[參與聯署:
http://hkwildlifeegretry.weebly.com/]
截至 8/6 22:30，我們已收到超過3188份的聯署，意見已直接傳送到有關部門。
致
康樂及文化事務署署長
李美嫦女士, JP
香港自然生態論壇獲悉康樂及文化事務署（康文署）於廣福道強行
修樹，罔顧鷺鳥林的巢鳥安全，導致大量幼鳥受傷及死亡，本論壇表示深切遺憾，並予以強烈譴責！
本月六日下午二時多，本論壇收到通知有康文署工程車於廣福道的鷺鳥林進行
修樹的工作，並觀察到有幼鳥墜地的情況。該版友曾上前了解，唯只獲工人草草回應：「最多待會叫人放回上樹」，未見有即時停工跡象。版友所提供相片清楚顯示工程車為政府AM車牌車輛，並印有「新界東樹木組」及康文署標誌。本論壇得知事件嚴重性，並即派版主前往了解及通知有關部門和團體協助。版主四時抵達，有關車輛及工作人員早已離開，現場遺下有康文署標記的安全圍帶以及大量的修枝，據知曾有區議員到場投訴，
修樹工作才暫時被制止。版主後來發現落在地上的修枝埋下鷺鳥巢共七個，至少三個鳥巢更有雛鳥在上！愛護動物協會及漁農自然護理署同事到場，救走十隻雛鳥並送往嘉道理農場治療，另外現場至少有三隻幼鳥經已死亡，亦有破爛的鳥蛋散落在地上。受影響的鷺鳥包括小白鷺、大白鷺及夜鷺。
廣福道鷺鳥林為全港第二大，亦列為具特殊科學價值地點(SSSI)之一，據統計該鷺鳥林有151個鷺鳥巢，佔全港12%(HKBWS, 2016)。上址於2014年三月亦受土木工程拓展署的斜坡工程影響，攀藤被大片移除，並被圍上重重木板，引起團體關注。土木工程拓展署後來參考漁農自然護理署的建議，立即停工，以免影響鷺鳥的繁殖。想不到三年後，康文署竟重蹈覆轍，罔顧鷺鳥生命，辣手摧毀鳥巢。據現場觀察，鄰近樹上仍有至少11個，部份鳥巢甚至貼住修枝下刀的位置，可見工程對該鷺鳥林影響之嚴重性。更可悲的是，當質問現場的康文署職員，竟獲回覆：「不相信
修樹的工人看見有巢有雀仍下刀。」而眼前遍地屍骸卻是鐵一般的事實。
根據香港法例170章<<野生動物保護條例>>，野生雀鳥所使用中的鳥巢及其蛋皆受第4及5條保護，違例者最高刑罰是罰款十萬及監禁一年。顯然本次
修樹的事件已嚴重觸犯該條例。相關部門有法不依，情理何在？
就事件發生的以下幾項，本論壇感到極之詫異及震驚，包括：
1. 為何康文署要急趕地在鷺鳥繁殖季節時進行
修樹工作；
2. 為何康文署會對於已存在二十多年，並已列為具特殊科學價值地點(SSSI)的全港第二大鷺鳥林毫不知情，竟然於鷺鳥繁殖季節時批出
修樹的工作指示，此舉絕對是康文署行政失當；
3. 為何執行
修樹的工作人員，缺乏基本常識及專業知識，在目睹鷺鳥、更在已經有人提示鷺鳥的存在下，仍然繼續
修樹工作；
對此，本論壇現嚴正要求康文署：
1. 必須清楚交代及解釋
修樹原因及其必要性，包括在鷺鳥繁殖季節進行
修樹的必要性
2. 解釋是否知悉其管轄場地為香港受保護鷺鳥林；如知悉，為何署方仍然在鷺鳥繁殖季節批出
修樹工作。如不知悉，為何
3. 交代署方有否就香港相關法例的認知給予轄下員工足夠培訓，包括香港法例170章<<野生動物保護條例>>
4. 交代署方現時有否明確指引給予員工，如何確保樹木工作不影響雀鳥生態；以及在樹木工作進行前或進行中，發現鳥巢或幼鳥時的相關應對程序及行動
5. 交代現時署方有否機制，與相關部門或團體包括漁農自然護理署及香港觀鳥會，緊密溝通及聯繫，確保樹木工作不影響雀鳥生態。如有，為何是次事件會發生
6. 交代事件是否涉及人為疏忽及行政失當，並確保同類事件不會再次發生
二零一七年六月六日
香港自然生態論壇
Ms. Li Mei Sheung, Michelle, JP
Director of Leisure, Cultural and Services Department
Dear Ms Li Mei Sheung,
HK Wildlife Forum condemns the Leisure, Cultural and Services Department’s criminal and negligent tree pruning practice at the egretry on Kwong Fuk Road in Tai Po that killed and wounded many egret nestling and fledglings.
On February 6 at 2pm, HK Wildlife Forum learnt that a team of LCSD employees were pruning trees at an egretry on Kwong Fuk Road in Tai Po, and young birds were falling from their nests onto the ground. When questioned by a member of the HK Wildlife Forum, the workers at the scene said dismissively: “We would return the birds onto the trees later” and “we do not believe that workers will prune trees if they are aware that they are bird nests on it”. Yet the pruning went on. Our member’s photos showed that the vehicles parked at the scene were labelled LCSD N.T. East Tree Team and have car plates beginning with AM.
In view of the severity of the incident, the moderator of HK Wildlife Forum arrived at the scene at 4pm to look into the issue and liaise with relevant government departments and organisations. Unfortunately, upon arrival, the team of LCSD employees has already left, leaving barricade tapes and a heaped pile of fallen branches behind. It is believed that the tree pruning was stopped when a district councilor lodged a complaint on site. The moderator found seven egret nests amongst the pruned branches, and three of which contained nestlings. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) rescued a handful of nestlings and sent them to the Wild Animal Rescue Centre at Kadoorie Farm and Botanic Garden. At least three nestlings died on site and there were broken eggs on the ground. Some of the 11 nests perched on neighbouring trees are left in an unsafe, exposed position. The victimized species included Black-capped Night Heron, Little Egret and Great Egret.
The egretry on Kwong Fuk Road in Tai Po is the second largest in Hong Kong, and is listed as a Site of Special Scientific Interest. According to a 2016 census, the egretry houses 151 nests, which is 12 per cent of the total nests found across the territory. In March 2014, the Civil Engineering and Development Department (CEDD) drew flak and criticism when it removed large areas of vines at the egretry in an act to maintain slope safety. With advice from the AFCD, the CEDD ceased their operations to prevent disturbing the egretry during the breeding season.
This tree pruning practice has blatantly broken Cap 170 of Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (WAPO) that protects all birds, bird nest and their eggs, and carries a maximum penalty of HK$100,000 and a year behind bars.
HK Wildlife Forum is outraged that:
1. LCSD pruned trees at the egretry during the breeding season.
2. LCSD is not aware of the existence of the egretry which has been established for more than 20 years and listed as a Site of Special Scientific Interest.
3. Tree workers lack common sense and professional knowledge to cease work when they see and are notified that there are egret nests in the trees.
HK Wildlife Forum urges LCSD to:
1. Explain why the trees needed to be pruned, and why the work must be conducted during the breeding season
2. Explain whether the department is aware that the site is a protected egretry, and if the department knows of the existence of the egretry, why the work is approved.
3. Explain whether the department has provided relevant legal training to its employees including the Cap 170 of Wild Animals Protection Ordinance (WAPO).
4. Explain whether the department has issued guidelines for its employees on wildlife protection measures when conducting tree management, and the procedures needed when bird nest or nestlings are discovered prior to and during tree management.
5. Explain whether there is a communication mechanism between government departments and between government and relevant environmental groups like the Hong Kong Bird Watching Society to ensure tree management goes hand in hand with wildlife protection.
6. Explain whether this incident is the result of human error or maladministration, and how similar incidents can be prevented.
HKWildlife.net
www.hkwildlife.net
June 6, 2017
Share
