Nature concerns must be part of development plans

No one is perhaps more eager to end the contentions over Hong Kong's land supply than the chief executive, who is reportedly due to announce initiatives to increase housing supply in next week's policy address.

This comes as no surprise. For years, Hong Kong has seen housing become unaffordable and its old stock increasingly dilapidated. Moreover, a major feature of Leung Chun-ying's election platform last year rested on a promise to tackle housing shortages.

There is no doubt that this is of great urgency, but if land were to be set aside for housing, policymakers need to simultaneously consider what land to conserve. The logic is simple. We need to know what of nature we value and should protect before we can allocate the less ecologically sensitive areas for development.

Events last year have shown that development and conservation do not mix well. In July, plans to build a columbarium at the ecologically rich area of Sha Lo Tung were shelved under mounting pressure from the public. The proposal, already submitted to the Advisory Council on the Environment for endorsement, is now under review.

Not long afterwards, the proposed Lung Mei artificial beach had many citizens up in arms about the development's impact on marine life in the area.

Even the new development area of northeast New Territories, where its Long Valley wetland has been a haven for birds, has environmentalists fearing the worst once a large human community settles in nearby.

These proposals were mired in conflict largely because the sites were such poor choices for development.