TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

Page

 

1.         MONITORING REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................... 1

2.         MONITORING EQUIPMENT............................................................................................... 1

3.         MONITORING LOCATIONS................................................................................................ 1

4.         MONITORING METHODOLOGY....................................................................................... 1

Intertidal Mudflat Monitoring.................................................................................................. 1

Tideline Monitoring................................................................................................................... 1

5.         RESULTS.................................................................................................................................. 2

Intertidal Mudflats.................................................................................................................... 2

Tideline...................................................................................................................................... 2

6.         DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION...................................................................................... 3

Intertidal Mudflats.................................................................................................................... 3

Tideline...................................................................................................................................... 3

 

 

List of Figures

 

Figure 3.1........ Location of Intertidal Mudflat and Tideline Avifauna Surveys

Figure 5.1........ Comparison of Bird Abundance and Species Composition on Exposed Mudflats: Ngau Hom Shek and Sheung Pak Nai, November, 2004.

Figure 5.2........ Comparison of Bird Abundance and Species Composition along Tidelines: Ngau Hom Shek and Sheung Pak Nai, November, 2004.

 

 

Appendices

 

Appendix 1      Requirements and Event and Action Plan for that potential work disturbance to inter-tidal bird communities monitoring works.

1.                  MONITORING REQUIREMENTS

1.1              Section 6.2.5 of the approved EM&A Manual for the Project requires that potential work disturbance to inter-tidal bird communities is monitored during the construction phase. Appendix 1 shows the requirements and Event and Action Plan for monitoring works.

 

2.                  MONITORING EQUIPMENT

2.1              Equipment used for monitoring included a 20-60x spotting scope, 10x42 binoculars, and Hand-held GPS.

 

3.                  MONITORING LOCATIONS

3.1              Monitoring was conducted at two locations, Ngau Hom Shek (NHS) and Sheung Pak Nai (SPN), as shown in Figure 3.1. Monitoring at NHS was adjacent to the works area, and provides a record of potential construction phase disturbance. The SPN site is relatively distant from the works area, and was used as a control site.

 

4.                  MONITORING METHODOLOGY

Intertidal Mudflat Monitoring

4.1              Bird species and abundance within a 100m quadrat of exposed mudflat were recorded at low tide (>100m of mudflat exposed) on 16th November 2004. Records were made at both NHS and SPN (Figure 3.1).

4.2              Bird abundance and species composition were compared with baseline data recorded from September/October 2001 to May 2002, as presented in the Shenzhen Western Corridor EIA Report. 

Tideline Monitoring

4.3              Surveys at NHS were conducted along a 10m wide belt transect centred along the tideline on 16th November, 2004. The transect extended 250m either side of the bridge alignment (Figure 3.1). The transect was divided into 50m sections, and bird density and species composition within each section was recorded. Surveys were conducted at low tide, when at least 100m of mudflat was exposed.

4.4              Surveys were also conducted at a 500m belt transect established at SPN (Fig. 3.1), on the same date using the same methodology adopted at NHS.

4.5              Bird density within the tideline transects at NHS and SPN was compared using the non-parametric Mann-Whitney test, where:

HO = There are no differences in bird densities along the tidelines at NHS and SPN.

4.6              Additionally, bird abundance and species composition were compared with baseline data recorded from September 2001 to May 2002, as presented in the Shenzhen Western Corridor EIA Report.

 

5.                  RESULTS

Intertidal Mudflats

5.1              Densities recorded on exposed mudflats were 2 bird/ha at NHS and 7 birds/ha at SPN. Records at NHS were limited to single Chinese Pond Heron (Ardeola bacchus) and Little Egret (Egretta garzetta). Six Chinese Pond Heron and a single Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea) were recorded from SPN (Figure 5.1).

5.2              Compared to the values presented in the EIA Report, bird densities and species richness in November 2004 were slightly higher at both NHS and SPN. For NHS, values presented in the EIA Report were 1.5 birds/ha and a mean of 0.9 species compared to 2 birds/ha and 2 species recorded from NHS during recent surveys. For SPN values presented in the EIA Report were 3.9 birds/ha and a mean of 1.5 species compared to 7 birds/ha and 2 species recorded from SPN during recent surveys.

Figure 5.1 – Comparison of Bird Abundance and Species Composition on Exposed Mudflats: Ngau Hom Shek and Sheung Pak Nai, November 2004

Tideline

5.3              Bird densities recorded along tidelines were 46 birds/ha and 16 birds/ha at NHS and SPN respectively, with 3 species recorded from both sites. Species recorded at both sites comprised Little Egret (Egretta garzetta) and Great Egret (Casmerodius albus). A single Common Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) was recorded from NHS, and single a Grey Heron (Ardea cinerea) was recorded from SPN (Figure 5.2).

5.4              A Mann-Whitney found no statistically significant difference between bird densities recorded at NHS and SPN (P = 0.570).

5.5              At NHS, bird density recorded during recent surveys was much higher than the mean value presented in the EIA Report (46 birds/ha compared to a mean of 23.2 birds/ha), and species richness was also higher (3 species compared to a mean of 1.8 species). At SPN, bird densities recorded during recent surveys (16 birds/ha) were lower than mean values recorded in the EIA Report (58.2 birds/ha). Species richness was slightly higher, with 3 species recorded during recent surveys, compared with a mean of 2.0 species recorded in the EIA Report.

Figure 5.2 – Comparison of Bird Abundance and Species Composition Along Tidelines: Ngau Hom Shek and Sheung Pak Nai, November 2004.

6.                  DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Intertidal Mudflats

6.1              At both sites, bird densities and species richness recorded on intertidal mudflats in November 2004 were higher than mean values given in the EIA Report.

Tideline

6.2              At NHS, bird densities and species richness recorded along the tideline in November 2004 were much higher than mean values given in the EIA Report. Bird densities at NHS (the potential impact site) were higher than at SPN (the control site).

 

6.3              During surveys conducted in November 2004, no statistically significant difference in tideline densities at NHS and SPN was observed, and there was no evidence of construction phase disturbance at NHS, the potential impact site.

 

 

 

References

 

Carey, G.J., Chalmers, M.L., Diskin, D.A., Kennerley, P.R., Leader, P.J., Leven, M.R., Lewthwaite, R.W., Melville, D.S., Turnbull, M., and Young, L. (2001): The Avifauna of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Bird Watching Society, Hong Kong.