5.1
Ardeid Night
Roost Monitoring
With reference to the
Pre-construction Ardeid Night Roost survey (January 2021) findings that identified two active ardeid night roosts within 100
m from the Project boundary (one approximately 40 m east of the Project
boundary and the other one approximately 45 m northeast of the Project
boundary), consequent monthly monitoring of these active ardeid night roosts
was done in accordance to the EM&A Manual
Sections 7.3.10 and 7.3.11; and EIA Report Section 8.12.1.3.
The Ardeid Night Roost Monitoring survey was
conducted with the following objectives:
· Check the status and
location of any active ardeid night roosts within 100 m from the Project
boundary (Survey Area) with reference to EM&A Manual Section 7.3.10;
· Monitor the effectiveness
of proposed mitigation measures and detect any unpredicted indirect ecological
impacts arising from the proposed Project as specified in EIA Report Section
8.12.1.3; and
· Recommend remedial actions, where appropriate, based on the impact
monitoring results (EIA Report Section 8.12.1.3) for the implementation
of the contractors as only necessary.
5.1.2.1 Monitoring
Area
With reference from Section
7.3.10 of the approved EM&A Manual, the monitoring was conducted
in areas within 100 m from the Project boundary. The monitoring area and
vantage points for direct observation of any active night roosts are shown in Appendix O.
5.1.2.2 Monitoring Activity
5.1.2.2.1 Active Ardeid Night Roost
Current
Ardeid Night Roost Monitoring Survey focused on the two active night roosts
within the Survey Area (100 m from the Project boundary) that were previously
confirmed during the pre-construction Survey. These roosts include one that was
approximately 40 m east of the Project boundary and another around 45 m
northeast of the mentioned boundary (Section 3 of the approved Pre-construction
Survey Report of Ardeid Night Roost). Primary data collection with the use of
8x and 10x binoculars; and field guides including the Avifauna of Hong Kong
(Carey et al., 2001) and The Birds of Hong Kong and South China (Viney et al.,
2005), was from about one hour before sunset time until one hour after sunset
with reference to Section 7.3.10 of the approved EM&A Manual. Sunset time
was according to Hong Kong Observatory (HKO). The survey was conducted on 10
August 2026.
Species
composition, abundance and locations of night roosts were recorded. Species
composition, abundance and location of pre-roosting aggregations (PRA) were
also noted. PRAs are gatherings of avian individuals prior to flying into a
night roost (Moore and Switzer, 1998). The time of return of the ardeids to the
pre-roost and the final night roost were also recorded. Direct observations
were made from vantage points adjacent the Project site with clear and
unobstructed view of any active roosting location (s) within the Survey Area.
However, aside from the established vantage points for the focused mangrove
strips along Shan Pui River, observations were also conducted throughout the
whole 100 m study site to cover other areas aside from the mangrove strips.
Observations
such as any changes in site condition or disturbances detected or observed at
the monitoring locations, including both construction and non-construction
related activities, during the monitoring activity was recorded with reference
to Section 7.3.10 of the approved EM&A Manual. Additionally, other
observations such as bird droppings on the ground which may possibly indicate
presence of night roosts were noted in addition to noting of the roosting
substrate (i.e. substrate species and approximate height). Any breeding
activity usage of the roosting locations within the Survey Area was also noted.
5.1.2.2.2 Noise Monitoring
Monitoring Locations, Frequency, Time and
Parameters
The noise monitoring
locations were established at 22°28’4.25”N, 114°1’41.32”E; and 22°28’10.43”N, 114°1’42.17”E for NMS1 and NMS2 stations, respectively. Monitoring
frequency was only once a month in concurrence with the construction phase
monthly monitoring of the active night roosts for correlation. Monitoring time
for both stations started around 19:08, the earliest final night roost period
recorded during the survey and lasted for 30 minutes. Table 16 presents the
monitoring parameters.
The Action and Limit Levels for Active Ardeid Night Roost Survey have
been set and are presented in Appendix C.
However, exceedances to the
limit level were endeavoured to be prevented by the full implementation of
mitigation measures (Section 4.2 of the approved Pre-construction
Survey Report of Ardeid Night Roost and Sections 5.2.1-5.2.2 of this
Report) during the construction phase.
Event and Action Plan
In instances of exceedance/s in the action and/or
limit levels, the different measures as specified in Table 3.3 Event and
Action Plan for Construction Noise of the approved EM&A Manual and likewise presented in Appendix
H of this report shall be implemented as responses.
5.1.3.1 Active Ardeid Night Roost
The monitoring activity was
conducted on 10 August 2026 and started around 17:58 (one hour before sunset)
on a low tide condition. During the pre-roost period (PRP), the period when
avian individuals gather first before flying into a night roost, individual of
Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola bacchus
(5), Great Egret Ardea alba (2) and Little Egret Egretta garzetta
(2) were observed around 18:40 at the mudflat east side ANR1 of the Project
boundary while individuals of Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola
bacchus (3), Great Egret Ardea alba (1) and Little
Egret Egretta garzetta (1) were concurrently observed
in pre-roost aggregate (PRA) at the mudflat northeast side ANR2 of the Project
boundary (Table 17).
F For the final night roost
at around 19:08, individuals of Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola
bacchus (21), Great Egret Ardea alba (2) and Little
Egret Egretta garzetta (13) were observed at the
roosting area ANR1 utilizing the understory to canopy layer of the roosting
substrate Sonneratia apetala and S. caseolaris; while other individuals of Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola bacchus (14), Great Egret
Ardea alba (1), Little Egret Egretta garzetta (5) and
Grey Heron Ardea cinerea (1) were noted at ANR2 that utilized the understory to
canopy layer of the aforementioned roosting substrate.
No disturbance
(construction related and/or otherwise) to the active night roost areas was
observed during the period. Bird droppings were observed within the vicinity of
the roosting area located east of the Project boundary.
5.1.3.2 Noise
Monitoring
Noise monitoring activities
were conducted on 10 August 2026 in concurrence with the construction phase
monthly monitoring of the pre-identified active night roosts. Noise monitoring
started at 19:08 and lasted for 30 minutes, until 19:38.
Current survey results
showed noise levels (LAeq (30 min.)) at both
monitoring stations to be well below the action and limit levels as presented
in Table 18.
No Action / Limit
exceedance was recorded for noise levels at stations (NMS1 and NMS2) in close proximity to the two active ardeid night roosts
(ANR1 and ANR2) observed within the Survey Area during the reporting month.
5.1.4
Detection of Any
Unpredicted Indirect Ecological Impacts Arising from the Project
No unpredicted indirect
ecological impacts that arose from the project were noted during the current
monitoring period.
5.1.5.1 Status and Location of Any Active
Ardeid Night Roost
Two active ardeid night
roost areas (ANR1 and ANR2) were observed within the Survey Area during the
August 2026 monitoring period. These roosts were located at the mangrove strips
in the east and northeast portions of the Project boundary. These were used by
individuals of Chinese Pond Heron Ardeola bacchus, Great Egret Ardea alba, Little Egret Egretta garzett. and Grey Heron Ardea cinerea
5.1.5.2 Noise Monitoring Results
Both noise levels at each
of the monitoring stations were below the action and limit levels..
5.2
Ecological
Monitoring of Birds
With reference to Section
7.3.6 of the EM&A Manual, monthly ecological monitoring of
birds, focusing on avifauna species of conservation interest, and overwintering
waterbirds utilising wetland habitats in Fung Lok Wai and Nam Sang Wai as well
as along Shan Pui River and Kam Tin River within the monitoring area (500 m
from the Project Boundary) was conducted in addition to monitoring on the
utilization of wetland habitats by birds also within the same monitoring area
as required by Section 7.3.1 of the EM&A Manual..
5.2.2.1 Monitoring Area
The monitoring area
included wetland habitats in Fung Lok Wai and Nam Sang Wai as well as along
Shan Pui River and Kam Tin River within 500m from the Project boundary with
reference to Section 7.3.6 of the EM&A Manual. The location
of point count sites and transect routes is shown in Appendix P.
5.2.2.2 Monitoring Activity
Avifauna surveys on the different wetland
habitats using the transect count and point count methods were conducted last 5 August 2026 (daytime) which
started at around 07:15. Additionally, the survey overlooking the mudflats and
mangroves in the Shan Pui River was concurrently conducted on the same date
with the daytime survey during the low tide (generally 1.5m or below) period,
and also started at around 07:15. The methodology for the monitoring activity
followed Sections 8.3.3.6 and 8.3.3.7 of the EIA Report
(AEIAR-220/2019) and as detailed below.
For the transect count and
point count methods, the presence and relative abundance of avifauna species at
various wetland habitats were recorded visually and aurally.
Avifauna species were
detected either by direct sighting or by their call and identified to species
level. Any notable behaviours such as feeding, roosting and breeding were also
recorded. Bird species encountered outside the point count locations and walk transects
were also recorded. A comprehensive list of species recorded from the
Assessment Area was prepared, with wetland-dependence, conservation and/or
protection status indicated. Ornithological nomenclature in this report follows
Carey et al. (2001), Viney et al. (2005) and the most recent updated list from
Hong Kong Bird Watching Society (HKBWS).
Noise levels were recorded with the methodology and
equipment as mentioned in Section 3.4 and Section 3.2, respectively, of this
EM&A report. The parameter as shown in was recorded at each of the point
count locations.
Noise levels were recorded
with the methodology and equipment as mentioned in Section 3.4 and Section
3.2, respectively, of this EM&A report. The parameter as shown in Table 19 was recorded at each of
the point count locations.
In addition to recording of
noise levels, any changes in site condition or disturbances detected or observed
at the monitoring locations, including both construction and non-construction
related activities with reference to Section 7.3.7 of the EM&A
Manual were also noted.
5.2.2.3 Data Analysis
For the bird communities,
the monitoring results were compared to pre-construction baseline condition
during the dry and wet seasons as summarized in the Baseline Bird Survey Report
with reference to Section 7.3.8 of the EM&A Manual. However,
to further account the seasonality, monitoring results of the current month
were compared to the results of the corresponding month of the baseline data.
The data for point count
method and transect walk method were presented separately to account for the
difference in the survey effort of the two methods. For each method, abundance
and species composition of the avifauna communities during the monitoring month
were summarized.
To check the presence of
variation in bird abundance between baseline and impact monitoring, t-test was
applied (α = 0.05). Moreover, to check the presence of variation in bird
species diversity, the two-sided Hutcheson t-test was also used. The two-sided
Hutcheson t-test was developed as a method to compare the diversity of two
community samples using the Shannon diversity index
(Hutcheson 1970). Shannon diversity index will be computed using the formula, 
where, H’ = Shannon Diversity Index; Pi =
proportion of the population of species; i =
number of species in sample; ln = natural logarithm. Shannon diversity
index is used as it accounts
the proportion (relative abundance) of each species; thus, it gives a better
description of diversity than a plain number of species (species richness).
The Action and Limit Levels for ecological monitoring of birds have been
set and are presented in Appendix C.
Wetland habitat utilization
during the construction phase monitoring shall only be compared seasonally,
hence the comparison shall only be done after all the data (dry season and wet
season) were collected with reference to Appendix 8.5 of the approved EIA
Report.
Results of the avifauna survey on the different habitats within the
monitoring area using the transect count and point count methods as conducted
last 5 August 2026 (daytime) which started at around 07:15, are presented in Sections
5.2.3.1 and 5.2.3.2. Meanwhile, results for the surveys overlooking
the mudflats and mangroves in the Shan Pui River, with monitoring activities
conducted on similar date with the daytime survey during the low tide
(generally 1.5m or below) period around 07:15 had results presented in Section
5.2.3.3.
5.2.3.1 Abundance
5.2.3.1.1 All Avifauna Species
An overall total of 446 avifauna individuals were recorded in the
monitoring area during the August 2026 monitoring period, of which 322
individuals were recorded from the point count method and 124 individuals from
the transect walk method. Relative to the August 2016 baseline data (point
count method =160; and transect walk = 140), an increase was noted for point
count method, and a slight decrease was noted for transect walk method.
Details of these findings are summarized in Table 20.
No Action / Limit
exceedance was recorded for the abundance of all avifauna species (including
but not limited to overwintering waterbirds) for both the point-count and
transect walk method.
5.2.3.1.2 Avifauna Species of Conservation
Importance
Of the 446 avifauna
individuals recorded in the monitoring area during the August 2026 monitoring
period, 189 individuals (point count method = 156 individuals; transect walk
method = 33 individuals) were of conservation importance. With reference to August
2016 data, (point count method = 66; and transect walk = 54), an increase was
noted for point count method, and a decrease was noted for transect walk
method. Details of these findings are summarized in Table 21.
No Action / Limit
exceedance was recorded for the abundance of Species of Conservation Importance
in both point-count and transect walk method.
5.2.3.2 Diversity (Species Richness1
and Shannon Diversity Index2)
5.2.3.2.1 All Avifauna Species
A total of 42 avifauna
species (species richness) were recorded during the August 2026 monitoring
period, of which, 34 species were recorded by the point count method while 32
species were noted by the transect walk method. Relative to the baseline data (point
count method = 26 species; transect walk method = 30 species), an increase in
total species richness for both point count method and transect walk method
were recorded. In terms of Shannon diversity index (H’) values, current result
in point count method showed an increase (t-value = 1.30; t-crit = 1.97;
p-value = 1.94E-01; α = 0.05) relative to the baseline reference value.
The current results in the transect walk method showed a significant increase
(t-value = 2.21; t-crit = 1.97; p-value = 2.80E-02; α = 0.05) from
baseline reference value. Details of these findings are summarized in Table 22, Appendix F.6.1, and Appendix F.6.2.
No Action / Limit
exceedance was recorded for the species diversity of all avifauna species in
both point count and transect walk method.
5.2.3.2.2 Avifauna Species of Conservation
Importance
Of the 42 avifauna species
identified during the August 2026 monitoring period, 16 species were of
conservation importance (point count method = 13 species; transect walk method
= 9 species). Meanwhile, relative to the baseline values in August 2016 (point
count method = 7 species; transect walk method = 6 species), an increase in
number of species with conservation importance was recorded for both point
count method and transect walk method. In terms of Shannon diversity index
(H’), there is an increase for point count method (t-value = 0.63; t-crit =
1.97; p-value = 5.31E-01; α = 0.05) and a significant increase for
transect walk method (t-value = 3.86; t-crit = 1.99; p-value = 2.34E-04; α
= 0.05) relative to the baseline reference values. Details of these findings
are summarized in Table 23, and Appendix F.6.3.
No Action / Limit
exceedance was recorded for the species diversity of avifauna species with
conservation importance in both point count and transect walk method.
5.2.3.3 Wetland Habitat Utilization
Avifauna communities were
observed during the current monitoring period in the different wetland
habitats, i.e. mangrove, modified watercourse, ponds, and reed bed.
With reference to Section 7.3.1 of the EM&A Manual,
the utilization of the wetland habitats by birds within the monitoring area was
recorded and monitored.
5.2.3.3.1 All Avifauna Species
During the current
monitoring period, majority of the different wetland habitats were observed
with Very Low (VL) abundance. In terms of species richness, different wetland
habitats were generally observed with Low (L) number of species (Table 24).
5.2.3.3.2 Avifauna Species of Conservation
Importance
Majority of the different
wetland habitats had Very Low (VL) abundance of avifauna species of
conservation importance; and were generally utilized by Very Low (VL) number of
species (Table 25).
5.2.3.4 Noise Levels
Noise levels LAeq (30 min) recorded on 5 August 2026 and 10 August 2026
(daytime and night time) from each of the point count
locations during the ecological bird monitoring are shown in Table 26.
No Action / Limit
exceedance was recorded for noise levels at all stations for the ecological
monitoring of birds in the reporting month.