Board logo

Subject: 反對犧牲「濕地緩衝區」以換取后海灣濕地保育 [Print This Page]

Author: HKBWS Suet Mei    Time: 2/10/2018 12:46     Subject: 反對犧牲「濕地緩衝區」以換取后海灣濕地保育

Oppose the sacrifice of “Wetland Buffer Area” (WBA) for wetland conservation in Deep Bay



在過去五個月的公眾諮詢期間,有不少人士指后海灣一帶的魚塘濕地有發展潛力,更有人認為后海灣「濕地保育區」內不少魚塘荒廢,而且不時有人填土填塘,生態價值下降,建議可以適量放寬「濕地緩衝區」的地積比率及增加房屋發展密度,吸引發展商以換地的方式將「濕地保育區」內的發展項目轉移至「濕地緩衝區」,並將部分收益投放到荒廢魚塘,加強濕地保育及管理。

During the public consultation period for the land supply in the past five months, some people pointed out that the fishponds and wetlands in the Deep Bay area have potential for development. Some even considered that many fishponds in the Deep Bay “Wetland Conservation Area” (WCA) are abandoned with land or pond filling happening from time to time, causing their ecological value to decline. As such, they suggested to relax the plot ratio in WBA and increase its residential development density to attract developers transfer their development project from WCA to WBA via land exchange, and take part of the profit to conserve and manage the abandoned fishponds.

本會反對此建議,認為會增加「濕地緩衝區」的發展壓力,有違其緩衝的功能及保護「濕地保育區」的規劃原意。本會擔心高密度開發「濕地緩衝區」會為「濕地保育區」帶來不良生態影響,因此「濕地緩衝區」不是合適的換地選址。這不但違反香港《生物多樣性策略及行動計劃》的良好保育意向,更與國際《生物多樣性公約》的保育精神背道而馳。此外,本會不能認同「必須容許地產發展方可換來自然保育」的論述。

The Society rejects this suggestion because it will increase the development pressure of the WBA, which is contrary to its buffering function and its planning intention to protect the WCA. We are concerned about the adverse off-site ecological impacts on WCA caused by the increase in development intensity in WBA, thus WBA is an inappropriate site to exchange for the land in WCA. The proposed suggestion runs directly contrary to the intent of Hong Kong’s Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan and the Convention on Biological Diversity at the international scale. The Society also do not agree with the idea of “there must be real estate development to support natural conservation”.

本會自2012年起在后海灣進行一項由環境及自然保育基金資助的管理協議計劃,範圍覆該超過600公頃魚塘。計劃鼓勵養魚戶維持傳統的魚塘管理及操作,特別是在收獲塘魚時降低魚塘水位,為雀鳥提供合適的覓食空間。這個棲息地管理及監察計劃能將魚塘養殖業和雀鳥保育達至雙贏的局面,並且保存魚塘的經濟、生態、景觀、文化和教育價值及其舒緩水患的功能。到現時為止,本港已有七個具生態保育價值的地點正進行管理協議計劃,但公私營界別合作在過去十多年間卻仍沒有成功保育的例子。在現有的政策及機制下,管理協議是一個較可行保育魚塘以外的濕地的出路。

Since 2012, the Society has been carrying out a management agreement (MA) project funded by the Environment and Conservation Fund in Deep Bay, covering an area of over 600 hectares of fishponds. The MA project encourages fish farmers to maintain traditional fish pond management and operation, especially to lower the water level when harvesting the fish, so as to provide suitable foraging habitat for birds. This habitat management and monitoring program aims to achieve a win-win situation for both fish farming and bird conservation. It also conserves the economic, ecological, landscape, cultural and educational value of the fishponds and its function in flood prevention. Up to now, there are seven sites with ecological conservation values are managed under the MA scheme in Hong Kong. However, there have been no successful case of private-public partnership for conservation over the past 10 or more years. Hence, the MA scheme is a more practical measure for the conservation wetlands other than fishponds under the existing policy and mechanism.

此外,現時政府只為「米埔內后海灣拉姆薩爾濕地」制訂管理計劃。本會促請政府將管理計劃擴展至姆薩爾濕地以外的濕地,為后海灣一帶的濕地訂立一個長遠及全面的保育政策,以確保每年數以萬計途經香港的候鳥們,能有一個安全及食物充足的中途補給站及度冬地點。

In addition, the Government has only formulated a management plan for the "Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site". The Society urges the Government to extend the management plan to wetlands outside the Ramsar site and to establish a long-term and comprehensive conservation policy for the conservation of wetlands in the Deep Bay area, so as to ensure there is a safe stop-over and wintering site with ample of food for the tens of thousands of migratory birds passing through Hong Kong each year.

*延伸閱讀:
>>環團呼籲政府著手研究保育方案(2018年5月2日):https://bit.ly/2R6fuCq
>>環團回應南生圍發展商的言論(2016年5月19日):https://bit.ly/2OVNT5s

*Further readings:
>>Green Groups call for Government to lead conservation efforts (2 May 2018): https://bit.ly/2R6fuCq
>>Green Groups response to the allegations made by the Nam Sang Wai developer (19 May 2016): https://bit.ly/2DEaodN

Image Attachment: WBA_Exchange_2014_ForumSize.jpg (2/10/2018 12:46, 809.16 KB) / Download count 27
http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/attachment.php?aid=35736






Welcome to HKBWS Forum 香港觀鳥會討論區 (http://www.hkbws.org.hk/BBS/) Powered by Discuz! 6.0.0