One-man show: green groups want Hong Kong government to put more effort into protecting special sites
It emerges that one department employs just one person to look after 68 sensitive sites spanning more than 7,000 hectares throughout the territory
Protection for Hong Kong’s 68 Sites of Special Scientific Interest is too weak and they will likely come under further threat amid the uptick in unauthorised developments across the territory, according to green groups.
Some are calling on conservation and planning authorities to allocate more resources and manpower to conserve the ecologically sensitive sites.
They made the call as the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department revealed it employed just one person to coordinate the management of 68 sites spanning more than 7,000 hectares across Hong Kong. The department is tasked with keeping the register of SSSIs and monitors the sites for change.
The government designates sites with features of scientific interest such as rare fauna and flora to deter human activities or developments there. Government departments must also give “due consideration” to conservation when developments on or near the sites are proposed.
But repeated ecological damage is becoming a major concern in light of several cases of degradation in green belts and conservation areas.
The department confirmed to the Post that just one employee was tasked with SSSI-specific management, whose duties include conducting status reviews and coordinating monitoring efforts. It added that regular monitoring was also conducted by conservation staff.
The figure was first reported to the Legislative Council’s Finance Committee earlier this month as part of the government’s budget exercise.
Green Power chief executive Dr Man Chi-sum said the figure reflected the “passive attitude” of the government in controlling illegal developments and relying on statutory planning rules enforced by the Planning Department to protect special areas.
“Having just one person in charge [of SSSI] is unreasonably disproportionate,” Man said.
“SSSIs require more than just enforcement after they are damaged. They require constant monitoring and active management before the damage is done ... and the AFCD has a responsibility here.”
He urged the department to expand the team as more unauthorised developments had been detected in conservation and green-belt areas.
Several cases of ecological degradation near or in SSSIs have surfaced in recent years. A mangrove area near an SSSI in north Lantau was razed by local villagers in 2014 in protest against government restrictions on the use of their private land.
Streams designated as sites near village zones in Hoi Ha in Sai Kung and Sha Lo Tung in Tai Po have recently been subject to massive vegetation clearance. And the recent exposure of illegal dumping and excavation in the heavily protected Mai Po Inner Deep Bay Ramsar Site again brought to light weak management and monitoring of these sites.
Dr Michael Lau Wai-neng, assistant conservation director at WWF-Hong Kong, which manages the Mai Po wetlands, said penalties for unauthorised activity in such sites should be more severe. He also called for more community-based monitoring.
“In terms of zoning, the SSSI designation has a lot of strength. But it lacks monitoring,” he said.
The department carried out 120 patrols at SSSIs last year, but there have been no prosecutions in the last five years.
In 2013-14, the department spent HK$650,000 managing the sites. The budget was slashed to HK$550,000 in 2014-15 before returning to HK$650,000 in 2015-16. According to official data, the territory’s 67 SSSIs cover a total area of 7,473 hectares, which would equate to HK$86 of protection per hectare.
By comparison, Britain spends at least £54 million (HK$594 million) to protect SSSIs in England and Wales, or about £50 (HK$556) per hectare, according to 2008 data from the National Audit Office. More recent data shows annual expenditure now exceeds £111 million (HK$1.2 billion).
A spokesman for the AFCD said it regularly monitored SSSIs to check for any changes in scientific status.
“Based on the monitoring results, appropriate measures such as vegetation management would be carried out if necessary,” he said.
The AFCD allows non-profit groups to enter into management agreements with landowners or tenants of private land of specific sites to enhance conservation.
Roy Ng Hei-man of the Conservancy Association said SSSIs were practically “useless” as the Planning Department lacked teeth in its enforcement capability.
“If someone really wanted to degrade an area, they wouldn’t care what level of zoning you put in place,” he said.
He said the problem with SSSI protection was that they failed to keep up with modern-day threats. “SSSIs were effective at keeping out building or farming but we’re now talking about small-scale damage such as dumping, fly-tipping or tree felling,” he said.
A Planning Department spokesman said while all sites were identified and designated by the AFCD, not all were covered by statutory planning. It said patrols in SSSIs were “part of the overall duties of staff”, but was unable to say what resources were allocated solely for such sites.
“Any planning application for development within or in proximity to SSSI zones will be circulated to AFCD for comments,” a spokesman said. Only if the SSSIs were covered by statutory plans would it take enforcement action.
There were four reports of alleged unauthorised developments in SSSIs in 2015 and 2014, up from three in 2013 and one in 2012 and 2011. None were confirmed to be unauthorised developments under the Town Planning Ordinance.
