Orchard

8.5.10 The village / orchard habitat refers to areas with low-rise village housings and interspersed with patches of orchard. Two patches of this habitat were recorded adjacent to the Tin Hau Temple. This habitat was dominated by fruit tree Common Banana (Musa x paradisiaca). Exotic plants including Taiwan Acacia, Big-leaved Acacia (Acacia mangium) and Wedelia trilobata were also commonly recorded. This habitat was under active management. No flora species of conservation importance was recorded within this habitat.

Plantation

8.5.11 Small patches of plantations were recorded at the western edge of the Assessment Area. The plantations were dominated by exotic species Taiwan Acacia and White Popinac, with scarce distribution of native species such as Chinese Hackberry and Common Red-stem Fig (Ficus variegata). Common plant species at understory include Chinese Privet (Ligustrum sinense), Bidens alba, Ciliate Microstegium (Microstegium ciliatum) and Guinea Grass (Panicum maximum). No flora species of conservation importance was recorded within this habitat.

Terrestrial Fauna

8.5.12 The sections below outline the findings of fauna surveys. Lists of fauna species recorded from the Assessment Area are provided in Appendix 8.3. The habitat in which the species of conservation importance were recorded, their protection status and distribution in Hong Kong are presented in Table 8.10. Their indicative locations and representative photographs are presented in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/102 and Appendix 8.1, respectively.

Avifauna

8.5.13 A total of 39 avifauna species were recorded within the Assessment Area, twelve of which are species of conservation importance (Table 8.10 refers). Most of these recorded species are common and widespread in Hong Kong. The highest abundance and diversity of avifauna were recorded within the developed area habitat. These species are highly adapted to urbanised habitats, with ten of the twelve recorded avifauna species of conservation importance recorded in developed area and/or modified watercourse. Black Kite (Milvus migrans) was recorded at flight above the developed area.

8.5.14 Ardeids including Chinese Pond Heron, Great Egret, Intermediate Egret (Egretta intermedia) and Little Egret and were recorded foraging along the embankment of TMRC, including the riverbank, on exposed channel bed, or even on vessels along the channel, depending of different tidal conditions. These ardeids were observed in different locations from upstream to downstream areas, and including the typhoon shelter. The perching and foraging locations of these ardeids appeared opportunistic and mainly depended on availability of prey, with no specific hotspots noted. Some of their foraging grounds fall within the Project boundary.

Tuen Mun Egretry

8.5.15 Little Egret was observed utilising the Tuen Mun Egretry which is located about 800 m from the nearest Project site boundary. A maximum number of eighteen nests were recorded at the egretry (Table 8.6 refers). The nesting and breeding activities were recorded at a stand of Lebbeck Tree along San Wo Lane to the east of TMRC. The ardeid nests were unevenly distributed over five individuals of Lebbeck Tree, which ranged from 9 to 12m tall, and with crown spread of 8 to14m. Most of the nests (>50%) were recorded on a relatively mature individual of the Lebbeck Tree.

Table 8.6 Number of Nests Recorded at Tuen Mun Egretry

Species	Mar 2021¹	Apr 2021	May 2021	Jun 2021
Little Egret (Egretta garzetta)	-	18	14	8

Note: (1) No nests were observed.

8.5.16 During flight line surveys, two main flight lines from the egretry were observed. A total of 119 flight lines sightings were recorded. About two-thirds of the breeding Little Egret were recorded flying south to the direction of TUM Station, while around one-third flew north (Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/104). The majority of the ardeids from the egretry were observed to fly at 25 m or above within the Assessment Area, over the existing railway structure (e.g. TUM Station and Light Rail) and in close proximity to nearby building structures, suggesting adaptability in the current urbanised areas. TMRC was observed to be one of the foraging habitats for the breeding ardeids as some of them were found landing and foraging along the channel.

Roosting Ardeids

8.5.17 Ardeids were observed utilising some big trees in Tuen Mun Park next to the TMRC and TUM Station as night roosting site. The night roost supported a high abundance of ardeids, with relative higher abundance in dry season (with peak count of 300 individuals in January 2021), while abundance gradually decrease during subsequent months (lowest abundance of 39 individuals recorded in May 2021) (Table 8.7 refers). The night roost was generally used by Little Egrets (about 70-85%), with low proportion of Great Egret (about 12-27%) and Chinese Pond Heron (about 2-5%) observed during the survey period.

8.5.18 Majority of the ardeids returned to the night roost approximately 30 minutes before or after sunset (Table 8.7 and Appendix 8.4). The ardeids mainly roosted at the canopy of a group of mature Big-leaved Fig (Ficus virens) interspersed with some Chinese Banyan (Ficus microcarpa). The roosting height was around 10 to 25 m. Pre-roosting behaviour was observed from some of these ardeids at an artificial lake in Tuen Mun Park next to the night roosting site. In addition, roosting behaviour of Black-crowned Night Heron was also recorded during daytime at the eastern edge of the artificial lake in Tuen Mun Park. The indicative location and extent of the night roost, pre-roost and day roost areas recorded during survey are provided in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/103.

Table 8.7 Number and Species of Night Roost Ardeid Recorded during Ardeid Night Roost Survey

Survey Date	Species Recorded				Sunset Time during Survey	Approximate Earliest Time of Return	Peak Time of Return
Survey Date	Little Egret	Great Egret	Chinese Pond Heron	Total	Sunset Time during Survey	Approximate Earliest Time of Return	Peak Time of Return
Jan 2021	254	37	9	300	17:58	17:30	18:00-18:14
Feb 2021	105	41	3	149	18:22	18:00	18:15-18:29
Mar 2021	122	17	7	146	18:33	18:00	18:15-18:29
Apr 2021	56	18	2	76	18:46	18:20	18:45-18:59
May 2021	31	7	1	39	19:00	18:25	18:45-18:59
Jun 2021	38	8	2	48	19:11	18:40	19:00-19:14

8.5.19 During flight line surveys on the roosting ardeids, a total of 1,116 flight lines sightings were recorded. A total of five major ardeid flight lines to the night roost in Tuen Mun Park were observed, including four from south and one from north. The indicative flight lines observed during the survey are presented in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/105. Majority of the ardeids (total more than 95% along flight lines 1 to 4) were recorded flying in the direction from the Tuen Mun Typhoon Shelter to their night roosting trees, with more than half (61%) of the ardeids recorded flying along flight line 3 (along Hoi Wong Road and TMRC). Further details of flight line usage are presented in Appendix 8.4 (Table A3).

8.5.20 Flight lines 1 to 3 were mainly used by ardeids perching in Tuen Mun Typhoon Shelter (e.g. on breakwater and vessels), and ardeids perching along the shoreline near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier. These ardeids were observed flying along the eastern TMRC and along Hoi Wong Road, over the flat area above Tuen Mun Swimming Pool and Tuen Mun Fire Station. These ardeids used a range of flight zones and heights in Zone A (flight height at about 10 to 30 m), while the flight lines start to converge in Zone B (near Wong Chu Road, with main flight height of about 10 to 25 m). The ardeids eventually reach Zone C, and converge closer to the night roost (mainly about 10 to 25 m). While the ardeid were observed to fly mainly along the indicated flight lines, some scattered ardeid individuals were also observed flying within a wider flight zone. The flight zone cover a relatively wide horizonal area near the typhoon shelter, while the width of the flight zone gradually converges when ardeids approach the night-roost. These ardeids were also observed with high maneuverability, flying near existing high-rise buildings and tall structures of the cargo handling freights in Tuen Mun Typhoon Shelter (approx. 25 m in height). Some of these ardeids were regularly recorded to land along TMRC.

8.5.21 Flight line 4 was used by ardeids flying from the direction of Hong Kong Gold Coast, passing through the east of Tuen Mun Typhoon Shelter and along Tuen Mun Heung Sze Wui Road, before descending near Tuen Mun Park. Ardeids using this flight line were observed with a relatively stable flight height at about 20 to 25 m (particularly in Zones A and B), before descending into Tuen Mun Park in Zone C. This flight line is situated between high-rise buildings on both sides of Tuen Mun Heung Sze Wui Road, and over highway (Wong Chu Road).

8.5.22 Along flight line 5, ardeids were observed flying into the night roost from the north (upstream location of TMRC). Ardeids along flight line 5 were observed flying at a relatively lower flight height (about 0 to 15 m), mainly flying along the western bank of TMRC, but were also occasionally flying above TUM Station before descending into the night roost in Tuen Mun Park. These ardeids were regularly recorded to land along TMRC. Further description of the indicative ardeid flight lines and flight heights were provided in Appendix 8.4 and Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/105).

Butterfly

8.5.23 A total of 19 butterfly species were recorded within the Assessment Area, one of which is a species of conservation importance (Appendix 8.3 refers). Most of these species are either common or very common in Hong Kong, such as Pale Grass Blue (Pseudozizeeria maha serica) and Common Mormon (Papilio polytes polytes). The species of conservation importance Small Cabbage White (Pieris rapae crucivora) was recorded in developed area (within Tuen Mun Park).

Odonate

8.5.24 A total of four species of odonate were recorded, mainly flying over vegetated areas in developed area and over modified watercourse. No odonate species of conservation importance was recorded (Appendix 8.3 refers). All of the recorded species are abundant in Hong Kong.

Herpetofauna

8.5.25 A total of four reptile and five amphibian species were recorded in developed area within the Assessment Area (Appendix 8.3 refers). Most of the recorded species are common and widely distributed in Hong Kong, such as Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta) and exotic invasive species Greenhouse Frog (Eleutherodactylus planirostris). No species of conservation importance was recorded.

Mammal

8.5.26 A total of six mammal species were recorded within the Assessment Area, including five bat species, which are all species of conservation importance protected under Cap. 170 (Appendix 8.3 refers). The bat species were mostly recorded at night flying above the developed area habitats such as Tuen Mun Park, Wu Shan Recreation Playground, and near the modified watercourse.

8.5.27 Roosts of Short-nosed Fruit Bat (SNFB) were recorded under Chinese Fan-palm in Tuen Mun Park and Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden throughout the survey period. One mature Chinese Fan-palm tree in Tuen Mun Park was observed to support SNFB, with abundance of the roosting bats ranging from 12 to 20 individuals throughout the survey period. On the other hand, SNFB in Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden was observed on a fixed Chinese Fan-palm tree, but was observed to use different Chinese Fan-palm trees (up to five tree individuals were observed with roosting SNFB during the survey period), with abundance of roosting bats in each tree ranging from 0 to 10 individuals. Some of these trees with roosting bats were observed to be vacant in some months, suggesting irregular use of tree individuals. Least Horseshoe Bat (Rhinolophus pusillus) were also recorded emerging from an underground culvert within Wu Shan Recreation Playground during dry season, likely utilising the culvert as their day roost.

Aquatic Community

8.5.28 A total of nine aquatic fauna species were recorded from the TMRC including three crustacean, five fish and one gastropod species (Appendix 8.3 refers). As the TMRC is connected to the sea, a mixture of freshwater and estuarine species was recorded in low to moderate abundance, including Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), Jarbua Terapon (Terapon jarbua) and Sesarmine Crab (Parasesarma bidens). Most of the recorded species are common or very common in Hong Kong. No species of conservation importance was recorded.

8.6 Ecological Value of Habitats and Species

Assessment Area (TME Alignment)

8.6.1 The ecological importance of recorded habitats was evaluated in accordance with the EIAO-TM Annex 8 criteria and presented in Table 8.8 to Table 8.9 below. Species of conservation importance identified from literature review and surveys are summarised in Table 8.4 and Table 8.10 respectively. Their indicative locations and representative photographs are presented in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/102 and Appendix 8.1, respectively.

Table 8.8 Ecological Evaluation of Modified Watercourse and Developed Area within the Assessment Area for TME Alignment

Criteria	Developed Area	Modified Watercourse
Naturalness	Low. An artificial habitat.	Low. An artificial habitat.
Size	Very large (293.5 ha)	Moderate (16.9 ha, ~4.9 km)
Diversity	Low to moderate floral and faunal diversity, but most flora are introduced or planted species and most fauna are common and widespread in Hong Kong.	Very low floral and low faunal diversity
Rarity	A very common habitat in Hong Kong. No flora species of conservation importance were recorded. A total of 14 fauna species of conservation importance, including eight avifauna (Black-crowned Night Heron, Chinese Pond Heron, Grey Heron, Great Egret, Little Egret, Pacific Reef Heron, Black Kite, and Ashy Drongo), one butterfly (Small Cabbage White) and five bat species (Short-nosed Fruit Bat, Least Horseshoe Bat, Chinese Noctule, Japanese Pipistrelle and an unknown Vespertilionidae species) were recorded. A small part of this habitat supported roosting ardeids (night-roosting ardeids and day-roosting Black-crowned Night Heron in Tuen Mun Park), roosting SNFB (Tuen Mun Park and Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden), and roosting Least Horseshoe Bat (Wu Shan Recreation Playground).	A common habitat in Hong Kong. No flora species of conservation importance were recorded. Seven avifauna species of conservation importance (Black-crowned Night Heron, Chinese Pond Heron, Grey Heron, Great Egret, Intermediate Egret, Little Egret and Collared Crow) were recorded.
Re-creatability	High	High
Fragmentation	Low	None
Ecological linkage	Not structurally and functionally linked with habitat of high ecological value. A small part of this habitat supported roosting ardeids (night-roosting ardeids and day-roosting Black-crowned Night Heron in Tuen Mun Park), roosting SNFB (Tuen Mun Park and Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden), and roosting Least Horseshoe Bat (Wu Shan Recreation Playground).	Structurally and functionally connected to the sea (flowing into the typhoon shelter), and supports ardeids from the Tuen Mun Egretry.
Potential value	Low	Low
Nursery / Breeding ground	Breeding ardeids were recorded within this habitat, the egretry is located outside Assessment Area.	Breeding ardeids from Tuen Mun Egretry located outside the Assessment Area were recorded utilising this habitat as foraging ground.
Age	N/A	N/A
Abundance / Richness of Wildlife	Low to moderate, but most wildlife was commonly found in Hong Kong High abundance of ardeids were recorded at the night roost in Tuen Mun Park	Low
Ecological value	Moderate for the area with night roosting ardeids Low in other areas	Low to Moderate

Table 8.9 Ecological Evaluation of Mixed Woodland, Village/Orchard and Plantation within the Assessment Area for TME Alignment

Criteria	Mixed Woodland	Village / Orchard	Plantation
Naturalness	Moderate	Low. An artificial habitat.	Low. An artificial habitat.
Size	Small (9.1 ha)	Very small (4.9 ha)	Very small (2.7 ha)
Diversity	Low to moderate floral and low faunal diversity	Low floral and faunal diversity	Very low floral and faunal diversity
Rarity	A common habitat in Hong Kong. One flora species (Luofushan Joint-fir) and three avifauna species of conservation importance (Crested Goshawk, Greater Coucal, and Ashy Drongo) were recorded.	A very common habitat in Hong Kong, with no flora and fauna species of conservation importance recorded.	A very common habitat in Hong Kong, with no flora and fauna species of conservation importance recorded.
Re-creatability	Moderate. Re-creatable if time is allowed for maturation and natural succession.	High	High
Fragmentation	Moderate, four patches of mixed woodland scattered on the western side of the TMRC	Low	Moderate, three patches of plantation scattered at the western edge of the Assessment Area
Ecological linkage	Not structurally and functionally linked with habitat of high ecological value.	Not structurally and functionally linked with habitat of high ecological value.	Not structurally and functionally linked with habitat of high ecological value.
Potential value	Low to moderate	Low	Low
Nursery / Breeding ground	No record of nursery or breeding ground	No record of nursery or breeding ground	No record of nursery or breeding ground
Age	Young	N/A	Young
Abundance / Richness of Wildlife	Low to Moderate	Low	Very low
Ecological value	Low to Moderate	Low	Low

Table 8.10 Species of Conservation Importance Recorded within the Assessment Area for TME Alignment

Species	Recorded Habitat ⁽¹⁾	Protection Status	Distribution in Hong Kong ⁽²⁾	Rarity ⁽²⁾
Flora
Luofushan Joint-Fir (Gnetum luofuense)	MWL	Near Threatened ⁽³⁾	Forest and shrubland.	Very Common
Avifauna
Black-crowned Night Heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) ⁽⁴⁾	MWC, DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; (LC)⁽³⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus) ⁽⁴⁾	MWC, DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC)⁽³⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea) ⁽⁴⁾	MWC, DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC⁽³⁾	Found in Deep Bay area, Starling Inlet, Kowloon Park, Cape D'Aguilar.	Common
Great Egret (Ardea alba) ⁽⁴⁾	MWC, DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC)⁽³⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Intermediate Egret (Egretta intermedia) ⁽⁴⁾	MWC	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; RC ⁽³⁾	Found in Deep Bay area, Tai Long Wan, Starling Inlet, Tai O, Cape D'Aguilar.	Common
Little Egret (Egretta garzetta)⁽⁴⁾	MWC, DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC) ⁽³⁾	Widely distributed in coastal area throughout Hong Kong.	Common
Pacific Reef Heron (Egretta sacra) ⁽⁴⁾	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; (LC)⁽³⁾; Class II ⁽⁵⁾; Rare ⁽⁶⁾	Widely distributed in coastal area throughout Hong Kong	Uncommon
Black Kite (Milvus migrans) ⁽⁴⁾	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; Cap.586 ⁽³⁾; (RC) ⁽³⁾; Class II ⁽⁵⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Crested Goshawk (Accipiter trivirgatus)	MWL	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; Cap.586 ⁽³⁾; Class II ⁽⁵⁾; Rare ⁽⁶⁾; Near Threatened ⁽⁷⁾	Widely distributed in woodlands and shrublands throughout Hong Kong.	Uncommon
Greater Coucal (Centropus sinensis)	MWL	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; Class II ⁽⁵⁾; Vulnerable ⁽⁶⁾	Widely distributed in Hong Kong.	Common
Ashy Drongo (Dicrurus leucophaeus)	DA, MWL	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; LC ⁽³⁾	Scarce winter visitor. Found in Shing Mun, Tai Po Kau.	Scarce
Collared Crow (Corvus torquatus) ⁽⁴⁾	MWC	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; LC ⁽³⁾; Near Threatened ⁽⁷⁾; Vulnerable ⁽⁸⁾	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
Butterfly
Small Cabbage White (Pieris rapae crucivora)	DA	-	Shek Mun Kap, Fan Lau, Ngong Ping, Kam Tin, Ho Chung, Luk Keng, Tuen Mun Ash Lagoon	Rare
Mammal
Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx)	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; Near Threatened ⁽⁷⁾	Very widely distributed in urban and countryside areas throughout Hong Kong.	Very Common
Least Horseshoe Bat (Rhinolophus pusillus)	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC)⁽³⁾	Widely distributed in countryside areas throughout Hong Kong	Uncommon
Chinese Noctule (Nyctalus plancyi)	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾; PRC (RC) ⁽³⁾	Fairly widely distributed in countryside areas throughout Hong Kong.	Common
Japanese Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus abramus)	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾	Widely distributed throughout Hong Kong.	Very Common
Unknown Vespertilionidae sp.	DA	Cap.170 ⁽³⁾	-	Abundant

Notes:

(1) Habitats: MWC=Modified Watercourse; DA=Developed Area; MWL=Mixed Woodland.

(2) Distribution in Hong Kong and Rarity follows:

Flora: Wu and Lee (2000); Xing and Chau (2000); Siu (2000).

Fauna: AFCD (2021); Karsen et al. (1998); Shek (2006a); Reels (2019).

(3) Cap. 170: Protected under Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (Cap. 170).

Cap. 586: Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap.586).

Fellowes et al. (2002): LC=Local Concern; RC=Regional Concern; PRC=Potential Regional Concern. Letters in parentheses indicate that the assessment is on the basis of restrictedness in nesting and/or roosting sites rather than in general occurrence.

(4) Wetland-dependent species (including wetland-dependent species and waterbirds).

(5) The List of Endangered and Protected Species of China.

(6) Zheng and Wang (1998).

(7) Jiang et al. (2016).

(8) IUCN (2021).

Assessment Area (Offsite Works Area)

8.6.2 As described in Section 8.4.15, the ecological conditions within the Assessment Area of offsite works area at Mong Wing Street was established from literature review and supplemented with review of the latest aerial photographs. The evaluation of habitats was further elaborated and presented in Table 8.11 below. Species of conservation importance identified from literature review are summarised in Table 8.4, and their indicative locations are presented in Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/107.

Table 8.11 Ecological Evaluation of Habitats within the Assessment Area for Mong Wing Street Offsite Works Area

Criteria	Developed Area	Watercourse	Plantation	Tall Shrubland
Naturalness	Low, man-made habitat.	Natural with channelised downstream.	Low, man-made planted habitat.	Natural habitat with human disturbance
Size	Moderate (55.86 ha)	Small (0.74 ha, 773 m)	Moderate (23.63 ha)	Small (10.78 ha)
Diversity	Low diversity of vegetation and wildlife.	Low diversity of vegetation and wildlife.	Low to moderate diversity of vegetation and low diversity of wildlife.	Moderate diversity of vegetation and low diversity of wildlife
Rarity	Common habitat in Hong Kong. Two avifauna species (Little Egret, Black Kite) and a bat species (Japanese Pipistrelle) of conservation importance was recorded.	Common habitat in Hong Kong. Two avifauna species of conservation importance (Black-crowned Night Heron, Little Egret) was recorded.	Common habitat in Hong Kong. One flora species of conservation importance (Red Azalea) was recorded.	Common habitat in Hong Kong. One flora species of conservation importance (Pitcher Plant) was recorded.
Re-creatability	High	Moderate re-creatability	Readily re-creatable	Readily re-creatable
Fragmentation	Low	Low	Moderate	Moderate
Ecological linkage	Not structurally and functionally linked with habitat of high ecological value.
Potential value	Low to moderate	Low as stream fauna was scarce.	Low	Low
Nursery / Breeding ground	No record of nursery or breeding ground
Age	N/A	N/A	Young	Young
Abundance / Richness of Wildlife	Low	Low	Low	Low
Ecological value	Low	Low	Low	Low

8.7 Identification of Potential Ecological Impacts

Potential Ecological Impact from Proposed TME Alignment

Construction Phase – Direct Impacts

No Direct Impact on Recognised Sites of Conservation Importance

8.7.1 Given the considerable distance between the Project site and the Tuen Mun Egretry, no direct impact is anticipated on this site of conservation importance.

Direct Loss of Terrestrial Habitats and Associated Wildlife

8.7.2 The Project includes viaduct sections of about 2.4 km which run southwards from TUM Station to a new TMS Station near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier, station structures (i.e. TMS and A16 Stations), associated facilities such as sidings and Emergency Access Point (EAP), and other temporary works sites and works areas for supporting the construction of the Project (e.g. provision of site office, storage materials, temporary traffic management) (Section 2 refers).

8.7.3 The permanent and temporary losses of habitat would include both developed area and modified watercourse (i.e. TMRC) within the Project site (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/106). Under the ecological assessment, the direct permanent loss of habitat (about 2.50 ha) is defined as the footprint area of the two new stations (i.e. TMS and A16 Stations), the railway viaduct, and associated facilities (e.g. EAP). The railway viaduct comprises columns of supporting pier structures, land-based pile caps to be embedded below ground level, and a bridge structure across TMRC (Section 2 refers). Temporary habitat loss (about 21.29 ha) would arise from the temporarily occupied works sites (e.g. on-site construction activities) and works areas (e.g. site office and material storage), which would be reinstated upon the completion of construction. The habitat loss arising from the Project are summarised in Table 8.12 and further discussed below. The evaluation of ecological impacts arising from direct habitat loss are further discussed and elaborated in Table 8.13 – Table 8.14.

Table 8.12 Direct Loss of Terrestrial Habitats within Project Footprint

Habitats	Modified Watercourse (ha)	Developed Area (ha)	Sub-total ⁽¹⁾ (ha)
Permanent Loss (TMS Station, A16 Station, supporting piers and pile cap, and associated facilities)	0.26	2.24	2.50
Temporary Loss (works site, works area)	4.87	16.42	21.29
Total ⁽¹⁾	5.13	18.66	23.79

Note:

(1) Figures are rounded to two decimal places, hence minor discrepancy may occur.

8.7.4 Permanent loss of developed area (2.24 ha) would arise from site formation and the establishment of aboveground structures of the Project alignment, affecting mainly recreational areas and existing road. In particular, TMS Station would be built along the existing Wu King Road, while A16 Station would be built at the existing Tuen Mun Swimming Pool and the nearby Tuen Mun Community Green Station; while an EAP would be located near the south of Tuen Mun Park (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/106). Temporary loss of developed area (16.42 ha) arises from temporary works sites (e.g. including temporary closure and modification at Tuen Mun Park, Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden, Wu Shan Recreation Playground, and other public facilities such as cycle tracks, roads, and footpaths) for on-site construction along the Project alignment; and temporary works areas (e.g. provision of site office and material storage). This includes the bankside vegetation along the east of the proposed alignment and TMRC. Roosting ardeids were only observed at the mature trees in Tuen Mun Park, while no roosting behaviour was observed at the row of bankside vegetation along TMRC. The loss of developed area would not result in loss of trees used by the roosting ardeids. Most of these developed areas were considered of low ecological value, with scarce wildlife, except for the ardeid night roost within Tuen Mun Park which was considered of moderate ecological value. Vegetation was limited to landscape species in this habitat.

8.7.5 Permanent loss of modified watercourse (0.26 ha) is relatively small compared to the overall Project area, which arises from the construction of viaduct structures (e.g. supporting piers and pile caps) along the eastern side of TMRC and across TMRC between Tuen Mun Swimming Pool and Wu Shan Recreation Playground. The water column and channel bed would be lost upon the construction of these viaduct structures. Temporary loss of modified watercourse (4.87 ha) would arise from the construction activities and temporary bridge platforms along the Project alignment. The modified watercourse supported limited vegetation, with some wildlife usage observed (including perching and foraging behaviour of avifauna species of conservation importance such as ardeids).

8.7.6 There would be maintenance works to be conducted at Tuen Mun Park with the ardeid night roost at the north-western corner of the park (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/103). The proposed maintenance works within this area would be limited to diversion of cycle track and pedestrian walkway (e.g. erection of hoarding/signage, painting of road sign) and minor pruning works at the overgrown trees branches that may pose safety issue to the public, or obstruction of construction within the works site and subsequent railway operation. No habitat loss is anticipated within the proposed works site for maintenance works.

Fragmentation of Terrestrial Habitats

8.7.7 The viaduct structure from TUM Station to TMS Station would result in potential fragmentation of TMRC and habitats across TMRC, separating the two sides of TMRC and potentially interrupting wildlife movement. Nonetheless, the viaduct structure would mainly be supported on pier structures, where wildlife movement would still be possible for most part under the viaduct alignment. For example, wildlife (e.g. avifauna and butterflies) were observed to fly underneath the existing viaduct near TUM Station, and above the existing bridge structures across TMRC (e.g. Tin Hau Bridge, road bridge along Hoi Wong Road and Wong Chu Road, etc.). Recent study has also suggested that ardeids were observed to fly over obstructing bridge structure when returning to the night roost (Stanton and Klick, 2018). As such, wildlife within the Assessment Area are anticipated to be acclimatised and are expected to continue their movement across TMRC. No significant loss of wildlife movement corridor is anticipated, with no adverse impact on ecological linkage and function across the Assessment Area. No unacceptable ecological impact is anticipated from the potential habitat fragmentation from the Project.

Direct Loss of Roosting and Foraging Ground

8.7.8 As described in Section 8.5, roosting and pre-roosting behaviour of ardeids was observed in Tuen Mun Park, while roosting behaviour of bats (SNFB and Least Horseshoe Bat) were observed in Tuen Mun Park, Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden, and Wu Shan Recreation Playground. Breeding ardeids were also observed in Tuen Mun Egretry, located outside the Assessment Area. No roosting and breeding behaviour of other fauna species was observed within the Assessment Area.

8.7.9 Direct loss of the SNFB roost may arise from the temporary closure of Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden, and direct loss of ardeid foraging ground will be resulted from the works at TMRC. Both are further discussed below. The pre-roosting, roosting, and breeding grounds of the ardeids were located outside the Project site boundary, hence they are not subject to direct impacts from the Project.

8.7.10 As discussed in Section 8.7.4 and 8.7.6 respectively, there would be loss of developed area and bankside vegetation, and limited maintenance works to be conducted at Tuen Mun Park (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/103). The loss of habitat and vegetation would not encroach into the trees within Tuen Mun Park, hence would not affect the roosting ardeids. The proposed maintenance works would only be limited to necessary pruning works (at overgrown trees branches that may pose safety issue to the public, or obstruction of construction within the works site and subsequent railway operation), as well as diversion of cycle track and pedestrian walkway. Direct impact from maintenance works on the trees utilised by night-roosting ardeids would be minimal. Direct injury to the individuals of night-roosting ardeids would also be avoided as the maintenance works would only be conducted during daytime.

Direct Impact on Species of Conservation Importance

8.7.11 Both modified watercourse and developed area were observed to support fauna species of conservation importance, which include ardeids species of conservation importance foraging and commuting along TMRC, as well as Short-nosed Fruit Bats (SNFB) roosting in Chinese Fan-palm trees at Tuen Mun Park and Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden. Habitat loss from the Project may result in the loss of foraging ground for the ardeid species, and roosting ground for SNFB in Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden.

8.7.12 Along the Project alignment of 2.4 km, 1.6 km of the footprint would overlap with the east of the modified watercourse, TMRC, which was observed to support some foraging ardeids. These ardeid species are very common and widespread in Hong Kong (Table 8.10 refers), utilising a wide range of areas and habitats. Within the Assessment Area, these ardeids have been readily recorded to utilise similar areas in the vicinity (e.g. the channel bank along the west of TMRC, the upstream area of TMRC, and further south at Tuen Mun Typhoon Shelter and Hong Kong Gold Coast). Furthermore, the modified watercourse within the Assessment Area was considered to be of low to moderate ecological value. Considering the small area of direct loss within the TMRC (permanent loss of 0.26 ha due to the pier structures), and the availability of similar habitats in the vicinity during construction and operational phases (e.g. the opposite channel bank on the west of TMRC), no unacceptable ecological impact is anticipated from the loss of ardeid foraging ground.

8.7.13 A temporary works site is proposed at Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden. According to the preliminary tree assessment schedule (TG02 in Appendix 9.1 refers), Chinese Fan-palm at Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden would be retained, subject to the recommendation of the Tree Preservation and Removal Proposal (TPRP) to be prepared in later stage. In the event that Chinese Fan-palm need to be felled, it would potentially result in the loss of SNFB roosts. SNFB is a very common and widely distributed species in Hong Kong, readily roosting under the fronds of the planted Chinese Fan-palm trees. This species has also been recorded roosting in other palm species such as Queen Palm and Royal Palm in Tuen Mun Park (Seeburrun, 2019). Moreover, the rest garden and the vegetation within would be reinstated upon the completion of construction. Considering the abundance of alternative roosting opportunities and the adaptability of this bat species, and with the implementation of mitigation measures to avoid direct injury of this species, the temporary loss of SNFB roosting ground in Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden is not likely to be significant.

Direct Injury / Mortality to Wildlife

8.7.14 The construction activities within the Project site may also result in potential direct injury / mortality of wildlife species. Majority of the recorded wildlife were of high mobility (e.g. birds, butterflies, and bats), which were subject to regular existing disturbance due to the urbanised nature of the Assessment Area and the high level of human activities. These species were anticipated to be adaptable and able to avoid the construction activities. No significant injury and mortality on wildlife would be anticipated from the construction activities of the Project.

8.7.15 While the Project is not anticipated to result in significant loss of SNFB roosting ground, the construction activities may result in the potential injury on the SNFB, which may be roosting during daytime with low activity, thus more susceptible to injury during site formation or other daytime construction activities. Mitigation measures should be implemented to avoid the potential injury of the roosting bats.

Bird Collision

8.7.16 The construction activities for the aboveground structures (e.g. viaduct and stations) may also result in potential injury or mortality of the commuting birds like ardeids, especially with structures that are difficult to see (e.g. cable and wires). As discussed above, the ardeids have demonstrated adaptability and manoeuvrability within the existing urbanised area (e.g. viaduct at TUM Station and bridges such as Tin Hau Bridge and road bridge at Hoi Wong Road). With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures (e.g. using non-transparent or non-glaring materials and providing suitable lighting), no significant ecological impact arising from bird collision is anticipated.

Construction Phase – Indirect Impacts

Disturbance and Obstruction of Flight Line for Roosting and Breeding Ardeids

8.7.17 As described in Section 8.5, ardeids flight lines were observed along TMRC and adjacent developed area. As such, the viaduct structure would potentially obstruct or disrupt the flight line of these ardeids, resulting in potential displacement of flight lines or abandonment of the night roost, thus potentially affecting their foraging success and survival.

8.7.18 The viaduct of TME extends southward from the existing overrun at TUM Station, and continues with viaduct structure level ranging from about 16 to 20 m above local ground. The majority of the viaduct maintains at similar height, while Tuen Mun River Bridge is supported by two pairs of pylons (1.4 m width x 4 m length) of about 32 m high across TMRC, which occupies a total footprint of less than 0.06 ha. The proposed alignment coincides with the flight lines 1 to 3 near Tuen Mun Park area (Zone C, Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/105). The height of the viaduct structure near TUM Station (and near the night roost) is about 20 m above local ground (Section 2 and Appendix 2.1 refers). Within Zone C, the ardeids showed a range of flight heights between 0 to 30 m, with about 22% of the ardeids flying at 15 to 25 m (Appendix 8.4, Table A2 refers). A portion of the ardeids were also observed to fly under existing footbridges along water surface, or perch along TMRC before returning to the night roost. During the construction and operation of the Project, ardeids are anticipated to fly at a greater height or closer to the surface of TMRC, or adopt alternative flight lines to avoid the construction activities and the aboveground structures. A considerable proportion of ardeids fly at a height similar to or greater than the height of the proposed viaduct, as observed in Zone A and Zone B (Appendix 8.4, Table A2 refers). The extra energy expenditure to maintain at a greater height at Zone C is expected to be minor. The viaduct and Tuen Mun River Bridge crosses TMRC at Zone A (near Wu Shan Recreation Playground), where the alignment only coincides with flight line 1. Flight height of ardeids within this zone exhibited a wider range, with 18% of the ardeids flying above 25 m. Alternative flight lines were also utilised (e.g. about 5% ardeids usage at flight line 4 along Tuen Mun Heung Sze Wui Road). The small proportion of ardeids (about 9%) using flight line 1 are anticipated to fly at a greater height or closer to the river surface when approaching the viaduct across TMRC, or adopt adjacent flight lines (e.g. flight lines 2, 3 and 4). Potential obstruction of flight path in Zone A is also expected to be minor.

8.7.19 Moreover, ardeids in the area showed certain level of tolerance and adaptability to the existing urban structures with their high manoeuvrability, flying at different heights, over or near railways structures (e.g. TUM Station and Light Rail), highways (e.g. Hoi Wong Road and Wong Chu Road), and adjacent to tall structures (e.g. high-rise buildings and cargo handling freights) (Section 8.5.20 refers). Recent study has also suggested the effect of road bridge may affect night-roosting ardeids by changing their flight behaviour (e.g. erratic flight or altered flight height), but the ardeids still proceeded to the roosting site, as a re-grouped flock or separated into smaller groups when passing through the obstructing structures (Stanton and Klick, 2018). While the change in flight behaviour may result in increased energy expenditure, the ardeids in the area showed high adaptability, and the potential impact from increased energy expenditure is anticipated to be minor. Given that the relatively open space above TMRC and Tuen Mun Park is maintained, the potential flight line obstruction arising from the proposed aboveground structures on the roosting ardeids is anticipated to be minor.

8.7.20 While breeding Little Egrets were observed in Tuen Mun Egretry, these ardeids were recorded to fly both north and south from the Egretry along TMRC. The egretry was situated about 800 m away from the Project site, and all ardeids were observed flying at a height at 25 m or above when they reach the Assessment Area, and observed to fly over existing railway structures (e.g. TUM Station and Light Rail) (Section 8.5.16 refers). Upon the construction of the aboveground structures, ardeids from the egretry are anticipated to fly over the viaduct structure as per their existing flight behaviour, as their current flight height within the Assessment Area was approximate to or above the proposed viaduct structure. The proposed aboveground structure is not anticipated to result in significant obstruction of flight line for the breeding ardeids from Tuen Mun Egretry.

Disturbance from Daytime Construction Activities

8.7.21 Indirect impact on the adjacent habitats and associated wildlife would arise from the disturbances during construction phase. These disturbances include increase in human activities, construction activities, noise and vibration disturbance from traffic and construction machinery, which could decrease the habitat quality and subsequently discourage and/or displace animal usage in the vicinity.

8.7.22 Outside the Project site, ecological sensitive resources within the Assessment Area include an ardeid night roost, day-roosting Black-crowned Night Heron, and a roost of SNFB in Tuen Mun Park (east of the proposed viaduct alignment). Considering the proximity of the ardeid night roost to the viaduct alignment, the construction activities and disturbance may discourage ardeid usage of the Tuen Mun Park night roost. In particular, the night roost supported up to 300 ardeids during dry season within the survey period, though the erection/construction of concrete cofferdams and temporary platform is preferably to be conducted during dry seasons for minimisation of water quality impact and safety issue arising from the potential flooding at Tuen Mun River during wet season. Construction disturbance to the ardeid night roost in Tuen Mun Park may result in potentially minor to moderate ecological impacts on the community of ardeids in the vicinity, particularly during dry season. The roosting ardeids that are returning to the night roost during sunset may be discouraged from using the area if there are still ongoing construction activities. These ardeids may be forced to use potential alternative night roosts in the vicinity, such as other mature trees (e.g. Ficus spp.) within Tuen Mun Park (e.g. along the artificial pond), or the Tuen Mun Egretry (850 m north of the existing night roost), resulting in potentially higher energy expenditure and lower habitat quality. Mitigation measures should be implemented to avoid and minimise the disturbance impact from the construction activities on the night roost, (in particular the control of construction working hours), further discussed in Section 8.9.4. A summary of construction works/activities within 100m from ardeid night roost and the corresponding mitigation measures for the ardeid night roost is presented in Table 8.17. On the other hand, the day roosts of Black-crowned Night Heron and SFNB were about 150 m and 100 m east of the proposed alignment respectively. Potential ecological impact arising from indirect disturbance is anticipated to minor. Nonetheless, mitigation measures shall also be implemented to further minimise disturbance from daytime construction activities.

8.7.23 Other disturbance impacts may arise from the increase in traffic and human activities along the rest of the proposed viaduct alignment (e.g. along TMRC). Considering the urbanised nature of the area, the existing wildlife are subject to high level of human activities and disturbance. Other than the ardeid night roost, the disturbance arising from the Project is not anticipated to result in significant ecological impacts on the ecological resources in the vicinity.

Disturbance from Night-Time Construction Activities

8.7.24 While all construction activities with Powered Mechanical Equipment (PME) would be performed during daytime, some of the construction activities may need to be conducted during night-time (between 19:00 – 7:00) to avoid potential safety issue and minimise interruption or disruption to existing road and rail traffic (Section 2.3.27 refers). The potential night-time construction activities would include the modification works at the existing overrun section connecting to TUM Station, which is located adjacent to the night roost. The modification works at overrun section comprise various activities, with brief description added to Table 8.17. The increase in human activities and construction activities, noise and vibration, as well as glare and lighting may discourage ardeids from using the night-roost. Should night-time construction activities (without use of PME) occur at the overrun section of TUM Station, mitigation measures would be implemented to minimise the disturbance impact on the night roosting ardeids, including the erection of temporary movable barrier and light control, as well as construction planning to arrange night-time works in wet season as far as practicable.

Impact on Water Quality and Hydrology of Modified Watercourse

8.7.25 The viaduct alignment would be constructed along the eastern bank of the TMRC, which may result in potential water quality and hydrology impacts (e.g. deterioration of water quality, increase in suspended solids and potential contaminants, and potential change in hydrodynamics). Land-based construction activities adjacent to the TMRC may also result in construction site runoff (e.g. runoff and erosion of exposed bare soil and earth) and construction discharge, thus potentially affecting the water quality in the channel. While only limited abundance and diversity of aquatic community fauna was recorded within the TMRC, the watercourse supported ardeid species of conservation importance. These ardeids are highly mobile in nature, and uses a wide range of habitat in the vicinity (e.g. high abundance of ardeids were observed within the typhoon shelter and along the shoreline of Tuen Mun Promenade, and upstream sections of TMRC). Furthermore, considering the small cross-section area of the river channel to be blocked by the pier structures, change of flow regime in TMRC would be insignificant. With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, unacceptable impacts on other water quality are not expected (Section 5 refers). Therefore, adverse ecological impacts due to the potential water quality deterioration during the construction are not anticipated.

Sewage Effluent from Construction Workforce

8.7.26 As discussed in Section 5, no discharge of sewage to the storm water system and marine water will be allowed. Adequate and sufficient portable chemical toilets would be provided in the works areas to handle sewage from construction workforce. Potential ecological impact arising from sewage generation from the Project is not anticipated.

Operational Phase – Direct Impacts

Direct Injury / Mortality to Wildlife and Bird Collision

8.7.27 During the operational phase, electrically powered trains will operate along the proposed viaduct alignment, extending southward from the existing TUM Station towards A16 Station, and ending at TMS Station near Tuen Mun Ferry Pier. Such extension of the railway network would result in increased train movement along the alignment where railway was previously absent, potentially resulting in injury and mortality to wildlife. The presence of transparent or reflective material (e.g. glass panels) or structures that are difficult to see (e.g. cable and wires) may also result in potential bird collision. Nonetheless, existing structures in the vicinity of the area include high-rise buildings, bridges, cargo handling freights with tall structures, highway with heavy traffic, etc. As discussed above, the commuting ardeids have demonstrated manoeuvrability within the existing urbanised area (e.g. flying underneath or over the viaduct at TUM Station and bridges such as Tin Hau Bridge and road bridge at Hoi Wong Road, as well as operating Light Rail trains). Considering the wide range of commuting path currently utilised by ardeids and their adaptability, potential injury and bird collision from the proposed alignment is anticipated to be minor.

Operational Phase – Indirect Impacts

Disturbance to Adjacent Habitats and Associated Wildlife

8.7.28 The starting point of the Project is required to connect with TUM Station, and thus it is infeasible to further setback the alignment from the night roost. The operation of the TME would result in the potential decrease in local vehicles (diverted traffic), but the increase of human activities and railway operation, which may result in increased disturbance (e.g. noise, lighting and glare) on the adjacent habitats and associated fauna. Considering the urbanised nature of the area, the existing wildlife are subject to regular human activities and have showed tolerance to such disturbance (e.g. ardeids observed to commute over the existing TUM Station and over Light Rail, and foraging on the existing supporting piers and under the TUM Station, while bats roosted in Tuen Mun Park and Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden which are close to the TUM Station with regular human usage observed throughout the day). Considering the generally high mobility and adaptability of wildlife recorded within the Assessment Area, wildlife in the area is anticipated to acclimatise to the additional disturbance during operational phase. No significant ecological impact is anticipated to arise from the operation of the Project.

8.7.29 As discussed in Section 8.7.18, commuting ardeids are anticipated show change in flight behaviour (e.g. flight line and height), but are expected to proceed to the night roost. Considering the high manoeuvrability and adaptability of the ardeids, adverse ecological impacts on the flight path of commuting ardeids are not anticipated from the operation of the Project. For the roosting ardeids within Tuen Mun Park, they may be subject to indirect impacts (e.g. noise, glare, and visual disturbance) from the adjacent railway operation (particular at night). The night roost at Tuen Mun Park, which adjoins the pedestrian and cycle track, is currently subject to high level of existing human disturbance during both day and night time, such as park users, traffic noise, and residential activities nearby. Ardeids in Hong Kong has also exhibited tolerance towards noise disturbance from urban structures, such as a new egretry that had been established at Kam Po Road, sitting directly adjacent to the existing viaduct structure of West Rail Line, northwest of Kam Sheung Road Station (Anon, 2021b), suggesting adaptability to some disturbance from urban infrastructures such as rail traffic. The noise disturbance from the railway operation is anticipated to arise in minor ecological impact on the night roosting ardeids. The operation of railway may also result in potential disturbance from light and noise during train passby, which may discourage ardeids from roosting at the night roost. The current Tuen Mun Park is subject to high level of light disturbance from existing human activities and highly urbanised structures (e.g. human activities were notable within the park at night, while high intensity of light emission was observed from the existing TUM Station). Other nearby mature trees within the Tuen Mun Park (e.g. various Ficus tree Ficus spp. along the artificial pond) may potentially be used as alternative night roosts. In the case without mitigation measures, minor to moderate ecological impact may arise from the visual disturbance on the night roost.

Obstruction of Ardeid Flight Line

8.7.30 The potential obstruction of ardeid flight line during operational phase is anticipated to be similar to the construction phase, as described in Section 8.7.17 – 8.7.20. While the viaduct may potentially obstruct or disrupt the flight lines, alternative flight lines were observed in the vicinity (along Tuen Mun Heung Sze Wui Road). Ardeids have also showed tolerance and adaptability to the existing urban structures. Given that the relatively open space above TMRC and Tuen Mun Park is maintained, the potential flight line obstruction arising from the proposed viaduct alignment on the roosting ardeids is anticipated to be minor.

Shading Effect from Viaduct

8.7.31 During operational phase, the presence of viaduct structure would result in shading effect on the habitats underneath, resulting in potential ecological impacts such as hindered growth of vegetation. However, considering the north-south orientation of the alignment, the shading effect is minimised with regards to the east-west sun path. Habitats underneath the alignment is anticipated to receive some illumination during different time of the day. Moreover, developed area underneath the alignment mainly supported landscape vegetation, while terrestrial and aquatic vegetation are scarce underneath modified watercourse. No significant ecological impact is anticipated to arise from the shading effect arising from the viaduct structure.

Potential Ecological Impact from Offsite Works Area at Mong Wing Street

Construction Phase – Direct Impacts

8.7.32 The offsite works area is located at an urbanised and disturbed area, currently used as a construction site office. No natural habitats and species of conservation importance was recorded within its footprint. The proposed offsite temporary works is not anticipated to arise in the any direct impacts on recognised sites of conservation importance and ecological resources.

Construction Phase – Indirect Impacts

8.7.33 As described in Section 8.3.4, the proposed usage at the temporary works area includes site office, material storage for pre-cast unit (non-dusty material) and temporary tree nursery, while no excavation works, earthworks and stockpiling of dusty materials would be conducted. Considering the low ecological values of nearby habitats, and its existing usage as construction site office, the proposed temporary works in not anticipated to arise in any additional ecological impacts.

Operational Phase

8.7.34 The offsite works area at Mong Wing Street would not be used during the operation phase of the Project. No ecological impact is anticipated during the operation of the proposed Project.

8.8 Evaluation of Potential Ecological Impacts

8.8.1 Potential ecological impacts on the identified habitats within the Assessment Area of TME Alignment associated with the construction and operation of the Project have been evaluated in accordance with the Annex 8 of the EIAO-TM, as presented in Table 8.13 – Table 8.14, while the ecological impacts on the identified habitats within the Assessment Area of offsite works area have been evaluated in Table 8.15.

Table 8.13 Evaluation of Potential Ecological Impacts to Developed Area and Modified Watercourse (Assessment Area of TME Alignment)

Criteria	Developed Area	Modified Watercourse
Habitat Quality	Moderate (for night roosting area) Low in other areas	Low to moderate
Species / Ecological Resources	Low to moderate diversity and abundance of wildlife, including eight avifauna species (i.e. six ardeid species, Black Kite, and Ashy Drongo), one butterfly (Small Cabbage White) and five bat species of conservation importance	Very low to low diversity and abundance of wildlife recorded, including seven avifauna species of conservation importance (i.e. six ardeid species and Collared Crow)
Size / Abundance	2.24 ha would be permanently affected 16.42 ha would be temporarily affected	0.26 ha would be permanently affected 4.87 ha would be temporarily affected
Duration	Direct Impact Direct impact from construction and operational phases at the footprint of TME alignment (e.g. habitat loss, potential injury and mortality) would be permanent. Direct impact from construction phase at temporary works sites and works areas (e.g. habitat loss) would be temporary. Indirect Impact Indirect impacts from construction phase (e.g. disturbance and increased human activities) would be temporary, lasting until the completion of construction. Indirect impacts from operational phase (e.g. obstruction, shading, and disturbance from viaduct structure, railway operation, and increased human activities) would be permanent.	Direct Impact Direct impact from construction and operational phases at the footprint of TME alignment (e.g. habitat fragmentation, habitat loss, potential injury and mortality) would be permanent. Direct impact from construction phase at temporary works sites and works areas (e.g. habitat loss) would be temporary. Indirect Impact Indirect impacts from construction phase (e.g. disturbance and increased human activities) would be temporary, lasting until the completion of construction. Indirect impacts from operational phase (e.g. obstruction, shading, and disturbance from viaduct structure, railway operation, and increased human activities) would be permanent.
Reversibility	Direct Impact Direct impact from construction and operation phases at the footprint of TME alignment would be irreversible. Direct impact at temporary works sites and works areas at construction phase would be reversible. Indirect Impact Indirect impacts arising from construction phase would be reversible, while indirect impacts from operational phase would be irreversible.	Direct Impact Direct impact from construction and operation phases at the footprint of TME alignment would be irreversible. Direct impact at temporary works sites and works areas at construction phase would be reversible. Indirect Impact Indirect impacts arising from construction phase would be reversible, while indirect impacts from operational phase would be irreversible.
Magnitude	Moderate	Low to moderate
Overall Impact Significance	Minor to Moderate within Tuen Mun Park where night roosting ardeids are present Minor in other developed area	Minor

Table 8.14 Evaluation of Potential Ecological Impacts to Mixed Woodland, Village/Orchard and Plantation (Assessment Area of TME Alignment)

Criteria	Mixed Woodland	Village / Orchard	Plantation
Habitat Quality	Low to moderate	Low	Low
Species / Ecological Resources	Low to moderate diversity and abundance of wildlife, including one flora species (Luofushan Joint-fir) and three avifauna species of conservation importance (Crested Goshawk, Greater Coucal, and Ashy Drongo)	Low diversity and low abundance of wildlife recorded No species of conservation importance was recorded	Very low diversity and abundance of wildlife recorded No species of conservation importance was recorded
Size / Abundance	Habitat would not be directly affected
Duration	Indirect impacts (e.g. disturbance and increased human activities) from construction phase would be temporary, lasting until the completion of construction. Indirect impacts (e.g. disturbance and increased human activities) from operational phase would be permanent, remaining throughout the operation period of TME.
Reversibility	Indirect impacts arising from construction phase would be reversible, while indirect impacts from operational phase would be irreversible.
Magnitude	Low	Very low	Very low
Overall Impact Significance	Minor	Minor	Minor

Table 8.15 Evaluation of Potential Ecological Impacts to Identified Habitats (Assessment Area of Offsite Works Area)

Criteria	Developed Area	Watercourse	Plantation	Tall Shrubland
Habitat Quality	Low	Low	Low	Low
Species / Ecological Resources	Low diversity and richness of vegetation and wildlife. Two avifauna species (Little Egret, Black Kite) and a bat species (Japanese Pipistrelle) of conservation importance was recorded.	Low diversity and richness of vegetation and wildlife. Two avifauna species of conservation importance (Black-crowned Night Heron, Little Egret) was recorded.	Low to moderate diversity of vegetation and low richness of wildlife. One flora species of conservation importance (Red Azalea) was recorded.	Moderate diversity of vegetation and low richness of wildlife. One flora species of conservation importance (Pitcher Plant) was recorded.
Size / Abundance	1.10 ha would be temporarily affected	Habitat would not be directly affected
Duration	Direct impact (temporary loss) and indirect impact (disturbance and increased human activities) from construction phase would be temporary	Indirect impacts (e.g. disturbance and increased human activities) from construction phase would be temporary, lasting until the completion of construction.
Reversibility	Direct impact (temporary loss) and indirect impact (disturbance and increased human activities) would be reversible	Indirect impacts arising from construction phase would be reversible.
Magnitude	Low	Very low	Very low	Very low
Overall Impact Significance	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant	Insignificant

8.9 Mitigation of Adverse Environmental Impacts

8.9.1 According to the Annex 16 of EIAO-TM and EIAO Guidance Note. 3/2010, ecological impacts on important habitats and the associated wildlife caused by the proposed Project should be mitigated by, in order of priority, avoidance, minimisation, and compensation approaches to the maximum practical extent.

8.9.2 As described in Section 8.7 and Table 8.13, the Project may result in potential ecological impacts on the night roosting ardeids in Tuen Mun Park (e.g. indirect disturbance from construction activities), potential obstruction of flight line from the viaduct alignment, and potential injury of SNFB. Appropriate mitigation measures are discussed below in view of these affected ecological resources.

Avoidance

Impacts on the Ardeid Night Roost

8.9.3 The ardeid night roost occurs adjacent to the proposed alignment, which would be subject to potential direct loss from tree pruning as part of maintenance works (Section 8.7.9 refers), and indirect disturbances during both construction and operational phases (Section 8.7.21 refers), arising in potential minor to moderate ecological impacts. To avoid direct impacts, tree felling at the Tuen Mun Park will be avoided, while maintenance works would only be limited to necessary pruning works, at overgrown trees branches that may pose safety issue to the public, or obstruction of construction within the works site and subsequent of railway operation. In addition, pruning of trees of the ardeids night roost should only be conducted when no ardeids are perching on the trees. To minimise other indirect impacts on the roosting ardeids as well as other ecological resources, mitigation and minimisation measures should also be considered, as further discussed below.

Minimisation

Establishment of Buffer Zone and Control of Working Hours

8.9.4 As described in Section 8.5, the ardeids were observed to start returning to the night roost approximately 30 minutes before sunset (Table 8.7 refers). During the construction phase, the timing of the noisy construction activities should be arranged to avoid impact on the night roosting ardeids as far as possible. As such, no noisy construction activities using the power mechanical equipment (PME) should be conducted within 100 m from the night roosting site after 30 minutes before sunset, until the ardeids leave the roosting location of the following day (i.e. around 30 minutes after sunrise), in order to minimise the potential disturbance to night-roosting ardeids (refer to Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/103). The time for the control of noisy construction activities will commence 30 minutes before sunset, as presented in Table 8.16 with reference made to the Hong Kong Observatory. As a good practice, the contractor should plan the construction works properly for completion of the daily noisy construction works within the buffer zone 30 minutes before sunset, especially for concreting works of bored piles which should be carried out continuously to avoid the cold joint. The concreting works beyond the sunset time should therefore be considered as contingency arrangement due to the uncontrollable issues (i.e. traffic jam, delay of concrete supply, breakdown of plant / equipment, etc). In the event of occurrence of contingency arrangement, a notice with valid justification documents and contingency arrangement details should be prepared and recorded in the EM&A reports. This notice should also record any change in the ardeid night roost (e.g. displacement or abandonment) observed during contingency arrangement and any mitigation measures implemented and/or to be implemented. A reporting mechanism should be developed with details stated in Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) Manual. A monthly monitoring and observation on condition of night roost should be carried out during the construction phase to monitor the impact on the night roost.

Table 8.16 Seasonal Sunset Time During Survey

Months	Reference Time of Sunset ⁽¹⁾	Control of Noisy Construction Activities ⁽²⁾
Dec – Feb	17:38 – 18:27	17:08 – 07:30 (on the following day)
Mar – May	18:27 – 19:03	17:57 – 07:30 (on the following day)
Jun – Aug	18:41 – 19:11	18:11 – 07:30 (on the following day)
Sep – Nov	17:38 – 18:40	17:08 – 07:30 (on the following day)

Notes:

(1) Reference was made to the sunset time in year 2021.

(2) Noisy construction activities should be ceased before the proposed time, except for contingent arrangement of concreting works due to uncontrollable issues. Such occurrence should be notified by the Contractor to Engineer/Engineer’s Representative, Environmental Team Leader and Independent Environmental Checker on the same day of the occurrence.

8.9.5 As described in Section 8.7.24, some night-time activities are necessary to avoid potential safety issue and minimise interruption or disruption to existing road and rail traffic. In case where these activities occur in close proximity of the night roost, careful arrangement of work programme should be adopted as far as practicable to avoid disturbances from construction activities near the night-roost (such as noise, light and other human disturbance), especially during dry season (when ardeids are at relatively higher abundance). In addition, mitigation measures such as movable noise enclosures and movable barriers should be adopted to mitigate the noise and light from the night-time construction activities and to minimise disturbance to the night roosting ardeids, where necessary. Proper construction planning would also be implemented to arrange night-time activities in wet season as far as practicable. Where possible, these activities will also be scheduled on non-consecutive days to avoid continuous disturbance on the night roost.

Table 8.17 Summary of Construction Works/Activities within 100m from Ardeid Night Roost and the Associated Mitigation Measures for the Ardeid Night Roost

Work Element		Description and Limitation of Activities	Potential Ecological Implication	Proposed Mitigation Measures
TUM Overrun Modification	Modification works that does not require the use of PME (i.e. manual works, such as relocation of buffer stops)	· Due to interfacing with existing rail traffic, works may be conducted during night-time. · Duration of night-time works, if required, would be limited to not more than 2 nights per week.	· Modification works located within 100m buffer zone of night roost. · Potential disturbance from night-time activities on night-roosting ardeids.	· Night-time activities should be avoided as far as practicable. · Daytime construction activities within buffer zone should follow control of working hours (refer to Table 8.16). · Should night-time works be unavoidable, the following measures would be adopted: movable barrier; light control; and proper construction planning to arrange works in wet season as far as practicable.
TUM Overrun Modification	Noisy modification works that require the use of PME (e.g. demolition of end wall, provision of overhead line and modification of trackform and drainage channel)	· Works that involve PME would be scheduled during daytime.	· Modification works located within 100m buffer zone of night roost. · With the PME usage scheduled to daytime, potential disturbance to ardeids would be minimised.	· Night-time activities should be avoided. · Daytime construction activities within buffer zone should follow control of working hours (refer to Table 8.16).
Provision of Temporary Steel Platform		· Establishment of platforms to be conducted during dry season.	· Temporary loss of modified watercourse.	· Construction activities should be conducted during daytime. · Any activities within buffer zone should follow control of working hours (refer to Table 8.16).
Construction of Viaduct and Concreting Works		· Adoption of DfMA for the construction of the piers and viaduct structures · Concreting works would normally be limited to daytime. · Contingent arrangement may arise under uncontrollable issues (e.g. traffic jam, delay of concrete supply, equipment breakdown, etc.), which may result in concreting works beyond sunset.	· Contingent arrangement beyond sunset may potentially impacting night roosting ardeids. · Such contingent arrangement is of emergency nature, not anticipated to occur regularly. · Potential ecological impact would be minor.	· Any activities within buffer zone should follow control of working hours (refer to Table 8.16). · Concreting works should be limited to daytime under normal circumstances. · In the event of a contingency event, a notice with justification and arrangement details should be prepared and recorded in the EM&A reports. Any observed change in the ardeid night roost and mitigation measures implemented and/or to be implemented should also be documented.
Maintenance Works at Tuen Mun Park		· Maintenance works would be limited to diversion of cycle track and pedestrian walkway and pruning works. · Pruning would only be conducted where necessary, at trees that may obstruct construction, or affect safe operation of railway.	· While the proposed works site for maintenance works encroaches within the ardeid night roost, no adverse ecological impact is anticipated due to the nature of the maintenance works.	· When pruning of trees of the ardeids night roost is deemed necessary, it should only be conducted when no ardeids are perching on the trees.

Pre-Construction Bat Survey

8.9.6 In the event that Chinese Fan-palm need to be felled, prior to the commencement of temporary works within Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden, pre-construction bat survey should be conducted to verify that no SNFB individuals are roosting within the Chinese Fan-palm trees. These roosting bats are relatively inactive during daytime, thus more susceptible to injury during tree-felling. Where roosting SNFB were observed, felling of the Chinese Fan-palm trees should be suspended until the SNFB has emerged (e.g. after sunset). It is recommended to conduct tree-felling works during suitable weather conditions (e.g. fine, non-rainy evenings) during which the bats would be relatively active and more likely to emerge. If there are any injured bats found within the works area at Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden, AFCD should be informed and the bats should be taken into care immediately. Pruning the fronds of the Chinese Fan-palm can also be considered during night-time (when SNFB has emerged from the roost) as an exclusion measure to discourage their return to the tree and avoid subsequent injury of bats. As SNFB are relatively active throughout the year, no seasonal pattern was observed.

Avoidance of Bird Collision

8.9.7 Considering the commuting activity of birds in the vicinity, the potential bird collision should be avoided by using non-transparent panels as the noise enclosure, as well as adopting non-glaring tinted materials, or superimposing dark patterns at the majority of facade glazing along barriers and station structures, as per Guidelines on Design of Noise Barriers (EPD & HyD, 2003) and Practice Notes No. BSTR/PN/003 (Revision E) Noise Barriers with Transparent Panels (HyD, 2020), to avoid and minimise bird mortality from collision.

8.9.8 The bridge structure across the TMRC should also be well-illuminated to increase visibility for facilitating bird flight above or under the bridge and avoiding potential injury from collision.

Reinstatement of Areas of Temporary Loss

8.9.9 Temporary works sites and works areas would be reinstated and restored (e.g. at Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden and Wu Shan Recreation Playground) by reinstatement of landscape area and compensatory tree planting. Shade tolerant plants would also be planted at the shaded area under the viaduct. Further information regarding the landscape planting are provided in Section 9. Reprovision of Chinese Fan-palm trees during the reinstatement could also provide roosting opportunities for SNFB.

Minimisation of Disturbances

8.9.10 Despite most of the recorded fauna within the Assessment Area were of high mobility, a bat roost of SNFB were recorded within the temporary works site, while an ardeid night roost was observed adjacent to the proposed alignment, and day-roosting Black-crowned Night Herons were observed within Tuen Mun Park. Mitigation measures should be implemented to minimise the disturbance impacts (e.g. noise, glare and dust) to the surrounding habitats and their associated wildlife arising from the construction activities, including but not limited to the following:

· Noise mitigation measures by effective placing of site hoarding, temporary noise barriers and material stockpiles where practicable as screening, shut down of machines and plants that are in intermittent use, and the use of quality PME to limit noise emissions at source;

· Glare reduction measures such as restriction of construction hours, hoarding provision, night-time lighting control and avoidance of any directional lightings to the adjoining habitats and roosts to minimise the impact to nearby nocturnal fauna especially avifauna and bat; and

· Dust suppression measures (such as regular spraying of haul roads, proper storage of construction materials, and environmental control measures as stipulated in the Air Pollution Ordinance (Construction Dust) Regulation) to avoid and minimise emission and dispersal dust, which would cover vegetation and potentially discourage usage of nearby wildlife.

Control of Glare / Lighting

8.9.11 The overall reduction of glare during both construction and operational phases should also be considered. A balance between lighting for safety, and avoiding excessive lighting can be achieved through the use of directional lighting to avoid light spill into sensitive areas (e.g. the ardeid night roost), and control timing of lighting periods, particularly for the works site(s) located in proximity to the ardeid night roost in Tuen Mun Park, and during peak roosting season of ardeid (e.g. dry season), hence minimising the potential indirect impact on the community of the night-roosting ardeids.

8.9.12 As described in Section 8.7.29, minor to moderate ecological impact may arise from the unmitigated disturbance on the ardeid night roost in Tuen Mun Park. To minimize the potential disturbance from railway operation during night-time period, provision of panel at the viaduct section adjoining to the ardeid night roost has been considered. As such, subject to detailed design stage, an extent of about 85m long (starting from the southern end of existing overrun structure) and 1m high vertical non-transparent panels on top of parapet of viaduct would be established along the eastern side of the viaduct (Figure No. C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/108 refers) which is adjacent to the ardeid night roost. The provision of this vertical panel on top of the parapet would be able to reach the height of the operating railway train windows, thus providing a shielding effect. With the inclusion of this vertical non-transparent panel, the potential disturbance (e.g. noise and glare / visual disturbance) from the railway operation on the adjacent ardeid night roost would be reduced and minimised.

Good Site Practices

8.9.13 Good site practices should be strictly followed to avoid adverse impacts arising from the construction activities. Recommendations for good site practices during the construction phase include:

· Nomination of approved personnel, such as a site manager, to be responsible for implementation of good site practices, arrangements for waste collection and effective disposal to an appropriate facility;

· Training of site personnel in site cleanliness, concepts of waste reduction, reuse and recycling, proper waste management and chemical waste handling procedures;

· Provision of sufficient waste reception/ disposal points, and regular collection of waste;

· Adoption of appropriate measures to minimise windblown litter and dust during transportation of waste by either covering trucks or by transporting wastes in enclosed containers;

· Provision of regular cleaning and maintenance programme for drainage systems, sumps and oil interceptors;

· Adoption of a recording system for the amount of wastes generated, recycled and disposed (including the disposal sites); and

· Preparation of Waste Management Plan (WMP), as part of the Environmental Management Plan (EMP).

Ecological Enhancement Features

Consideration of Ardeid Perching and Foraging Structures

8.9.14 Incorporation of ardeid perching and foraging structures can be considered along the proposed alignment to further enhance and encourage ardeid usage upon the completion of construction. For instance, subject to detailed design, ledges can be added to the pier structure, where existing ardeids have been observed to perch on. These ledges can also be considered at a level closer to the water surface, which may further benefit their foraging opportunity.

Overall Greening

8.9.15 Further enhancement can be considered by incorporating vegetation / promoting landscape tree planting on the promenade along the TMRC, thus enhancing the overall greening, encouraging usage of ardeids along the riverbank upon completion of construction (e.g. provide shading from the vegetation, and provide perching opportunities) to enhance the overall ecological opportunities of the TMRC and its vicinity, considering the existing ardeid usage.

8.10 Cumulative Ecological Impacts

8.10.1 The construction of the Project is anticipated to commence tentatively in 2023 for completion in 2030. A full list of concurrent projects is detailed in Table 2.6. Majority of the committed and planned concurrent projects in the vicinity of the Project are located within highly urbanised area, where ecological resources are limited. No adverse ecological impact was anticipated on the loss of developed area habitat arising from the projects. As such, no major cumulative ecological impacts are anticipated from the concurrent projects in the vicinity.

8.10.2 Other potential ecological impact from the Project includes the potential obstruction of flight line from the proposed alignment across TMRC. The concurrent project (“Planned Property Development at Area 16, Tuen Mun”) may result in the cumulative obstruction of ardeids flight line. The proposed alignment and the “Planned Property Development at Area 16” both coincides with the flight lines 1 to 3, resulting in potential obstruction to a similar proportion of commuting ardeids in the area. As such, the extent of ecological impact would be similar. As described in Section 8.7.18, new urban structures may result in ardeids flying in greater heights or adopt alternative flight lines, while the proposed alignment may result in minor to moderate ecological impact from the potential flight line obstruction. With the “Planned Property Development at Area 16”, building structures would be established on top of the A16 Station. Considering the height of property development, ardeids are not anticipated to fly above the property structures. It is expected that ardeids would utilise other flight lines to avoid the aboveground structures atop A16 Station, resulting in increase in energy expenditure. As explained in Section 8.7.19, given that the relatively open space above TMRC and Tuen Mun Park is maintained, the potential flight line obstruction arising from the proposed aboveground structures on the roosting ardeids is anticipated to be minor.

8.11 Evaluation of Residual Ecological Impacts

8.11.1 With the implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures (e.g. avoidance of direct impact on species of conservation importance, minimisation of disturbance impact, etc), no unacceptable residual ecological impact is anticipated from the construction and operation of the Project.

8.12 Environmental Monitoring and Audit

8.12.1 With the implementation of mitigation measures proposed in Section 8.9, potential impact on night roosting ardeids would be minimised. An EM&A programme would be conducted to ensure the proper implementation of the aforementioned mitigation measures.

8.12.2 For the night roosting ardeids in Tuen Mun Park, monthly monitoring of the ardeid night roost will be conducted during the course of construction works within 100m of the night roost, and during the operational phase, starting from the commencement of operation and cover at least six months period, or until the end of first entire dry season, whichever is later. Criteria to be monitored include the status, location and extent of the ardeid night roost, the condition of trees used as the night roost, the species, abundance and the returning time of the roosting ardeids , as well as their flight height and flight line. Details of the EM&A requirements should refer to the stand-alone EM&A Manual.

8.13 Conclusion

8.13.1 Ecological impact assessment for the Project was conducted following the EIA Study Brief No. ESB-332/2020 and the guidelines of the EIAO-TM Annexes 8 and 16. Terrestrial habitats identified within the Assessment Area include developed area, modified watercourse, mixed woodland, village / orchard, and plantation. Most of these identified habitats are man-made in nature, and were mostly considered to be of low ecological value, except for the mixed woodland and modified watercourse which were considered to be of low to moderate ecological value, and the developed area in Tuen Mun Park which supported ardeid night roost which was considered of moderate ecological value. The majority of the Assessment Area generally comprise highly urbanised areas, subject to heavy human disturbances. Ecological resources include bat roosts for Short-nosed Fruit Bats, foraging and roosting ardeids along and in close proximity of the TMRC, as well as Tuen Mun Egretry, which is outside the Assessment Area (approximately 800 m northeast of the Project site).

8.13.2 Direct impacts arising from the Project mainly include the loss of man-made habitats (modified watercourse and developed area), which is anticipated to be of minor impacts considering the ecological values of these habitats. Aside from habitat loss, potentially minor to moderate ecological impact on the night roosting ardeids in Tuen Mun Park may arise from the indirect disturbance from constriction activities, and potential flight line obstruction; while minor ecological impacts may arise from the potential injury of the roosting SNFB within Pui To Road (South) Rest Garden.

8.13.3 Mitigation measures proposed under the Project include the careful arrangement of work programme to avoid noisy construction activities near the night-roost during dry season (when ardeids are at relatively higher abundance), scheduling of working hours to control and avoid noisy construction activities in close proximity to the night roost after the peak time return of ardeids to night roost, avoidance of direct injury of the roosting bats (by implementing pre-construction bat survey on the Chinese Fan-palm prior to the commencement of work), as well as provision of panel at the viaduct section adjoining to the ardeid night roost for minimisation of potential disturbance during operational phase. With the implementation of the above mitigation measures, no unacceptable ecological impacts are anticipated to arise from the construction and operation of the Project.

8.14 References

Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) (2020). Hong Kong Biodiversity Newsletter Issue No. 26 (December 2020).

Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) (2021). Hong Kong Biodiversity Database. Available at https://www.afcd.gov.hk/English/conservation/hkbiodiversity/database/search.php (Accessed in 6 June 2021).

Anon. (2017). Summer 2017 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong Kong with particular reference to the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site. Report by The Hong Kong Bird Watching Society to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.

Anon. (2018). Summer 2018 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong Kong with particular reference to the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site. Report by The Hong Kong Bird Watching Society to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.

Anon. (2020). Summer 2019 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong Kong with particular reference to the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site. Report by The Hong Kong Bird Watching Society to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.

Anon. (2021a). Summer 2020 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong Kong with particular reference to the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site. Report by The Hong Kong Bird Watching Society to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.

Anon. (2021b). Summer 2021 Report: Egretry Counts in Hong Kong with particular reference to the Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site. Report by The Hong Kong Bird Watching Society to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government.

Carey, G. J., Chalmers, M. L., Diskin, D. A., Kennerley, P. R., Leader, P. J., Leven, M. R., Lewthwaite, R. W., Melville, D. S., Turnbull, M. and Young, L. (2001). The Avifauna of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society. Hong Kong.

Chan, S. K. F., Cheung, K. S., Ho, C. Y., Lam, F. N., Tang, W. S., Lau, M. W. N. and Bogadek, A. (2005). A Field Guide to the Amphibians of Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Friends of the Country Parks and Cosmos Books Ltd.

Chan, S.M. and Shek, C.T. (2006). Survey on the Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus sphinx) in the Urban Areas of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Biodiversity, 11: 8-10.

Corlett, R., Xing, F., Ng, S. C., Chau, L., Wong, L. (2000). Hong Kong Vascular Plants: Distribution and Status. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society. Hong Kong.

Fellowes, J. R., Lau, M. W. N., Dudgeon, D., Reels, G.T., Ades, G. W. J., Carey, G. J., Chan, B. P. L., Kendrick, R. C., Lee, K. S., Leven, M. R., Wilson, K. D. P. and Yu, Y. T. (2002). Wild animals to watch: Terrestrial and freshwater fauna of conservation concern in Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society No. 25, 123-160.

Fu, L. and Chin, C. (1992). China Plant Red Data Book - Rare and Endangered Plants. Science Press, Beijing.

Reels, G.T. (2019). An Annotated Check List of Hong Kong Dragonflies and Assessment of Their Local Conservation Significance. Journal of the International Dragonfly Fund.

Highways Department (HyD) (2009). Tuen Mun – Chek Lap Kok Link – EIA Report. Prepared by Maunsell Consultants Asia Ltd. for Highways Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Highways Department (HyD) (2008). Traffic Improvements to Tuen Mun Road Town Centre Section – EIA Report. Prepared by Maunsell Consultants Asia Ltd. for Highways Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Highways Department (HyD) (2007). Widening of Tuen Mun Road at Tsing Tin Interchange – EIA Report. Prepared by Maunsell Consultants Asia Ltd. for Highways Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hong Kong Herbarium (2018). Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong. Available at: https://www.herbarium.gov.hk/PublicationsText.aspx?BookNameId=1&SectionId=3 (Accessed November 2019).

Hong Kong Herbarium (2012). Check List of Hong Kong Plants. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hong Kong Herbarium and South China Botanical Garden (2007). Flora of Hong Kong. Volume 1. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hong Kong Herbarium and South China Botanical Garden (2008). Flora of Hong Kong. Volume 2. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hong Kong Herbarium and South China Botanical Garden (2009). Flora of Hong Kong. Volume 3. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hong Kong Herbarium and South China Botanical Garden (2011). Flora of Hong Kong. Volume 4. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Hu, Q. M., Wu, T. L., Xia, N. H., Xing F. W., Lai, C. C. P., Yip, K. W. (2003). Rare and Precious Plants of Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) (2021). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2021.1. Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org (Accessed 14 June 2021).

Jiang et al. (2016). Red List of China’s Vertebrates. Biodiversity Science. 24. 500–551.

Karsen, S. J., Lau, M. W. N. and Bogadek, A. (1998). Hong Kong Amphibians and Reptiles. Urban Council, Hong Kong.

Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation (KCRC) (1998). West Rail – West Kowloon to Tuen Mun Centre – Final Assessment Report. Prepared by ERM-Hong Kong. Ltd. For Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation.

Lee, L. F., Lam, K. S., Ng, K. Y., Chan, K. T. and Young, L. C. (2004). Field Guide to the Freshwater Fish of Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Cosmos Books Ltd.

Lee, W. H., Wong, E. Y. H., Chow, G. K. L., and Lai, P. C. C. (2007). Review of Egretries in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Biodiversity 14: 1-6.

Lo, Y. F. and Hui, W. L. (2010). Hong Kong Butterflies (Third Edition). Hong Kong: Cosmos Books Ltd.

Qin et al. (2017). Threatened Species List of China's Higher Plants. Biodiversity Science 25(7):696-747.

Seeburrun, G. (2019). Habitat Suitability of Hong Kong’s Urban Parks for Short-nosed Fruit Bats Cynopterus sphinx. MSc thesis, The University of Hong Kong.

Shek, C. T. (2006). A Field Guide to the Terrestrial Mammals of Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Hong Kong.

Shek, C. T. and Chan, C. S. M. (2006). Mist net surveys of bats with three new bat species for Hong Kong. Hong Kong Biodiversity 11: 1-9.

Siu, L. P. G. (2000). Orchidaceae of Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society, 23:137-148.

Stanton, D. J., and Klick, B. (2018). Flight modifications as a Response to Traffic by Night-roosting Egrets Crossing a Road Bridge in Hong Kong. Journal of Heron Biology and Conservation, 3:4-14.

Tam, T. W., Leung, K. K., Kwan, B. S. P., Wu, K. K. Y., Tang, S. S. H., So, I. W. Y., Cheng, J. C. Y., Yuen, E. F. M., Tsang, Y. M. and Hui, W. L. (2011). The Dragonflies of Hong Kong. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Friends of Country Park and Cosmos Books Ltd. Hong Kong.

Territory Development Department (TDD, 1999). Foothills Bypass, Tuen Mun Road/Wong Chu Road Interchange and Other Road Junction Improvement Works – EIA Report. Prepared by Scott Wilson Kirkpatrick for Territory Development Department, Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Viney, C., Phillipps, K. and Lam, C. Y. (2005). The Birds of Hong Kong and South China. 8th edition. Information Services Department, Hong Kong.

Wang et al. (1998). China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals. Mammalia. First Edition. Beijing: Science Press.

Williams G.A. (2004). Hong Kong Field Guides: Rocky Shores. The University of Hong Kong

Wu, D. L. and Hu, C. X. (1988). Illustrations of Rare and Endangered Plants in Guangdong Province. China Environmental Science Press, Beijing. 46pp. (In Chinese only).

Wu, S. H. and Lee, T. C. W. (2000). Pteridophytes of Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society, 23:5-20.

Xing, F. W., Ng, S. C. and Chau, L. K. C. (2000). Gymnosperms and angiosperms of Hong Kong. Memoirs of the Hong Kong Natural History Society, 23: 21-136.

Yue, P. Q. et al. (1998). China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals. Pisces. First Edition. Beijing: Science Press.

Zheng, G. M. and Wang, Q. S. (1998). China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals: Aves. First Edition. Beijing: Science Press

C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/101	Assessment Area for Terrestrial Ecology and Site of Conservation Importance
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/102	Habitat Map and Locations of Species of Conservation Importance
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/103	Location of Ardeid Roosting Areas
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/104	Representative Flight Line of Ardeids from Tuen Mun Egretry
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/105	Representative Flight Lines of Night Roosting Ardeids
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/106	Permanent and Temporary Loss of Habitats within the Project Footprint
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/107	Key Ecological Resources within the Assessment Area for Mong Wing Street Offsite Works Area
C1502/C/TME/ACM/M56/108	Location of Proposed Panel for Ardeid Night Roost

8 ECOLOGY (TERRESTRIAL)

8.1.1 This section presents the baseline ecological profile within the Assessment Area, and the assessment results of the potential ecological impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the Project.

8.2 Environmental Legislation, Standards and Guidelines

8.2.2 This assessment also made reference to the following international conventions and national legislation:

8.3.3 No marine works would be required for the Project and there will be no impact on marine waters within the Assessment Area. Therefore, the marine waters were scoped out from ecological survey and impact assessment.

8.3.5 The ecological characteristics of the Assessment Area were identified through a comprehensive review of the available relevant literature, as shown in Table 8.1 below.

8.3.16 Herpetofauna within the Assessment Area were surveyed using transect count method, including direct visual observation and active searching of their potential microhabitats (e.g. leaf litter, underneath of rotten logs). All reptiles and amphibians sighted or heard were recorded.

8.3.18 During reptile surveys, careful searches of appropriate microhabitats and refugia (e.g. stones, pond bunds, crevices, leaf litter/debris, rotten logs) were undertaken. In addition to active searching, observation of exposed, basking or foraging reptiles were also recorded.

8.3.19 Nomenclature of amphibian and reptile follows Chan et al. (2005) and Karsen et al. (1998), respectively.

8.3.23 The schedule of the ecological surveys is provided in Table 8.2 below.

Species

2017 (1)

2018 (2)

2019 (3)

2020 (4)

2021 (5)

Little Egret (Egretta garzetta)

17

20

14

9

12

Notes:

(1) Anon, 2017; (2) Anon, 2018; (3) Anon, 2020; (4) Anon, 2021a; (5) Anon, 2021b.

8.4.2 No site of conservation importance was identified within the vicinity of the offsite temporary works area at Mong Wing Street.

8.4.4 Developed area habitat only supported limited vegetation, which included exotic plantation such as Bauhinia spp., Paper-bark Tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia) and Sunshine Tree (Senna surattensis) (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020). This habitat was highly disturbed with low ecological value.

8.4.11 No herpetofauna and mammal was recorded during previous EIA studies (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020).

8.4.12 Territory-wide surveys conducted by the Herpetofauna Working Group of AFCD recorded two amphibian species, Brown Tree Frog (Polypedates megacephalus) and Gunther’s Frog (Rana guentheri), around Tuen Mun area. Both species are widely distributed in Hong Kong.

8.4.14 No aquatic community survey was conducted in the previous studies (HyD, 2007, 2008; CEDD, 2020).

Summary of Species of Conservation Importance

8.4.22 Summaries of species of conservation importance recorded from literature review within the current Assessment Areas for both TME Alignment and the Mong Wing Street offsite works area are provided in Table 8.4.

Notes:

8.5 Survey Findings

8.5.24 A total of four species of odonate were recorded, mainly flying over vegetated areas in developed area and over modified watercourse. No odonate species of conservation importance was recorded (Appendix 8.3 refers). All of the recorded species are abundant in Hong Kong.

Assessment Area (TME Alignment)

Notes:

Assessment Area (Offsite Works Area)

No Direct Impact on Recognised Sites of Conservation Importance

8.7.1 Given the considerable distance between the Project site and the Tuen Mun Egretry, no direct impact is anticipated on this site of conservation importance.

Direct Loss of Terrestrial Habitats and Associated Wildlife

Note:

Fragmentation of Terrestrial Habitats

Direct Loss of Roosting and Foraging Ground

Direct Impact on Species of Conservation Importance

Direct Injury / Mortality to Wildlife

Bird Collision

Disturbance and Obstruction of Flight Line for Roosting and Breeding Ardeids

Disturbance from Daytime Construction Activities

Disturbance from Night-Time Construction Activities

Impact on Water Quality and Hydrology of Modified Watercourse

Sewage Effluent from Construction Workforce

Direct Injury / Mortality to Wildlife and Bird Collision

Disturbance to Adjacent Habitats and Associated Wildlife

2017 ⁽¹⁾

2018 ⁽²⁾

2019 ⁽³⁾

2020 ⁽⁴⁾

2021 ⁽⁵⁾