Tree Pruning or Felling Plan

for

Mai Po Nature Reserve Infrastructure Upgrade

Project (Environnemental Permit No. EP-598/2022)

May 2023

(Version 4.0)

Prepared By:

(Registered Arborist)

Certified By Environmental Team Leader:

(Joan Choi)

Company: Ka Shing Management Consultancy Ltd

Table of Content

Page

No.

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND ...................................................................................... 1

2. TREE SURVEY METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 2

3. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF TREES AND FINDINGS ...................................... 4

4. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 5

5. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 5

List of Appendices

Appendix A – The Location of the Project

Appendix B – Registered Arborist’s C.V.

Appendix C – Footpath Adjustment for Tree Preservation

1 | Page

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND

1.1 The Mai Po Nature Reserve has served Hong Kong as one of the most valuable ecological assets

in the city, and is managed by the World Wide Fund for Nature Hong Kong (“WWF”). WWF

proposes to update of an existing concrete footpath of about 1.5m wide to a raised wooden

boardwalk of about 1.65m wide, construction of a new three-storey tower hide (TH2) and the

associated access wooden boardwalk of about 156m long and 1.65m wide; and construction of a

new three-storey tower hide (TH3) and the associated access wooden boardwalk of about 85m

long and 1.65m wide. The location of the Project as shown in the Appendix A of this report.

1.2 The project site is located in Mai Po Nature Reserve (MPNR) where has been managed by

World Wide Fund for Nature Hong Kong (“WWF”) since 1984. More than 20,000 people per

year visiting the MPNR and growing in visitor numbers is anticipated. Most of the existing

facilities have been in use for more than 20 years, in order to cater for an increasing number of

visitors and providing the good condition of facilities in the future, the upgrade of infrastructure

is proposed. The WWF had completed an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and is the

Permit Holder.

1.3 The Project under Mai Po Nature Reserve Infrastructure Upgrade Project (Register No. AEIAR-

233/2022) is approved by the EIA report and later granted an EP. The approved EIA report

described both the construction phase and operational phase.

1.4 Ka Shing Management Consultancy Ltd. has been commissioned by the WWF to undertake the

assignment as the Environmental Team (ET) for the Designated Project of Mai Po Nature Reserve

Infrastructure Upgrade Project.

1.5 Pursuant to Condition 2.9 of the Environmental Permit (EP) No.: EP-598/2022, The Permit

Holder shall, no later than one month before the commencement of construction of the Project,

issue a written notice to the Director to confirm whether tree pruning or felling is required for the

Project. If tree(s) pruning or felling is/are required for the Project as confirmed by the written

notice in Condition 2.9, the Permit Holder shall, no later than one month prior to the proposed

tree(s) pruning or felling works or otherwise approved by the Director, submit 4 hard copies and

1 electronic copy of a Tree Pruning or Felling Plan (TPFP) to the Director for approval.

1.6 This Report is to present the result of on-site inspection conducted on 23rd March 2023.

2 | Page

2. TREE SURVEY METHODOLOGY

2.1 In preparation of the Report, reference has been made to the following technical circulars,

practice notes and publications:

-EIAO, Cap. 499 Guidance Note No. 8/2010

-Annexes 10 and 18 to the EIAO-TM

-Study on Landscape Value Mapping of Hong Kong

-Landscape Character Map of Hong Kong (PlanD, 2005)

-Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines (HKPSG) Chapters 4, 10 and 11

-Town Planning Ordinance (Cap. 131)

-Forests and Countryside Ordinance (Cap.96)

-Protection of Endangered Species of Animals and Plants Ordinance (Cap. 586)

-Check Lis of Hong Kong Plants 2012 (AFCD ,2003)

-AFCD Nature Conservation Practice Note Nos. 01, 01 (Rev. Jun 2006) and 03

-Guidelines on Tree Preservation during Development (Greening, Landscape and Tree

Management Section, Development Bureau, April 2015)

-Guidelines on Tree Transplanting (Greening, Landscape and Tree Management Section,

Development Bureau, September 2014)

-DEVB TC No. 4/2020 – Tree Preservation

-DEVB TC No. 6/2015 – Maintenance of Vegetation and Hard Landscape Features

-DEVB TC No. 3/2012 – Site Coverage of Greenery for Government Building Projects

-ETWB TCW No. 5/2020 – Registration and Preservation of Old and Valuable Trees

-ETWB TCW No. 34/2003 – Community Involvement in Greeting Works

-WBTC No. 7/2002 – Tree Planting in Public Works

-Approved Mai Po and Fairview Park OZP No. S/YL-MP/6

-Lands Administration Office, Practice Note (LAO PN) Issue No. 2/2020 and 2/2020A – Tree

Preservation and Removal Proposal for Building Development in Private Projects Compliance

of Tree Preservation Clause under Lease and Guideline Notes (August 2022)

2.2 The on-site inspection was conducted on 23rd March 2023 by a registered arborist whose C.V.

shown in the Appendix B. The trees were assessed by visual tree assessment method only.

2.3 On-the-ground Visual Assessment is adopted in this tree survey. Information regarding tree

location, tree species, general tree characteristic, health condition, structural defects, site

condition, and presence of target are collected by visual observation and photographic record

taken, this survey is supplemented with “sound method” by using a rubber coated mallet as a

preliminary and non-destructive way to probe the possibility of internal decay. With information

3 | Page

collected and analyzed, necessity of further inspection, hazardous risk level and treatment

recommendation shall be advised Each tree, is clearly marked on site and its position is identified

by visual approximation and plotted on topographic plan.

2.4 Within the designated site boundary, all living trees with a stem diameter over 95mm measured

at a point of 1.3m above the root collar (hereafter referred to as the DBH) are included in the Tree

Survey.

2.5 Where trees could be reasonably accessed without significant safety risk to the public and where

reasonable access was available, they were surveyed individually. Tree Health Condition is

evaluated with the following criteria:

Foliage

 Evidence of“poor leaf color and small leaf size [which] may indicate damage of roots”

(Ref. R. Webb);

 Evidence of insect and fungal infections in leaves; and,

 Evidence of leaf damage owing to typhoons (although it is recognized that trees are usually

able to recover from this within one growing reason).

Twigs

 Evidence of“poor shoot growth and die-back of twigs in the crown are often symptoms of

root problems caused by a change in the water table level or soil compaction resulting

 from site development work”(Ref. R. Webb);

 Evidence of insect and fungal infections on the twigs and branches; and

 Evidence of twig damage particularly if the tree had been made unbalanced.

Branches

 Dead or crossing branches;

 Evidence of“heavy horizontal branches [which] may make the tree unstable (Ref. R.Webb);

 The presence of broken, damaged or cut branches as a possible site for infections; and

 Evidence of damaged branches which may make the tree unbalanced or unstable;“An edge

tree exposed as a result of the removal of adjacent trees often [which] has an unbalanced

crown and may be hazardous” (Ref. R. Webb).

Trunk

 “Tightly forked trunks [which] are a source of weakness in the tree as in high winds the tree

can be torn apart”(Ref. R. Webb);

 Evidence of“cavities or internal rot [which] can be revealed by discolored bark, moisture

seeping through the bark or bracket fungi”(Ref. R. Webb); and

 Open cavities and bark damage.

The Health Condition of each tree is graded as follows:

 Good - Trees with a low incidence of the less serious features and a medium chance of

4 | Page

recovery can be graded as good;

 Fair - Trees with a higher incidence of the less serious features and a medium chance of

recovery can be graded as fair;

 Poor - Trees with more serious health features and with a low chance of recovery, even with

remedial measures, can be graded as poor; and

 Dead - Dead or irretrievably unhealthy.

Tree Structure condition is graded as follows

 Good - Trees with well-balanced form, upright, evenly branching, well-formed head and

generally in accordance with the standard form for its species can be graded good;

 Fair - Trees with generally balanced form with natural compensations for loss of branches or

leaning trunks for example can be graded fair; and

 Poor - Trees with very unbalanced form, leaning, suffering loss of major branches with general

damaged and growing close to adjacent trees can be graded poor.

Tree Form is graded as follows

 Good - Trees with well-balanced, upright, evenly branching, well-formed crowns and which

are considered good examples of their species can be graded good;

 Fair - Trees with less balanced crowns which are mildly distorted due to competition with

neighbouring trees or structures, or which have suffered minor damage or which have leaning

trunks for example can be graded fair; and

 Poor - Trees with very distorted crowns, which are leaning severely or which have suffered

the loss of major branches or which are unstable can be graded poor.

According to the condition inspected, appropriate arboriculture treatment e.g. Tree Pruning or

Felling shall be required for the Project with justification and implementation program as necessary.

3. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF TREES AND FINDINGS

3.1 A comprehensive survey of all potentially impacted trees on all work sites and work areas was

conducted on 23rd March 2023 under the Project. The tree survey information presented

herein is an extract from a survey.

3.2 The Tree(s) Pruning or Felling is prepared in accordance with ETWB TC(W) No. 3/2006 and

LandsD Practice Note No. 7/2007. Under the Project, no trees would be pruned and felled.

The trees can be retained in site during construction. No trees are recommended to be

transplanted because of construction.

3.3 There are some tree(s) observed close to the existing concrete footpath in a particular area.

However, the construction method and detail will be adjusted to suit the actual condition for

5 | Page

preventing any tree pruning and felling. Detail refer to Appendix C.

4. CONCLUSION

4.1 Based on the result of on-site inspection, it is confirmed that no tree(s) pruning or felling

within study area are required and existing trees will not be affected by the construction works

of the Project. Therefore, Tree Pruning or Felling Plan (TPFP) which detailing the mitigation

measures for existing trees are not required.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 The Contractor was reminded to maintain noise, air quality, water quality and waste

management mitigation measures and continuously implements all environmental mitigation

measures in accordance with the EM&A Manual.

5.2 The ET and IEC will continue monitoring the environmental performance of Works

Contractors to ensure compliance with the requirements and mitigation measures specified

in the EIA and the EM&A Manual.