An aerial view of the San Tin area in the New Territories North, with wetlands and Shenzhen seen in the distance. Photo: Winson Wong
Opinion
Ian Brownlee
Ian Brownlee
Hong Kong wetlands risk losing out to technology in development plans
One of the top questions with the Northern Metropolis is how the government will protect irreplaceable biodiversity assets while planning huge building works
Early indications are that hi-tech dreams will win out over the responsibilities Hong Kong has to protect biodiversity of global importance
The announcement of the Northern Metropolis in 2021 was a welcome focus on an area of Hong Kong that had not been comprehensively planned. It covers a wide strip of land along the border with Shenzhen. It includes existing towns at Tin Shui Wai and Yuen Long and developing areas at Kwu Tung and elsewhere. It also includes areas of high ecological value.
One of the biggest questions with the Northern Metropolis is how the government will protect and enhance irreplaceable biodiversity assets while planning massive building works. Early indications are that hi-tech dreams will win out over the responsibilities Hong Kong has to protect biodiversity of international importance.
The immediate battle is between the proposed San Tin Technopole and the proposed Sam Po Shue Wetland Conservation Park. San Tin is an old centre of traditional villages with heritage buildings. It is located to the north of Castle Peak Road and to the west of the Lok Ma Chau crossing.
To the north of the villages is a big area of wetland which leads to the Shenzhen River, the border with the mainland. Immediately on the other side of the river is the intense urban development of the city of Shenzhen. The technopole is expected to expand from San Tin across the wetland, removing a significant portion.
I recently hiked with others to the top of Hadden Hill, a high point overlooking San Tin. It gives a panoramic view of Hong Kong and Shenzhen developments as well as Deep Bay. The dramatic impression for our group was how big Shenzhen is and how small the technopole will be.
Hong Kong has protected a large wetland area while Shenzhen has developed right up to the water. There has been a massive reduction in wetland around Deep Bay. When we identified where the technopole would be and the negative impact it would have on this amazing natural asset, the questions that came all shared one thought – why?
First, why is it necessary to develop the proposed hi-tech uses at all when the huge size of Shenzhen will dominate? There is a plan to build in an area closer to Shenzhen known as the Lok Ma Chau Loop, which does not involve wetland. Isn’t that enough?
Second, why in this location? In a forum in July, the government was asked if it would be better to build the technopole on reclaimed land adjacent to the Science and Technology Park at Pak Shek Kok. Tolo Harbour has a lower ecological value, and the uses would be an expansion of a successful location.
The answer was that it has to be close to Shenzhen – but how close? Conservationists have explained the importance of wetlands in mitigating flooding and tidal surges which would come with climate change. They have suggested that the technopole be moved upriver to Heung Yuen Wai.
An aerial view of the Ma Liu Shui reclamation project in Sha Tin. The Hong Kong Science and Technology Park is expected to receive, through reclamation, an additional 60 hectares of land in the next six years for innovation and technology developments. Photo: Sam Tsang
Third, why take up so much of the wetland? There are other locations in the area which are not wetland and of lower ecological value. Why not expand in that direction and leave the wetlands alone?
Multiple studies have shown the importance and interconnectivity between the various types of wetland around Mai Po nature reserve. The combined wetland areas are important for migratory birds, and a major part is protected by the international Ramsar convention.
This places an obligation on Hong Kong. Our own Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan says “biodiversity is to be valued, conserved, restored, sustainably managed and wisely used, thereby maintaining essential ecosystem services and sustaining a healthy and liveable place to the benefits of all people”.
The importance of the affected wetland has resulted in restrictive zoning by the Town Planning Board. Part of it is a “conservation area” which permits no development, while the main portion is a special “comprehensive development and wetland enhancement area”.
01:37
China’s first wetland protection law goes into effect
China’s first wetland protection law goes into effect
This permits a limited amount of low-density residential development, but only if a comprehensive wetland management scheme is implemented. Both zones are for “conservation and enhancement of ecological value and functions of the existing fish ponds or wetland”. The technopole does not meet these requirements.
The consultation document has avoided biodiversity conservation principles that are established within our systems. The main principles of “avoid, minimise and mitigate” do not appear to have been applied.
There was a stage 1 consultation with stakeholders, but no information has been released other than to say they looked at factors which could define boundaries. These include areas of wetland habitat, ecological value, level of aquaculture activities and existing, committed and planned developments.
No information is provided in the stage 2 consultation document which helps to understand the application of any of these. There is no ecological survey information, no figure of the area of wetland to be lost, no explanation of the selection of the boundary between the wetland and the technopole, and no indication of what mitigation is proposed. How can a proper public consultation be carried out without such information?
Even worse, there is no indication of any assessment of an option which completely avoided the wetland. There is no evidence to show the first principle of conservation – avoidance – has even been considered.
Hong Kong’s unique advantage in this location on Deep Bay is the remaining area of scarce wetland. The Northern Metropolis should be retaining it, enhancing it and celebrating it rather than reducing it.
Ian Brownlee is managing director of Masterplan Limited, a planning and development consultancy, and has a wide experience with wetland conservation projects. Theconsultationends on January 20
