活在南丫:十如何保護南丫島南? How Can We Protect South Lamma?

轉載自獨立媒體

文:Living Lamma

Last week, South Lamma – the place with of two of Hong Kong’s sites of special scientific interest, zoned for conservation and coastal protection, and home to Romer’s tree frogs and green turtles, both protected species – was saved from becoming a marina, hotel and residential complex by the Town Planning Board’s decision to reject the application for rezoning by the developer.

上週,城規會否決發展商在南丫島南興建遊艇會、酒店及住宅的改變土地用途的申請。南丫島南這片有兩處「具特殊科學研究價值」地點,在規劃大綱內屬自然保育及海岸保護區,亦是兩種受保護動物盧文氏樹蛙及綠海龜居住的地方,暫且得到保存。

In January 2010, South Lamma made front page news because of large, odd concreting work that suddenly appeared under the natural boulders on the hillside. (See top picture).

在2010年一月,在南丫島南的天然巨石及山下突然出現大型及莫名其妙的工程(見置頂圖),南丫島南又成為報章的新聞。

Now two projects – one by the Home Affairs Department (HAD) and the other by a local developer are helping to destroy the landscape value of South Lamma. (The other photos show HAD’s Great Concrete Wall of Tung O and the private building works).

這兩項工程分別由民政事務處及一位本地的發展商進行,工程已經影響到南丫島南的地貌價值(另一些圖片可以看到民政事務處的巨型石屎牆及有關的私人建築工程)。

HAD has replaced the traditional green railings along the hiking path with a concrete wall more than 116 metres in length. The wall measures over a metre on the path side and almost 3 metres on the beach side. It has transformed Tung O visually, seriously detracting from the majestic natural views of the rock face or the beach. Unusually, the water trough on the path – a welcome stop off on hot days, particularly for our four legged friends – has been removed and a small concrete wall erected.

民政事務處以一條長達116米的巨型石屎牆,取代原有的沿行人徑設置的傳統綠色欄杆。從行人徑量度,該巨型石屎牆高達1米,從沙灘量度更接近3米。 該牆從視覺上嚴重破壞東澳的具特色的岩石及沙灘的自然景觀。更不尋常的時,原有行人徑旁的水槽也被拆毀,取而代之的則是石屎牆,這條水槽本是遊人及狗隻在 天熱時,稍作小休的良伴。

We understand that there has been some difficulty with the path, particularly in typhoon season, but surely Asia’s World City can do better? Now our children cannot even see the sea for the concrete at what should be one of Hong Kong’s visually most impressive bays. Surely there could be a better choice of materials and design?

我們了解行人徑有不少問題,特別是颱風的季節,但所謂的「亞洲國際都會」能否做得更好?我們小孩從行人徑甚至看不到原本應該是香港最出色的海灘。除了災難性的石屎牆外,肯定有更好的物料及設計。

At the other end of the beach, visitors will find an enormous pile of construction material, signs put up by the Lands Department and a large digger working away (at least it was today.) This is the area that hundreds of volunteers helped to clean during the Hong Kong Coastal Clean Up Challenge this year.

在沙灘的另一邊,遊客可以見到大量建築物料,地政總署已設立警告牌,大型的剷泥車正在施工。這處是今年海灘清潔比賽(Hong Kong Coastal Clean Up Challenge)有過百義工幫忙清潔沙灘的地方。

Both HAD and the owner of the property are known supporters of the Baroque project. Is this yet another case of “destroy first, develop later” seen so often across Hong Kong’s rural New Territories?

民政事務處及發展商也是南丫島南博寮港發展項目的支持者。這是否另一個「先破壞、後發展」的例子?

We are sure members of the government will bristle at the accusation. But can the Secretary for Home Affairs please explain the reason for the insensitive design and unnecessary concrete pouring involved in so many of his department’s projects on Lamma?

我們肯定政府會否認這個指控,但民政事務局局長能否就當局在南丫島的多項不適當的工程設計及不必要的石屎作出解釋?

Surely there should be better protection for Hong Kong’s ecologically sensitive areas. The enforcement of the Statutory Outline Zoning Plan, would be a good start. It would also help if HAD would fulfill the promises of its environmental report by
“carrying out local environmental improvement projects with due regard to the impact on the environment.”

可以肯定的是,對於香港一些生態敏感的地方的保護必須加強。實施「分區規劃大綱圖」是一個好開始,民政事務處亦必須落實他們「在進行地區環境改善工程時,必須考慮工程對環境的影響」的承諾。

We would like to see immediate and effective action to restore the natural landscape of Tung O bay. We urge government to take the necessary measures to protect South Lamma. We hope that how this might be achieved will become a topic for debate at Legco, as well as in local news media.

我們要求當局採取即時及有效的措施,回復東澳的自然景觀。我們要求政府實行必要的措施保護南丫島南。我們希望這能成為立法會辯論的題目及傳媒關注的事項。

How we can affect change remains to be seen. We shall be sending a copy of this newsletter to the heads of departments for Planning, Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation, Environmental Protection and Home Affairs. We will also send it to the Development Bureau and Tourism Commission, as the destruction of South Lamma means a lost opportunity for eco-tourism in Hong Kong. And we will copy the Legco Panel on Environmental Affairs and our contacts in the press.

我們能否作出改變?我們會將這份通訊的副本寄到規劃署、漁農自然護理署、環境保護署及民政事務處。我們亦會寄到發展局及旅遊發展局,因為南丫島南受到破壞意味香港失去一處辦生態旅遊的機會。立法會環境事務委員會及傳媒都會收到這些資料。

We sincerely hope that these efforts will not, as has happened so often in the past, result in one government department passing the buck to another until the day when the Baroque (or whatever it might call itself in future) sees that people have given up and South Lamma once again becomes the target of a rezoning application for the benefit of property speculation.

我們希望這次的努力不會像從前一樣,政府部門將責任互相推卸,直至博寮港公司看到人們放棄南丫島南的機會,再次向城規會申請改變土地用途,將土地用作樓宇炒賣。

We would like to encourage other groups and individuals to add their voices to our campaign to protect South Lamma. However, as there is no one office or individual responsible, it is difficult to advise where to send a letter. Please use your contacts and networks to help us identify someone who can champion this cause.

我們希望其他組織及個人能夠一同參與我們保護南丫島的行動。然而,到目前為止仍沒有任何一個政府部門或官員承認責任,我們很難無法建議有關的信件應該寄到甚麼地方。請各位利用大家的網絡幫我們找到哪位官員就此事負責。

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s