|
Conservation News - Spring 2001
Last updated: June 2001
By Mike Kilburn
A fifth bird was found with fishing line wrapped round its bill. Sadly this bird has disappeared and is assumed to have died. These death s point to two of the more serious problems which AFCD will face when the Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site Management Plan comes into operation. In addition to monitoring the water of Deep Bay for pollutants including e.coli, the studies will have to take in the general level of bacterial contaminants. Resolving the issue, when it is known that a huge quantity of raw sewage is pumped into Deep Bay from Shenzhen, will be a huge task. The issue of birds being caught by fishing lines and hooks is also significant. The fish pond operators of Deep Bay use a number of methods to catch and kill birds they claim are eating their commercial fish. They use hooks baited with live tilapia in the shallows to catch herons and egrets, and also suspend fish hooks from lines over active ponds to catch birds flying over the ponds. Members finding these illegal traps are asked to report them to AFCD at 24714411. However, prosecutions can only be brought if the trap setters are caught red-handed. Therefore members are requested to leave the traps in place, giving AFCD the opportunity to catch the perpetrators. However, trapped birds should if possible be caught as they can be treated by staff at Kadoorie. Members are also requested to report all incidents to WWF at Mai Po on 24716306 and to the Society (Mike Kilburn on 2555 6237). In addition, posting such incidents on the society website helps to increase awareness.
As noted in the previous bulletin, it appears that KCRC was legally within its rights, if not its environmental responsibilities, to dump on the site. In addition to KCRC¡¦s environmenatl cynicism, what this demonstrates is the lack of adequate protection for Hong Kong¡¦s wetlands, despite being signatory to the Ramsar Convention, and the weaknesses of land zoning designations set by the Planning Department. Currently these designations are very loose, particularly in the practices permitted under ¡§village¡¨ land and ¡§agriculture¡¨. For example, a field can be covered with asphalt, a few water tanks can be used for holding fish and this is considered a fish farm and hence is agriculture (this has actually happened at a site near Plover Cove Reservoir). Once designated in this manner, it appears that all environmental considerations become irrelevant, and development of village land in particular is subject to no additional controls. Unsurprisingly there is no move within Government to address these issues, except for shaking of heads and mutterings about how hard it would be to change anything. Perhaps this is the time for Green Groups to propose some amendments to the Planning Department. While it is important to recognise the rights of villagers, this does not mean they should have carte blanche to cut down trees or fill in wetland within village zones without regard for the environmental conditions of the area. „h Members are encouraged to express their views on these terms either by writing to the Conservation Officer (Mike Kilburn) for publication in the bulletin, or by posting their views on the website bulletin board. Those with professional insight into either planning or the construction industry in particular are encouraged to state their views.
This is an area of outstanding natural beauty , with a wide list of birds recorded from the site. These include Crested Serpent Eagle, White-Bellied Sea Eagle, Chestnut Bittern, Black Bittern and Yellow Bittern. It is an especially good site for migrants during easterly winds. The issue is the fact that to adequately house 1000 people in the valley it would become necessary to provide a great deal more infrastructure including sewage treatment facilities, and road access through the country park. It seems that the Planning Department has failed to take these points in to consideration when considering the merits making this provision. It also appears to have ignored the fact that there has been no development in this valley for over twenty years, so quite why it wants to make this a centre for rural population is a mystery. To find out more about protesting against these plans visit the Friends of Tai Long Wan website on http://www.geocities.com/drpandahk/tailongwan.htm
If you plan to complain, the Long Valley case has taught us that he most productive way is to ask questions which highlight the problem and demand a written answer from the appropriate government representative.
By Mike Kilburm
However, visits in recent years tell the tale of a steady decline in numbers, particularly of wildfowl and raptors. According to reserve staff the two largest problems are the draining down of lakes by the local fisherman to harvest the fish, and the poisoning of geese and ducks for sale in the urban markets. The draining down of the lakes means that they dry out, which diminisheds the feeding opportunities for birds inside the reserve, causing many to disperse to other areas of Poyang Lake beyond the reserve boundaries. When I visited Poyang in December, 1999 I saw many small piles of flour left on the ground. Apparently these were laced with poison. In just a couple of days we saw several hundred of these piles and one day even watched a man laying them on the far edge of a lake. Not only does cause direct losses to the numbers of waterfowl - Bean Goose appears to be a particular target - but has a knock-on effect in the food chain, as poisoned birds are eaten by large raptors which either die or have their reproductive abilities impaired by the poisons. The number and diversity of raptors is now just a fraction of the total seen in the far smaller Deep Bay during the winter, with large raptors in particular being affected. Several tens of thousands of people live inside the reserve boundary, and consider the wildfowl an endless resource of free meat and a source of ready cash. It appears that prevention of such activities is beyond the capabilities of the reserve staff and not important enough for either the provincial or central government to take action. Poyang is a Ramsar site which receives extensive overseas funding, but despite this, is evidently failing to protect the birds which use the site adequately. This summer there will be a Hong Kong University-sponsored review of reserve management in China and elsewhere in North Asia. It is understood that this is expected to show how much progress has been made. It is equally important to show where progress is not being made and to create an environment where these issues can be addressed and solutions found. Members who have visited Poyang are encouraged to submit any data they have on numbers of wildfowl raptors, waders, cranes and other key species (e.g Great Bustard, Dalmatian Pelican) recorded at the site. In addition, members with insights into the causes of the declines at Poyang are encouraged to submit them to Mike Kilburn at mkilburn@hkstar.com or fax them to +852 2549 4019 or to post them on the Society bulletin board.
|