龍尾事件之
 十大荒       點
黃志俊﹣香港自然生態論壇發言人
因為無沙   ,所以大埔區內就要人工泳   ?
是否香港十八區,每一區都要有自己的沙    ?
環評報告未進行,已完成了工程可行性報告?
環評報告未通過,   已成了廿五項特首優先項
        目之一?
從來沒有數據或調查支持市民大   需要人工沙   !
 既有游泳設施新增,為何仍未能滿足需要?
烏溪沙
       /渡頭


此非區議會小型工程,選址考慮不可能只局限於大埔區
   烏溪沙和渡頭的天然沙 沒有被用作比較
環評報告最初找到23
               種,龍尾被評為低生態
                      價值。




補充環評報告找到
138種,同樣被評為
 低生態價值。

          是甚麼邏輯和理據?
     難道要一千種才算高生態價值?
環諮會的意見:要
              求補充報告不單是
              證明龍尾生態價
              值,而是確定其整
              體生態價值為低,
              同時,已定出若有
              重要物種,要指出
               遷移方案!

環諮會   樣的意見是應該如何解讀   ?
Project Title: Development of a Bathing Beach at Lung Mei, Tai Po!
 "Reference of the Approved EIA Report in the Register : AEIAR-123/2008!

               Conditions of Approval under Section 8(3) of the EIA Ordinance (the Ordinance)#
         The EIA Report as exhibited under Section 7(1) of the Ordinance is approved by the Director of
                           Environmental Protection with the following conditions:-!
 !1.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall ensure that the bathing beach will be put into operation only after the new sewerage
 system under “Tolo Harbour Sewerage of Unsewered Areas Stage I Phase IIC” in Lung Mei area has been
                                                                                                                             環保署發
 completed;"
 !2.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall conduct regular monitoring on the water quality of the bathing beach at Lung Mei
 in the first two years after the opening of the beach to assess the effectiveness of the water quality mitigation
                                                                                                                             出的環境
 measures.! The information shall be provided to the Environmental Protection Department for information and
 appropriate follow-up actions, if necessary;"
 !3.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall provide downward street lighting without flare to minimize impacts on star-
                                                                                                                             許可證!
 watching activities;"
 !4.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall take additional precautionary measures to reduce the size of the project, particularly
                                                                           o
 the size of the car park and footprint of the project, to further minimize o potential ecological impacts arising
                                                                             the
 from the project; and"
 !5.!!!!!!!!!!! The set of further information received from the Applicant on 24 October 2008 under Section 8(1) of
 the Ordinance shall form part of the approved EIA report, and shall be placed on the Ordinance Register and the
 Ordinance website (http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia)."
 Environmental Protection Department"
 November 2008"

 減低對海岸生態影響﹣與停車場的大小有何關係?
footprint足印﹣                                               真是抽象到不得了,不填海、不建海
                           堤才可以直接減少生態的負面影響。
給撥款委員
                           會的文件



合資格的魚類專家在港不多,每次清理10平方米,整個泥 面積達
200x100平方米,要清理2000次,需時可能要兩年以上,合理 ?




                  留有後著,受訓後即可成專
                    家,100人一齊做?
沒有提及環諮會以
                   6:5強行通過,並
                   且是由代主席投那
                    決定一票。

 誤導立法會議員,海岸公園是可以游泳!
環保團體是杯   會議,確實是有14份反對書。
管海馬被漁護署指為中度常見
錯誤引用過時資料
被環團   斥時,更利用珊瑚礁普查的數據說全港有103
隻記錄﹣可惜那在2001至2012年期間曾在印洲塘、海
下灣、吉澳、橋嘴、果州、東平洲、赤洲、沙塘口山
等。

黃志俊先生(香港自然生態論壇發言人)投影片

  • 1.
    龍尾事件之 十大荒 點 黃志俊﹣香港自然生態論壇發言人
  • 2.
    因為無沙 ,所以大埔區內就要人工泳 ? 是否香港十八區,每一區都要有自己的沙 ?
  • 3.
  • 4.
    從來沒有數據或調查支持市民大 需要人工沙 ! 既有游泳設施新增,為何仍未能滿足需要?
  • 5.
    烏溪沙 /渡頭 此非區議會小型工程,選址考慮不可能只局限於大埔區 烏溪沙和渡頭的天然沙 沒有被用作比較
  • 6.
    環評報告最初找到23 種,龍尾被評為低生態 價值。 補充環評報告找到 138種,同樣被評為 低生態價值。 是甚麼邏輯和理據? 難道要一千種才算高生態價值?
  • 7.
    環諮會的意見:要 求補充報告不單是 證明龍尾生態價 值,而是確定其整 體生態價值為低, 同時,已定出若有 重要物種,要指出 遷移方案! 環諮會 樣的意見是應該如何解讀 ?
  • 8.
    Project Title: Developmentof a Bathing Beach at Lung Mei, Tai Po! "Reference of the Approved EIA Report in the Register : AEIAR-123/2008! Conditions of Approval under Section 8(3) of the EIA Ordinance (the Ordinance)# The EIA Report as exhibited under Section 7(1) of the Ordinance is approved by the Director of Environmental Protection with the following conditions:-! !1.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall ensure that the bathing beach will be put into operation only after the new sewerage system under “Tolo Harbour Sewerage of Unsewered Areas Stage I Phase IIC” in Lung Mei area has been 環保署發 completed;" !2.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall conduct regular monitoring on the water quality of the bathing beach at Lung Mei in the first two years after the opening of the beach to assess the effectiveness of the water quality mitigation 出的環境 measures.! The information shall be provided to the Environmental Protection Department for information and appropriate follow-up actions, if necessary;" !3.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall provide downward street lighting without flare to minimize impacts on star- 許可證! watching activities;" !4.!!!!!!!!!!! The Applicant shall take additional precautionary measures to reduce the size of the project, particularly o the size of the car park and footprint of the project, to further minimize o potential ecological impacts arising the from the project; and" !5.!!!!!!!!!!! The set of further information received from the Applicant on 24 October 2008 under Section 8(1) of the Ordinance shall form part of the approved EIA report, and shall be placed on the Ordinance Register and the Ordinance website (http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia)." Environmental Protection Department" November 2008" 減低對海岸生態影響﹣與停車場的大小有何關係? footprint足印﹣ 真是抽象到不得了,不填海、不建海 堤才可以直接減少生態的負面影響。
  • 9.
    給撥款委員 會的文件 合資格的魚類專家在港不多,每次清理10平方米,整個泥 面積達 200x100平方米,要清理2000次,需時可能要兩年以上,合理 ? 留有後著,受訓後即可成專 家,100人一齊做?
  • 10.
    沒有提及環諮會以 6:5強行通過,並 且是由代主席投那 決定一票。 誤導立法會議員,海岸公園是可以游泳! 環保團體是杯 會議,確實是有14份反對書。
  • 11.
    管海馬被漁護署指為中度常見 錯誤引用過時資料 被環團 斥時,更利用珊瑚礁普查的數據說全港有103 隻記錄﹣可惜那在2001至2012年期間曾在印洲塘、海 下灣、吉澳、橋嘴、果州、東平洲、赤洲、沙塘口山 等。