Environmental Monitoring	Parameters	Action Level (AL)	Limit Level (LL)
Air Quality	1-hr TSP	0	0
24-hr TSP	0	0
Noise	L_eq_{(30 min)}	0	0
Water Quality	Suspended solids level (SS)	3	0
Turbidity level	0	0
Dissolved oxygen level (DO)	0	0
Dolphin Monitoring	Quarterly Analysis (Mar 2019 to May 2019 [KE1] )	0	1

Environmental Monitoring	Description	Monitoring Station	Frequencies	Remarks
Air Quality	1-hr TSP	AMS 5 & AMS 6	At least 3 times every 6 days	While the highest dust impact was expected.
24-hr TSP	At least once every 6 days	--
Noise	L_eq_(30mins)_, L₁₀_(30mins)and L₉₀_(30mins)	NMS 5	At least once per week	Daytime on normal weekdays (0700-1900 hrs).
Water Quality	�P Depth �P Temperature �P Salinity �P Dissolved Oxygen (DO) �P Suspended Solids (SS) �P DO Saturation �P Turbidity �P pH	�P Impact Stations: IS5, IS(Mf)6, IS7, IS8, IS(Mf)9 & IS10(N), �P Control/Far Field Stations: CS2(A) & CS(Mf)5, �P Sensitive Receiver Stations: SR3(N), SR4(N), SR5(N), SR10A(N) & SR10B(N2)	Three times per week during mid-ebb and mid-flood tides (within �� 1.75 hour of the predicted time)	3 (1 m below water surface, mid-depth and 1 m above sea bed, except where the water depth is less than 6 m, in which case the mid-depth station may be omitted. Should the water depth be less than 3 m, only the mid-depth station will be monitored).
Dolphin	Line-transect Methods	Northeast Lantau survey area and Northwest Lantau survey area	Twice per month	--
Mudflat	Horseshoe crabs, seagrass beds, intertidal soft shore communities, sedimentation rates and water quality	San Tau and Tung Chung Bay	Once every 3 months	--

Parameter (unit)	Water Depth	Action Level	Limit Level
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)	Surface and Middle	5.0	4.2 except 5 for Fish Culture Zone
Bottom	4.7	3.6
Turbidity (NTU)	Depth average	27.5 or 120% of upstream control station��s turbidity at the same tide of the same day; The action level has been amended to ��27.5 *and* 120% of upstream control station��s turbidity at the same tide of the same day�� since 25 March 2013.	47.0 or 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day; The limit level has been amended to ��47.0 *and* 130% of turbidity at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day�� since 25 March 2013.
Suspended Solid (SS) (mg/L)	Depth average	23.5 or 120% of upstream control station��s SS at the same tide of the same day; The action level has been amended to ��23.5 *and* 120% of upstream control station��s SS at the same tide of the same day�� since 25 March 2013.	34.4 or 130% of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes; The limit level has been amended to ��34.4 *and* 130% of SS at the upstream control station at the same tide of same day and 10mg/L for Water Services Department Seawater Intakes�� since 25 March 2013

3 Environmental Monitoring and Audit

3.1 Implementation of Environmental Measures

3.1.1 In response to the site audit findings, the Contractor have rectified all observations identified in environmental site inspections undertaken during the reporting period. Details of site audit findings and the corrective actions during the reporting period are presented in Appendix F.

3.1.2 A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix E.

3.1.3 Regular marine travel route for marine vessels were implemented properly in accordance to the submitted plan and relevant records were kept properly.

3.1.4 Dolphin Watching Plan was implemented during the reporting period. No dolphins inside the silt curtain were observed. The relevant records were kept properly.

3.2 Air Quality Monitoring Results

3.2.1 The monitoring results for 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP are summarized in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are presented in Appendix G.

Table 3.1 Summary of 1-hour TSP Monitoring Results Obtained During the Reporting Period

Reporting Period	Monitoring Station	Average (mg/m³)	Range (mg/m³)	Action Level (mg/m³)	Limit Level (mg/m³)
Mar 2019	AMS5	61	40 �V 118	352	500
Mar 2019	AMS6	70	37 �V 241	360
Apr 2019	AMS5	40	32 �V 49	352
Apr 2019	AMS6	39	34 �V 51	360
May 2019	AMS5	55	28 �V 113	352
May 2019	AMS6	42	33 �V 50	360

Table 3.2 Summary of 24-hour TSP Monitoring Results Obtained During the Reporting Period

Reporting Period	Monitoring Station	Average (mg/m³)	Range (mg/m³)	Action Level (mg/m³)	Limit Level (mg/m³)
Mar 2019	AMS5	54	17 �V 79	164	260
Mar 2019	AMS6	57	19 �V 93	173
Apr 2019	AMS5	36	28 �V 48	164
Apr 2019	AMS6	32	21 �V 42	173
May 2019	AMS5	38	18 �V 69	164
May 2019	AMS6	38	17 �V 65	173

3.2.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting period.

3.3 Noise Monitoring Results

3.3.1 The monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.3 and the monitoring results and relevant graphical plots for this reporting period are provided in Appendix H.

Table 3.3 Summary of Construction Noise Monitoring Results Obtained During the Reporting Period

Reporting period	Monitoring Station	Average L_eq_{(30 mins)}, dB(A)*	Range of L_eq_{(30 mins)}, dB(A)*	Action Level	Limit Level L_eq_{(30 mins)}, dB(A)
Mar 2019	NMS5	59	57 �V 60	When one documented complaint is received	75
Apr 2019		59	56 �V 66
May 2019		58	56 �V 60

*A correction factor of +3dB(A) from free field to facade measurement was included.

3.3.2 No Action/Limit Level exceedances for noise were recorded during daytime on normal weekdays of the reporting period.

3.3.3 Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of the Contract and nearby traffic noise and insect noise.

3.4 Water Quality Monitoring Results

3.4.1 Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all designated monitoring stations during the reporting period. Impact water quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix I.

3.4.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of turbidity level and dissolved oxygen were recorded during reporting period. No Limit Level exceedance of suspended solids were recorded during the reporting period.

3.4.3 3 Action Level exceedances of suspended solids level were recorded during the reporting period. The exceedances of suspended solids level recorded during reporting period was considered to be attributed to other external factors such as sea condition, rather than the contract works. The exceedances were considered as non-contract related. Record of ��Notification of Environmental Quality Limit Exceedances�� is provided in Appendix M.

3.4.4 Water quality impact sources during the water quality monitoring were the construction activities of the Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and nearby operating vessels by other parties.

3.5 Dolphin Monitoring Results

Data Analysis

3.5.1 Distribution Analysis �V The line-transect survey data was integrated with the Geographic Information System (GIS) in order to visualize and interpret different spatial and temporal patterns of dolphin distribution using sighting positions. Location data of dolphin groups were plotted on map layers of Hong Kong using a desktop GIS (ArcView^�3.1) to examine their distribution patterns in details. The dataset was also stratified into different subsets to examine distribution patterns of dolphin groups with different categories of group sizes, young calves and activities.

3.5.2 Encounter rate analysis �V Encounter rates of Chinese white dolphins (number of on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort, and total number of dolphins sighted on-effort per 100 km of survey effort) were calculated in NEL and NWL survey areas in relation to the amount of survey effort conducted during each month of monitoring survey. Dolphin encounter rates were calculated in two ways for comparisons with the HZMB baseline monitoring results as well as to AFCD long-term marine mammal monitoring results.

3.5.3 Firstly, for the comparison with the HZMB baseline monitoring results, the encounter rates were calculated using primary survey effort alone, and only data collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition would be used for encounter rate analysis. The average encounter rate of sightings (STG) and average encounter rate of dolphins (ANI) were deduced based on the encounter rates from six events during the present quarter (i.e. six sets of line-transect surveys in North Lantau), which was also compared with the one deduced from the six events during the baseline period (i.e. six sets of line-transect surveys in North Lantau).

3.5.4 Secondly, the encounter rates were calculated using both primary and secondary survey effort collected under Beaufort 3 or below condition as in AFCD long-term monitoring study. The encounter rate of sightings and dolphins were deduced by dividing the total number of on-effort sightings (STG) and total number of dolphins (ANI) by the amount of survey effort for the present quarterly period.

3.5.5 Quantitative grid analysis on habitat use �V To conduct quantitative grid analysis of habitat use, positions of on-effort sightings of Chinese White Dolphins collected during the quarterly impact phase monitoring period were plotted onto 1-km² grids among NWL and NEL survey areas on GIS. Sighting densities (number of on-effort sightings per km²) and dolphin densities (total number of dolphins from on-effort sightings per km²) were then calculated for each 1 km by 1 km grid with the aid of GIS. Sighting density grids and dolphin density grids were then further normalized with the amount of survey effort conducted within each grid. The total amount of survey effort spent on each grid was calculated by examining the survey coverage on each line-transect survey to determine how many times the grid was surveyed during the study period. For example, when the survey boat traversed through a specific grid 50 times, 50 units of survey effort were counted for that grid. With the amount of survey effort calculated for each grid, the sighting density and dolphin density of each grid were then normalized (i.e. divided by the unit of survey effort).

3.5.6 The newly-derived unit for sighting density was termed SPSE, representing the number of on-effort sightings per 100 units of survey effort. In addition, the derived unit for actual dolphin density was termed DPSE, representing the number of dolphins per 100 units of survey effort. Among the 1-km² grids that were partially covered by land, the percentage of sea area was calculated using GIS tools, and their SPSE and DPSE values were adjusted accordingly. The following formulae were used to estimate SPSE and DPSE in each 1-km² grid within the study area:

SPSE = ((S / E) x 100) / SA%

DPSE = ((D / E) x 100) / SA%

where S = total number of on-effort sightings

D = total number of dolphins from on-effort sightings

E = total number of units of survey effort

SA% = percentage of sea area

3.5.7 Behavioural analysis �V When dolphins were sighted during vessel surveys, their behaviour was observed. Different activities were categorized (i.e. feeding, milling/resting, traveling, socializing) and recorded on sighting datasheets. This data was then input into a separate database with sighting information, which can be used to determine the distribution of behavioural data with a desktop GIS. Distribution of sightings of dolphins engaged in different activities and behaviours would then be plotted on GIS and carefully examined to identify important areas for different activities of the dolphins.

3.5.8 Ranging pattern analysis �V Location data of individual dolphins that occurred during the 3-month baseline monitoring period were obtained from the dolphin sighting database and photo-identification catalogue. To deduce home ranges for individual dolphins using the fixed kernel methods, the program Animal Movement Analyst Extension, was loaded as an extension with ArcView^� 3.1 along with another extension Spatial Analyst 2.0. Using the fixed kernel method, the program calculated kernel density estimates based on all sighting positions, and provided an active interface to display kernel density plots. The kernel estimator then calculated and displayed the overall ranging area at 95% UD level.

Summary of Survey Effort and Dolphin Sightings(updated)

3.5.9 During the period of March to May 2019, six sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted to cover all transect lines in NWL and NEL survey areas twice per month.

3.5.10 From these surveys, a total of 794.91 km of survey effort was collected, with 96.2% of the total survey effort being conducted under favourable weather conditions (i.e. Beaufort Sea State 3 or below with good visibility). Among the two areas, 293.34 km and 501.57 km of survey effort were conducted in NEL and NWL survey areas respectively.

3.5.11 The total survey effort conducted on primary lines was 572.37 km, while the effort on secondary lines was 222.54 km. Survey effort conducted on both primary and secondary lines were considered to be on-effort survey data. A summary table of the survey effort is shown in Appendix J.

3.5.12 During the six sets of monitoring surveys conducted between March and May 2019, only five groups of 11 Chinese White Dolphins were sighted, with the summary table of dolphin sightings shown in Annex II of Appendix J. All five dolphin sightings were made during on-effort search, with four of them being made on primary lines.

3.5.13 In addition, all dolphin groups were sighted in NWL, and no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL. In fact, since August 2014, only two sightings of two lone dolphins were made in NEL during HKLR03 monitoring surveys.

Distribution

3.5.14 Distribution of dolphin sightings made during HKLR03 monitoring surveys conducted from March to May 2019 is shown in Figure 1 of Appendix J. These sightings were all scattered at the western portion of the North Lantau region, with no particular concentration (Figure 1 of Appendix J).

3.5.15 As consistently recorded in previous monitoring quarters, the dolphins were completely absent from the central and eastern portions of North Lantau waters (Figure 1 of Appendix J). Moreover, all dolphin sightings were located far away from the HKLR03 and HKBCF reclamation sites as well as along the alignment of Tuen Mun-Chek Lap Kok Link (TMCLKL) (Figure 1 of Appendix J). However, one group of two dolphins was sighted near the HKLR09 alignment to the west of Shum Wat.

3.5.16 Sighting distribution of dolphins during the present impact phase monitoring period (March-May 2019) was drastically different from the one during the baseline monitoring period (Figure 1 of Appendix J. In the present quarter, dolphins have disappeared from the NEL region, which was in stark contrast to their frequent occurrences around the Brothers Islands, near Shum Shui Kok and in the vicinity of HKBCF reclamation site during the baseline period (Figure 1 of Appendix J). The nearly complete abandonment of NEL region by the dolphins has been consistently recorded in the past 24 quarters of HKLR03 monitoring, which has resulted in zero to extremely low dolphin encounter rates in this area.

3.5.17 In NWL survey area, dolphin occurrence was also drastically different between the baseline and impact phase periods. During the present impact monitoring period, dolphins were sighted infrequently there, and their distribution was restricted to the western portion of the North Lantau region, which was in stark contrast to their frequent occurrences throughout the area during the baseline period (Figure 1 of Appendix J).

3.5.18 Another comparison in dolphin distribution was made between the six quarterly periods of spring months in 2014-19. Among the six spring periods, dolphins were regularly sighted in NWL waters in 2014, but such usage was dramatically reduced to very low levels in the five subsequent spring periods of 2015-19 (Figure 2 of Appendix J).

Encounter Rate

3.5.19 During the present three-month study period, the encounter rates of Chinese White Dolphins deduced from the survey effort and on-effort sighting data from the primary transect lines under favourable conditions (Beaufort 3 or below) for each set of the surveys in NEL and NWL are shown in Table 3.4. The average encounter rates deduced from the six sets of surveys were also compared with the ones deduced from the baseline monitoring period (September �V November 2011) (Table 3.5).

3.5.20 To facilitate the comparison with the AFCD long-term monitoring results, the encounter rates were also calculated for the present quarter using both primary and secondary survey effort. The encounter rates of sightings (STG) and dolphins (ANI) in NWL were 1.04 sightings and 2.28 dolphins per 100 km of survey effort respectively, while the encounter rates of sightings (STG) and dolphins (ANI) in NEL were both nil for this quarter.

Table 3.4 Dolphin Encounter Rates (Sightings Per 100 km of Survey Effort) During Reporting Period (March �V May 2019)

Survey Area	Dolphin Monitoring	Encounter rate (STG) (no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)	Encounter rate (ANI) (no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
Survey Area	Dolphin Monitoring	Primary Lines Only	Primary Lines Only
Northeast Lantau	Set 1 (4 & 11 Mar 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 2 (13 & 18 Mar 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 3 (10 & 15 Apr 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 4 (23 & 25 Apr 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 5 (2 & 7 May 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 6 (21 & 23 May 2019)	0.00	0.00
Northwest Lantau	Set 1 (4 & 11 Mar 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 2 (13 & 18 Mar 2019)	3.41	6.81
	Set 3 (10 & 15 Apr 2019)	0.00	0.00
	Set 4 (23 & 25 Apr 2019)	1.64	3.27
	Set 5 (2 & 7 May 2019)	1.71	5.13
	Set 6 (21 & 23 May 2019)	0.00	0.00

Table 3.5 Comparison of average dolphin encounter rates from impact monitoring period (March �V May 2019) and baseline monitoring period (September �V November 2011)

Survey Area	Encounter rate (STG) (no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)		Encounter rate (ANI) (no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
Survey Area	Reporting Period	Baseline Monitoring Period	Reporting Period	Baseline Monitoring Period
Northeast Lantau	0.0	6.00 �� 5.05	0.0	22.19 �� 26.81
Northwest Lantau	1.13 �� 1.39	9.85 �� 5.85	2.54 �� 3.00	44.66 �� 29.85

Notes:
1) The encounter rates deduced from the baseline monitoring period have been recalculated based only on the survey effort and on-effort sighting data made along the primary transect lines under favourable conditions.

2) �� denotes the standard deviation of the average encounter rates.

3.5.21 In NEL, the average dolphin encounter rates (both STG and ANI) in the present three-month impact monitoring period were both zero with no on-effort sighting being made, and such extremely low occurrence of dolphins in NEL have been consistently recorded in the past 24 quarters of HKLR03 monitoring (Table 3.6). This is a serious concern as the dolphin occurrence in NEL in the past few years (0.0-1.0 for ER(STG) and 0.0-3.9 for ER(ANI)) have remained exceptionally low when compared to the baseline period (Table 3.6). Dolphins have been virtually absent from NEL waters since August 2014, with only two lone dolphins sighted there on two separate occasions despite consistent and intensive survey effort being conducted in this survey area.

Table 3.6 Comparison of Average Dolphin Encounter Rates in Northeast Lantau Survey Area from All Quarters of Impact Monitoring Period and Baseline Monitoring Period (Sep �V Nov 2011)

Monitoring Period	Encounter rate (STG) (no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)	Encounter rate (ANI) (no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
September-November 2011 (Baseline)	6.00 �� 5.05	22.19 �� 26.81
December 2012-February 2013 (Impact)	3.14 �� 3.21	6.33 �� 8.64
March-May 2013 (Impact)	0.42 �� 1.03*	0.42 �� 1.03*
June-August 2013 (Impact)	0.88 �� 1.36	3.91 �� 8.36
September-November 2013 (Impact)	1.01 �� 1.59	3.77 �� 6.49
December 2013-February 2014 (Impact)	0.45 �� 1.10	1.34 �� 3.29
March-May 2014 (Impact)	0.00*	0.00*
June-August 2014 (Impact)	0.42 �� 1.04	1.69 �� 4.15
September-November 2014 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
December 2014-February 2015 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
March-May 2015 (Impact)	0.00*	0.00*
June-August 2015 (Impact)	0.44 �� 1.08	0.44 �� 1.08
September-November 2015 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
December 2015-February 2016 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
March-May 2016 (Impact)	0.00*	0.00*
June-August 2016 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
September-November 2016 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
December 2016-February 2017 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
March-May 2017 (Impact)	0.00*	0.00*
June-August 2017 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
September-November 2017 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
December 2017-February 2018 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
March-May 2018 (Impact)	0.00*	0.00*
June-August 2018 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
September-November 2018 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
December 2018-February 2019 (Impact)	0.00	0.00
March-May 2019 (Impact)	0.00*	0.00*

Notes:
1) The encounter rates deduced from the baseline monitoring period have been recalculated based only on survey effort and on-effort sighting data made along the primary transect lines under favourable conditions.

2) �� denotes the standard deviation of the average encounter rates.

3) The encounter rates in spring months were in blue and marked with asterisk.

3.5.22 On the other hand, the average dolphin encounter rates (STG and ANI) in NWL during the present impact phase monitoring period (reductions of 88.5% and 94.3% respectively) were only tiny fractions of the ones recorded during the three-month baseline period, indicating a dramatic decline in dolphin usage of this survey area as well during the present impact phase period (Table 3.7).

Table 3.7 Comparison of Average Dolphin Encounter Rates in Northwest Lantau Survey Area from All Quarters of Impact Monitoring Period and Baseline Monitoring Period (Sep �V Nov 2011)

Monitoring Period	Encounter rate (STG) (no. of on-effort dolphin sightings per 100 km of survey effort)	Encounter rate (ANI) (no. of dolphins from all on-effort sightings per 100 km of survey effort)
September-November 2011 (Baseline)	9.85 �� 5.85	44.66 �� 29.85
December 2012-February 2013 (Impact)	8.36 �� 5.03	35.90 �� 23.10
March-May 2013 (Impact)	7.75 �� 3.96*	24.23 �� 18.05*
June-August 2013 (Impact)	6.56 �� 3.68	27.00 �� 18.71
September-November 2013 (Impact)	8.04 �� 1.10	32.48 �� 26.51
December 2013-February 2014 (Impact)	8.21 �� 2.21	32.58 �� 11.21
March-May 2014 (Impact)	6.51 �� 3.34*	19.14 �� 7.19*
June-August 2014 (Impact)	4.74 �� 3.84	17.52 �� 15.12
September-November 2014 (Impact)	5.10 �� 4.40	20.52 �� 15.10
December 2014-February 2015 (Impact)	2.91 �� 2.69	11.27 �� 15.19
March-May 2015 (Impact)	0.47 �� 0.73*	2.36 �� 4.07*
June-August 2015 (Impact)	2.53 �� 3.20	9.21 �� 11.57
September-November 2015 (Impact)	3.94 �� 1.57	21.05 �� 17.19
December 2015-February 2016 (Impact)	2.64 �� 1.52	10.98 �� 3.81
March-May 2016 (Impact)	0.98 �� 1.10*	4.78 �� 6.85*
June-August 2016 (Impact)	1.72 �� 2.17	7.48 �� 10.98
September-November 2016 (Impact)	2.86 �� 1.98	10.89 �� 10.98
December 2016-February 2017 (Impact)	3.80 �� 3.79	14.52 �� 17.21
March-May 2017 (Impact)	0.93 �� 1.03*	5.25 �� 9.53*
June-August 2017 (Impact)	2.20 �� 2.88	6.58 �� 8.12
September-November 2017 (Impact)	3.12 �� 1.91	10.35 �� 9.66
December 2017-February 2018 (Impact)	4.75 �� 2.26	15.73 �� 15.94
March-May 2018 (Impact)	2.88 �� 4.81*	11.12 �� 22.46*
June-August 2018 (Impact)	1.16 �� 1.39	2.87 �� 3.32
September-November 2018 (Impact)	1.51 �� 2.25	2.70 �� 3.78
December 2018-February 2019 (Impact)	2.40 �� 1.88	7.95 �� 6.60
March-May 2019 (Impact)	1.13 �� 1.39*	2.54 �� 3.00*

Notes:

1) The encounter rates deduced from the baseline monitoring period have been recalculated based only on survey effort and on-effort sighting data made along the primary transect lines under favourable conditions.

2) �� denotes the standard deviation of the average encounter rates.

3) The encounter rates in spring months were in blue and marked with asterisk.

3.5.23 Notably, when comparing the seven quarterly periods in spring months since 2014, the quarterly encounter rates in the spring of 2019 were consistent with the very low levels as recorded in the spring periods of 2015-17, despite a slight rebound in spring of 2018 (Table 3.7). The dramatic drop in dolphin occurrence in NWL in recent years should raise serious concerns, and such temporal trend should be closely monitored in the upcoming monitoring quarters as the construction activities of HZMB works will soon be completed in coming months.

3.5.24 A two-way ANOVA with repeated measures and unequal sample size was conducted to examine whether there were any significant differences in the average encounter rates between the baseline and impact monitoring periods. The two variables that were examined included the two periods (baseline and impact phases) and two locations (NEL and NWL).

3.5.25 For the comparison between the baseline period and the present quarter (26^th quarter of the impact phase being assessed), the p-values for the differences in average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI were 0.0019 and 0.0113 respectively. If the alpha value is set at 0.05, significant differences were detected between the baseline and present quarters in both the average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI.

3.5.26 For the comparison between the baseline period and the cumulative quarters in impact phase (i.e. the first 26 quarters of the impact phase being assessed), the p-values for the differences in average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI were 0.000000 and 0.000000 respectively. Even if the alpha value is set at 0.00001, significant differences were still detected in both the average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI (i.e. between the two periods and the locations).

3.5.27 As indicated in both dolphin distribution patterns and encounter rates, dolphin usage has been significantly reduced in both NEL and NWL survey areas during the present quarterly period when compared to the baseline period, and such low occurrence of dolphins has also been consistently documented in previous quarters of the past five years throughout the HZMB construction.

3.5.28 The significant decline in dolphin usage of North Lantau region raises serious concern, as the timing of the decline in dolphin usage in North Lantau waters coincided well with the construction schedule of the HZMB-related projects (Hung 2018). Apparently there has been no sign of recovery of dolphin usage, even though almost all marine works associated with the HZMB construction have been completed, and the Brothers Marine Park has been established in late 2016 as a compensation measure for the permanent habitat loss in association with the HKBCF reclamation works.

Group Size

3.5.29 Group size of Chinese White Dolphins ranged from two to three individuals per group in North Lantau region during March to May 2019. The average dolphin group sizes from these three months were compared with the ones deduced from the baseline period in September to November 2011, as shown in Table 3.8.

Table 3.8 Comparison of Average Dolphin Group Sizes between Reporting Period (Mar �V May 2019) and Baseline Monitoring Period (Sep �V Nov 2011)

Survey Area	Average Dolphin Group Size
Survey Area	Reporting Period	Baseline Monitoring Period
Overall	2.20 �� 0.45 (n = 5)	3.72 �� 3.13 (n = 66)
Northeast Lantau	---	3.18 �� 2.16 (n = 17)
Northwest Lantau	2.20 �� 0.45 (n = 5)	3.92 �� 3.40 (n = 49)

Note:

1) �� denotes the standard deviation of the average group size.

3.5.30 The average dolphin group size in NWL waters during March to May 2019 was much lower than the one recorded during the three-month baseline period, but it should be noted that the sample size of only five dolphin groups in the present quarter was a tiny fraction of the sample size of 66 dolphin groups sighted during the baseline period (Table 3.8).

3.5.31 Notably, all five groups were very small with 2-3 individuals per group only (Annex II of Appendix J).

Habitat Use

3.5.32 From March to May 2019, only five grids in North Lantau waters recorded dolphin occurrences. The only grid with moderate dolphin density was located to the northeast of Lung Kwu Chau(Figures 4a and 4b of Appendix J). In contrast, the rest of the grids only recorded moderately low DPSE values.

3.5.33 Notably, all grids near HKLR03/HKBCF reclamation sites as well as TMCLKL alignments did not record any presence of dolphins at all during on-effort search in the present quarterly period (Figures 4a and 4b of Appendix J).

3.5.34 It should be emphasized that the amount of survey effort collected in each grid during the three-month period was fairly low (6-12 units of survey effort for most grids), and therefore the habitat use pattern derived from the three-month dataset should be treated with caution. A more complete picture of dolphin habitat use pattern should be examined when more survey effort for each grid is collected throughout the impact phase monitoring programme.

3.5.35 When compared with the habitat use patterns during the baseline period, dolphin usage in NEL and NWL has drastically diminished in both areas during the present impact monitoring period (Figure 5 of Appendix J). During the baseline period, many grids between Siu Mo To and Shum Shui Kok in NEL recorded moderately high to high dolphin densities, which was in stark contrast to the complete absence of dolphins there during the present impact phase period (Figure 5 of Appendix J).

3.5.36 The density patterns were also drastically different in NWL between the baseline and impact phase monitoring periods, with high dolphin usage recorded throughout the area during the baseline period, especially around Sha Chau, near Black Point, to the west of the airport, as well as between Pillar Point and airport platform. In contrast, only one grid with moderate dolphin density was located in the western portion of North Lantau waters during the present impact phase period (Figure 5 of Appendix J).

Mother-calf Pairs

3.5.37 During the present quarterly period, no young calf was sighted at all among the five groups of dolphins.

Activities and Associations with Fishing Boats

3.5.38 None of the five dolphin groups was engaged in feeding, socializing, traveling or milling/resting activity during the three-month study period.

3.5.39 Moreover, none of the groups was found to be associated with any operating fishing vessel during the present impact phase period

Summary Photo-identification works

3.5.40 From March to May 2019, roughly 400 digital photographs of Chinese White Dolphins were taken during the impact phase monitoring surveys for the photo-identification work.

3.5.41 In total, five individuals sighted six times altogether were identified (see summary table in Appendix III of Appendix J and photographs of identified individuals in Appendix IV of Appendix J). All of these re-sightings were made in NWL. With the exception of NL123 being re-sighted twice, the other four individuals (i.e. NL182, NL202, NL261 and WL145) were all re-sighted only once during the three-month monitoring period (Annex III of Appendix J).

3.5.42 Notably, none of these individuals was sighted in WL waters during the HKLR09 monitoring surveys from the same three-month period of March to May 2019.

Individual range use

3.5.43 Ranging patterns of the five individuals identified during the three-month study period were determined by fixed kernel method, and are shown in Annex V of Appendix J.

3.5.44 With the exception of WL145, the other four identified dolphins sighted in the present quarter were mostly utilizing NWL waters as in the past, and they have completely avoided NEL waters where many of them have utilized as their core areas in the past (Annex V of Appendix J). This is in contrary to the extensive movements between NEL and NWL survey areas observed in the earlier impact monitoring quarters as well as the baseline period.

3.5.45 On the other hand, in contrary to previous monitoring quarters, none of the five individuals have extended their range use to WL waters during the spring quarter of 2019, while one individual (WL145) that consistently utilized WL waters in the past have extended its range use to NWL survey area during the present quarter.

Action Level / Limit Level Exceedance

3.5.46 There was a Limit Level exceedance of dolphin monitoring for the quarterly monitoring data (between March 2019 to May 2019). According to the contractor��s information, the marine activities undertaken for HKLR03 during the quarter of March 2019 �V May 2019 included seawall construction and box culvert construction.

3.5.47 There is no evidence showing the current LL non-compliance directly related to the construction works of HKLR03 (where the amounts of working vessels for HKLR03 have been decreasing), although the generally increased amount of vessel traffic in NEL during the impact phase has been partly contributed by HKLR03 works since October 2012. It should also be noted that work area under HKLR03 (adjoining the Airport Island) situates in waters which has rarely been used by dolphins in the past, and the working vessels under HKLR03 have been travelling from source to destination in accordance with the Marine Travel Route to minimize impacts on Chinese White Dolphin (CWD). In addition, the contractor will implement proactive mitigation measures such as avoiding anchoring at Marine Department��s designated anchorage site �V Sham Shui Kok Anchorage (near Brothers Island) as far as practicable.

3.5.48 According to Monitoring of Chinese White Dolphins in Southwest Lantau Waters �V Fourth Quarterly Report (December 2015 to February 2016) which is available on ENPO��s website, with their primary ranges centered in North and West Lantau waters, some individuals showed apparent range shifts or extensions to Southwest Lantau waters in 2015-16. For example, three individual dolphins (NL120, WL46 and WL221) indicated obvious shifts in their range use from NWL to West Lantau (WL) and Southwest Lantau (SWL) waters. Moreover, many individuals (e.g. NL212, NL260, WL200, SL55, WL232, WL237 and WL265) have extended their ranges from WL waters to SWL waters. It remains to be seen whether some of these individuals have permanently shifted their ranges away from their primary ranges in North Lantau or begin to spend more times in SWL waters as part of their ranges.

3.5.49 ENPO updated that the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge Authority (HZMBA) for the Mainland section of Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB) has commenced an interim survey on fisheries resources and CWD in the Mainland waters. ENPO presented the preliminary findings of the HZMBA interim survey on CWD sighting and photo-identification works which provide solid evidence that some CWD that were previously more often sighted in HK waters have expanded their ranges into the Mainland waters, and some with reduced usage in HK waters. These preliminary data were mentioned in Monitoring of Chinese White Dolphins in Southwest Lantau Waters �V Fourth Quarterly Report (December 2015 to February 2016) which is available on ENPO��s website.

3.5.50 A two-way ANOVA with repeated measures and unequal sample size was conducted to examine whether there were any significant differences in the average encounter rates between the baseline and impact monitoring periods. The two variables that were examined included the two periods (baseline and impact phases) and two locations (NEL and NWL).

3.5.51 For the comparison between the baseline period and the present quarter (26^thquarter of the impact phase being assessed), the p-values for the differences in average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI were 0.0019 and 0.0113 respectively. If the alpha value is set at 0.05, significant differences were detected between the baseline and present quarters in both the average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI.

3.5.52 For comparison between the baseline period and the cumulative quarters in impact phase (i.e. first 26 quarters of the impact phase being assessed), the p-values for the differences in average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI were 0.000000 and 0.000000 respectively. Even if the alpha value is set at 0.00001, significant differences were still detected in both the average dolphin encounter rates of STG and ANI (i.e. between the two periods and the locations).

3.5.53 The AFCD monitoring data during March to May 2019 has been reviewed by the dolphin specialist. During the same quarter, no dolphin was sighted from 145.50 km of survey effort on primary lines in NEL, while only one group of one dolphin was sighted from 200.64 km of survey effort on primary lines in NWL. This review has confirmed that the rare occurrence of dolphins reported by the HKLR03 monitoring surveys in spring 2019 in NEL and NWL survey area is accurate.

3.5.54 All dolphin protective measures are fully and properly implemented in accordance with the EM&A Manual. According to the Regular Marine Travel Route Plan, the travelling speed of vessels must not exceed 5 knots when crossing the edge of the Brothers Marine Park. The Contractor will continue to provide training for skippers to ensure that their working vessels travel from source to destination to minimize impacts on Chinese White Dolphin and avoid anchoring at Marine Department��s designated anchorage site - Sham Shui Kok Anchorage (near Brothers Island) as far as practicable. Also, it is recommended to complete the marine works of the Contract as soon as possible so as to reduce the overall duration of impacts and allow the dolphins population to recover as early as possible.

3.5.55 It was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors.

3.5.56 The dolphin specialists of the projects confirmed that the CWD sighting around the North of Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP) has significantly decreased, and it was likely related to the re-routing of high speed ferry (HSF) from Skypier.

3.5.57 ET will keep reviewing the implementation status of the dolphin related mitigation measures and remind the contractor to implement the relevant measures.

3.5.58 It was recommended that the marine works of HZMB projects should be completed as soon as possible so as to reduce the overall duration of impacts and allow the dolphins population to recover as early as possible.

3.5.59 It was also recommended that the marine works footprint (e.g., reduce the size of peripheral silt curtain) and vessels for the marine works should be reduced as much as possible, and vessels idling / mooring in other part of the North Lantau shall be avoided whenever possible.

3.5.60 HyD updated that the draft map of the proposed Brothers Marine Park (BMP) was gazetted in February 2016. ENPO updated that the BMP was approved by the Chief Executive in the Executive Council in August 2016. The ETs were reminded to update the BMP boundary in the Regular Marine Travel Route (RMTR) Plan. The BMP was designated on 30 December 2016. It was suggested that the protection measures (e.g. speed limit control) for the approved BMP shall be brought forward so as to provide a better habitat for dolphin recovery. It was noted that under the latest RMTR Plan, the contractors have committed to reduce the vessel speed in BMP.

3.5.61 The marine travel route will shift along the edge of the Brothers Marine Park as much as practical under the RMTR Plan. It was noted that even though marine vessels may moor within the mooring site of BMP, commercial activities including loading / unloading / transshipment are not allowed except a permit is obtained. The HZMB works vessels were recommended to avoid the BMP.

3.5.62 It was noted that starting from January 2016, HSF from the SkyPier will be re-routed north to the northern edged of the Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park which currently has the highest density of CWD in the NWL. While the HSF will reduce speed to 15 knots, the associated disturbance may still affect CWD in the area. It was implied that the CWDs in the area shall be closely followed.

3.5.63 There was a discussion on exploring possible further mitigation measures, for example, controlling the underwater noise. It was noted that the EIA reports for the projects suggested several mitigation measures, all of which have been implemented.

3.6 Mudflat Monitoring Results

Sedimentation Rate Monitoring

3.6.1 The baseline sedimentation rate monitoring was in September 2012 and impact sedimentation rate monitoring was undertaken on 21 March 2019. The mudflat surface levels at the four established monitoring stations and the corresponding XYZ HK1980 GRID coordinates are presented in Table 3.9 and Table 3.10.

Table 3.9 Measured Mudflat Surface Level Results

	Baseline Monitoring (September 2012)			Impact Monitoring (March 2019)
Monitoring Station	Easting (m)	Northing (m)	Surface Level (mPD)	Easting (m)	Northing (m)	Surface Level (mPD)
S1	810291.160	816678.727	0.950	810291.173	816678.733	1.191
S2	810958.272	815831.531	0.864	810958.272	815831.553	1.019
S3	810716.585	815953.308	1.341	810716.577	815953.305	1.550
S4	811221.433	816151.381	0.931	811221.381	816151.280	1.206

Table 3.10 Comparison of Measurement

	Comparison of measurement			Remarks and Recommendation
Monitoring Station	Easting (m)	Northing (m)	Surface Level (mPD)	Remarks and Recommendation
S1	0.013	0.006	0.241	Level continuously increased
S2	0.000	0.022	0.155	Level continuously increased
S3	-0.008	-0.003	0.209	Level continuously increased
S4	-0.052	-0.101	0.275	Level continuously increased

3.6.2 This measurement result was generally and relatively higher than the baseline measurement at S1, S2, S3 and S4. The mudflat level is continuously increased.

Water Quality Monitoring

3.6.3 The mudflat monitoring covered water quality monitoring data. Reference was made to the water quality monitoring data of the representative water quality monitoring station (i.e. SR3(N)) as in the EM&A Manual. The water quality monitoring location (SR3(N)) is shown in Figure 2.1.

3.6.4 Impact water quality monitoring in San Tau (monitoring station SR3(N)) was conducted in March 2019. The monitoring parameters included dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity and suspended solids (SS).

3.6.5 The Impact monitoring result for SR3(N) were extracted and summarised in Table 3.11:

Table 3.11 Impact Water Quality Monitoring Results (Depth Average)

Date	Mid Ebb Tide			Mid Flood Tide
Date	DO (mg/L)	Turbidity (NTU)	SS (mg/L)	DO (mg/L)	Turbidity (NTU)	SS (mg/L)
01-Mar-2019	7.7	1.9	1.5	7.8	3.4	3.1
04-Mar-2019	8.0	1.6	1.3	8.0	1.8	1.8
06-Mar-2019	8.0	2.3	3.6	7.8	1.7	1.3
08-Mar-2019	7.7	3.1	2.3	7.3	2.7	2.8
11-Mar-2019	7.0	7.7	8.5	7.3	5.5	5.2
13-Mar-2019	7.4	7.4	8.6	7.2	4.9	4.5
15-Mar-2019	7.0	2.3	1.7	7.2	6.7	2.3
18-Mar-2019	6.9	8.4	9.2	6.6	3.8	4.4
20-Mar-2019	7.0	11.2	13.1	6.7	4.3	4.5
22-Mar-2019	6.7	15.0	14.4	7.0	7.6	8.3
25-Mar-2019	6.6	12.4	12.6	7.1	9.7	11.3
27-Mar-2019	6.8	8.2	4.7	6.9	7.4	7.5
29-Mar-2019	7.0	9.5	3.7	7.0	10.3	5.8
Average	7.2	7.0	6.6	7.2	5.4	4.8

Mudflat Ecology Monitoring

Sampling Zone

3.6.6 In order to collect baseline information of mudflats in the study site, the study site was divided into three sampling zones (labeled as TC1, TC2, TC3) in Tung Chung Bay and one zone in San Tau (labeled as ST) (Figure 2.1 of Appendix O). The horizontal shoreline of sampling zones TC1, TC2, TC3 and ST were about 250 m, 300 m, 300 m and 250 m respectively (Figure 2.2 of Appendix O). Survey of horseshoe crabs, seagrass beds and intertidal communities were conducted in every sampling zone. The present survey was conducted in March 2019 (totally 2 sampling days on 21^st and 22^nd March 2019).

3.6.7 Since the field survey of Jun. 2016, increasing number of trashes and even big trashes (Figure 2.3 of Appendix O) were found in every sampling zone. It raised a concern about the solid waste dumping and current-driven waste issues in Tung Chung Bay. Respective measures (e.g. manual clean-up) should be implemented by responsible government agency units.

Horseshoe Crabs

3.6.8 Active search method was adopted for horseshoe crab monitoring by two experienced surveyors in every sampling zone. During the search period, any accessible and potential area would be investigated for any horseshoe crab individuals within 2-3 hour of low tide period (tidal level below 1.2 m above Chart Datum (C.D.)). Once a horseshoe crab individual was found, the species was identified referencing to Li (2008). The prosomal width, inhabiting substratum and respective GPS coordinate were recorded. A photographic record was taken for future investigation. Any grouping behavior of individuals, if found, was recorded. The horseshoe crab surveys were conducted on 21^st and 22^nd March 2019, which were warm and humid days.

3.6.9 In June 2017, a big horseshoe crab was tangled by a trash gill net in ST mudflat (Figure 2.3 of Appendix O). It was released to sea once after photo recording. The horseshoe crab of such size should be inhabiting sub-tidal environment while it forages on intertidal shore occasionally during high tide period. If it is tangled by the trash net for few days, it may die due to starvation or overheat during low tide period. These trash gill nets are definitely ��fatal trap�� for the horseshoe crabs and other marine life. Manual clean-up should be implemented as soon as possible by responsible units.

Seagrass Beds

3.6.10 Active search method was adopted for seagrass bed monitoring by two experienced surveyors in every sampling zone. During the search period, any accessible and potential area would be investigated for any seagrass beds within 2-3 hours of low tide period. Once seagrass bed was found, the species, estimated area, estimated coverage percentage and respective GPS coordinates were recorded. The seagrass beds surveys were conducted on 21^st (for ST, TC2 and TC3) and 22^nd (for TC1) March 2019, which were warm and humid days.

Intertidal Soft Shore Communities

3.6.11 The intertidal soft shore community surveys were conducted in low tide period on 21^st (for ST. TC2 and TC3) and 22^nd (for TC1) March 2019. In every sampling zone, three 100m horizontal transect lines were laid at high tidal level (H: 2.0m above C.D.), mid tidal level (M: 1.5m above C.D.) and low tidal level (L: 1.0m above C.D.). Along every horizontal transect line; ten random quadrats (0.5 m x 0.5m) were placed.

3.6.12 Inside a quadrat, any visible epifauna was collected and was in-situ identified to the lowest practical taxonomical resolution. Whenever possible a hand core sample (10 cm internal diameter x 20 cm depth) of sediments was collected in the quadrat. The core sample was gently washed through a sieve of mesh size 2.0 mm in-situ. Any visible infauna was collected and identified. Finally the top 5 cm surface sediment was dug for visible infauna in the quadrat regardless of hand core sample was taken.

3.6.13 All collected fauna were released after recording except some tiny individuals that were too small to be identified on site. These tiny individuals were taken to laboratory for identification under dissecting microscope.

3.6.14 The taxonomic classification was conducted in accordance to the following references: Polychaetes: Fauchald (1977), Yang and Sun (1988); Arthropods: Dai and Yang (1991), Dong (1991); Mollusks: Chan and Caley (2003), Qi (2004), AFCD (2018).

Data Analysis

3.6.15 Data collected from direct search and core sampling was pooled in every quadrat for data analysis. Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index (H��) and Pielou��s Species Evenness (J) were calculated for every quadrat using the formulae below,

H��= -�U ( Ni / N ) ln ( Ni / N ) (Shannon and Weaver, 1963)

J = H�� / ln S, (Pielou, 1966)

where S is the total number of species in the sample, N is the total number of individuals, and Ni is the number of individuals of the i^th species.

Mudflat Ecology Monitoring Results and Conclusion

Horseshoe Crabs

3.6.16 3 individuals of horseshoe crab, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda, were found in present survey. All of them were found as slightly submerged in soft mud at TC2, while no horseshoe crab was found in TC1, TC3 and ST. Since all found target fauna were large individuals (prosomal width >100mm), their records are excluded from the data analysis to avoid mixing up with juvenile population living on intertidal habitat. Photo records of the observed horseshoe crab are shown in Figure 3.1 of Appendix O and the present survey result regarding horseshoe crab are presented in Table 3.1 of Appendix O. The complete survey records are presented in Annex II of Appendix O.

3.6.17 3 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda with average body size 270mm were found in TC2. Although the searching rate was low (0.75 ind. hr-1 person-1) for TC2, it made great participation of horseshoe crab searching in this sampling zone due to the low search record in previous monitoring. There were occasional records of 1 to 4 individuals between March and September throughout the monitoring period. The maximum record was 6 individuals only in June 2016.

3.6.18 Two of the observed horseshoe crabs were a mating pair with large body sizes (prosomal width: Male 280mm; Female 310mm), which were nearly burrowing in soft mud at low tidal level (0.5- 1.0m above C.D.) (Figure 3.2 of Appendix O). The mating pair indicated the breeding of horseshoe crab could be possible along the coast of Tung Chung Wan, as long as suitable substratum was available. It is estimated the searching rate will be higher in next survey (June.2019), due to the warmer and more humid weather in following months (April �V September). The suitable breeding period of target fauna is believed in wet season, more mating pairs and the tiny individuals (i.e. newly hatched) were usually recorded in June and September every year (Figure 3.3 of Appendix O).

3.6.19 Despite of mating pair, a large individual (Prosomal width: 290mm) was found in TC2 (Figure 3.4 of Appendix O). Based on its size, it indicated that individuals of prosomal width larger than 100 mm would progress its nursery stage from intertidal habitat to sub-tidal habitat of Tung Chung Wan. This large individual might move onto intertidal shore occasionally during high tide for foraging and breeding. Because it should be inhabiting sub-tidal habitat most of the time. This record is excluded from the data analysis to avoid mixing up with juvenile population living on intertidal habitat. The searching record of the horseshoe individual is estimated to increase in next survey (June 2019), since the horseshoe crab activity would increase gradually with the warmer weather instead of being inactive and burrowed in sediments.

3.6.20 No marked individual of horseshoe crab was recorded in the present survey. Some marked individuals were found in the previous surveys of September 2013, March 2014 and September 2014. All of them were released through a conservation programme in charged by Prof. Paul Shin (Department of Biology and Chemistry, The City University of Hong Kong (CityU)). It was a re-introduction trial of artificial bred horseshoe crab juvenile at selected sites. So that the horseshoe crabs population might be restored in the natural habitat. Through a personal conversation with Prof. Shin, about 100 individuals were released in the sampling zone ST on 20 June 2013. All of them were marked with color tape and internal chip detected by specific chip sensor. There should be second round of release between June and September 2014 since new marked individuals were found in the survey of September 2014.

3.6.21 The artificial bred individuals, if found, would be excluded from the results of present monitoring programme in order to reflect the changes of natural population. However, the mark on their prosoma might have been detached during moulting after a certain period of release. The artificially released individuals were no longer distinguishable from the natural population without the specific chip sensor. The survey data collected would possibly cover both natural population and artificially bred individuals.

Population difference among the sampling zones

3.6.22 In present survey, only 3 individuals of horseshoe crab were observed in TC2 while no target fauna was found in ST, TC1 and TC3. Although there were horseshoe crabs found in TC2, all of them were large individuals which are excluded from the analysis. The search record for each sampling zone was 0 ind. hr-1person-1. Figure 3.5 of Appendix O and 3.6 of Appendix O show the changes of number of individuals, mean prosomal width and search record of horseshoe crabs Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatusin respectively in each sampling zone throughout the monitoring period.

3.6.23 To consider the entire monitoring period for TC3 and ST, medium to high search records (i.e. number of individuals) of both species (Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatusin) were usually found in wet season (June and September). The search record of ST was higher from September 2012 to June 2014 while it was replaced by TC3 from September 2014 to June 2015.The search records were similar between two sampling zones from September 2015 to June 2016. In September 2016, the search record of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda in ST was much higher than TC3. From March to June 2017, the search records of both species were similar again between two sampling zones. It showed a natural variation of horseshoe crab population in these two zones due to weather condition and tidal effect. No obvious difference of horseshoe crab population was noted between TC3 and ST. In September 2017, the search records of both horseshoe crab species decreased except the Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda in TC3. The survey results were different from previous findings that there were usually higher search records in September. One possible reason was that the serial cyclone hit decreased horseshoe crab activity (totally 4 cyclone records between June and September 2017, to be discussed in 'Seagrass survey' section). From December 2017 to September 2018, the search records of both species increased again to low-moderate level in ST. Relatively higher population fluctuation of Tachypleus tridentatus was observed in TC3.

3.6.24 For TC1, the search record was at low to moderate level throughout the monitoring period. The change of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was relatively more variable than that of Tachypleus tridentatus. Relatively, the search record was very low in TC2. There were occasional records of 1 to 4 individuals between March and September throughout the monitoring period. The maximum record was 6 individuals only in June 2016.

Seasonal variation of horseshoe crab population

3.6.25 Throughout the monitoring period, the search records of horseshoe crabs were fluctuated and at moderate �V very low level in March (Figures 3.4 and 3.5 of Appendix O). Low �V Very low search record was found in March 2013, totally 17 ind. of Tachypleus tridentatus and 0 ind. of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were found in TC1, TC3 and ST. Compare with the search record of Mar 2013, the numbers of Tachypleus tridentatus were increased by more than 2 times in March 2014 and 2015 (46 ind. in 2014 and 45 ind. in 2015); the number of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda raise to 20 and 60 ind. in March 2014 and 2015 respectively. In March 2016, the search record dropped obviously. Only 1 and 23 ind. of Tachypleus tridentatus and Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were found, respectively. Then, the search records rise again in March 2017 and March 2018. The number of Tachypleus tridentatus was increased to 14 and 44 ind., while that of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda rise again to 33 and 31 ind. in March 2017 and 2018, respectively. Throughout the monitoring period, similar distribution of horseshoe crabs population were found in March. Most of the horseshoe crabs were found in TC3 and ST, while occasional records of 1 to 3 individuals in TC1 and TC2 found. In March 2019, 3 ind.of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda were observed in TC2. However, all of them were large individuals (prosomal width >100mm), their records are excluded from the data analysis to avoid mixing up with the juvenile population living on intertidal habitat.

3.6.26 The search record of horseshoe crab declined obviously in all sampling zones during dry season especially December (Figures 3.5 and 3.6 of Appendix O) throughout the monitoring period. Very low �V low search record was found in December from 2012 to 2015 (0-4 ind. of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 0-12 ind. of Tachypleus tridentatus). The horseshoe crabs were inactive and burrowed in the sediments during cold weather (<15 ºC). Similar results of low search record in dry season were reported in a previous territory-wide survey of horseshoe crab. For example, the search records in Tung Chung Wan were 0.17 ind. hr-1 person-1 and 0.00 ind. hr-1 person-1 in wet season and dry season respectively (details see Li, 2008). Compare with the search record of December from 2012 to 2015, which of December 2016 were much higher relatively. There were totally 70 individuals of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and 24 individuals of Tachypleus tridentatus in TC3 and ST. Since the survey was carried in earlier December with warm and sunny weather (~22 ºC during dawn according to Hong Kong Observatory database, Chek Lap Kok station on 5 December 2016), the horseshoe crab was more active (i.e. move onto intertidal shore during high tide for foraging and breeding) and easier to be found. In contrast, there was no search record in TC1 and TC2 because the survey was conducted in mid-December with colder and cloudy weather (~20ºC during dawn on 19 December). The horseshoe crab activity would decrease gradually with the colder climate. In December of 2017 and 2018, very low search records were found again as mentioned above.

3.6.27 From September 2012 to December 2013, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was less common species relative to Tachypleus tridentatus. Only 4 individuals were ever recorded in ST in December 2012. This species had ever been believed of very low density in ST hence the encounter rate was very low. In March 2014, it was found in all sampling zones with higher abundance in ST. Based on its average size (mean prosomal width 39.28-49.81 mm), it indicated that breeding and spawning of this species had occurred about 3 years ago along the coastline of Tung Chun Wan. However, these individuals were still small while their walking trails were inconspicuous. Hence there was no search record in previous sampling months. Since March 2014, more individuals were recorded due to larger size and higher activity (i.e. more conspicuous walking trail).

3.6.28 For Tachypleus tridentatus, sharp increase of number of individuals was recorded in ST during the wet season of 2013 (from March to September). According to a personal conversation with Prof. Shin (CityU), his monitoring team had recorded similar increase of horseshoe crab population during wet season. It was believed that the suitable ambient temperature increased its conspicuousness. However similar pattern was not recorded in the following wet seasons. The number of individuals increased in March and June 2014 and followed by a rapid decline in September 2014. Then the number of individuals fluctuated slightly in TC3 and ST until March 2017. Apart from natural mortality, migration from nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat was another possible cause. Since the mean prosomal width of Tachypleus tridentatus continued to grow and reached about 50 mm since March 2014. Then it varied slightly between 35-65 mm from September 2014 to March 2017.Most of the individuals might have reached a suitable size (e.g. prosomal width 50-60 mm) strong enough to forage in sub-tidal habitat. In June 2017, the number of individuals increased sharply again in TC3 and ST. Although mating pair of Tachypleus tridentatus was not found in previous surveys, there should be new round of spawning in the wet season of 2016. The individuals might have grown to a more conspicuous size in 2017 accounting for higher search record. In September 2017, moderate numbers of individual were found in TC3 and ST indicating a stable population size. In September 2018, the population size was lower while natural mortality was the possible cause.

3.6.29 Recently, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was a more common horseshoe crab species in Tung Chung Wan. It was recorded in the four sampling zones while the majority of population located in TC3 and ST. Due to potential breeding last year, Tachypleus tridentatusbecame common again and distributed in TC3 and ST mainly. Since TC3 and ST were regarded as important nursery ground for both horseshoe crab species, box plots of prosomal width of two horseshoe crab species were constructed to investigate the changes of population in details.

Box plot of horseshoe crab populations in TC3

3.6.30 Figure 3.7 of Appendix O shows the changes of prosomal width of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatus in TC3. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was rarely found between September 2012 and December 2013 hence the data were lacking. In March 2014, the major size (50% of individual records between upper (top box) and lower quartile (bottom box) ranged 40-60 mm while only few individuals were found. From March 2014 to September 2018, the median prosomal width (middle line of whole box) and major size (whole box) decreased after March of every year. It was due to more small individuals found in June indicating new rounds of spawning. Also, there were slight increasing trends of body size from June. to March of next year since 2015. It indicated a stable growth of individuals. Focused on larger juveniles (upper whisker), the size range was quite variable (prosomal width 60-90 mm) along the sampling months. Juveniles reaching this size might gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats.

3.6.31 For Tachypleus tridentatus, the major size ranged 20-50 mm while the number of individuals fluctuated from September 2012 to June 2014. Then a slight but consistent growing trend was observed from September 2014 to June 2015. The prosomal width increased from 25-35 mm to 35-65 mm. As mentioned, the large individuals might have reached a suitable size for migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat. It accounted for the declined population in TC3. From March to September 2016, slight increasing trend of major size was noticed again. From December 2016 to June 2017, similar increasing trend of major size was noted with much higher number of individuals. It reflected new round of spawning. In September 2017, the major size decreased while the trend was different from previous two years. Such decline might be the cause of serial cyclone hit between June and September 2017 (to be discussed in the 'Seagrass survey' section). From December 2017 to September 2018, increasing trend was noted again. Across the whole monitoring period, the larger juveniles (upper whisker) usually reached 60-80 mm in prosomal width, even 90 mm occasionally. Juveniles reaching this size might gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats.

Box plot of horseshoe crab populations in ST

3.6.32 Figure 3.8 of Appendix O shows the changes of prosomal width of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda and Tachypleus tridentatus in ST. As mentioned above, Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda was rarely found between September 2012 and December 2013 hence the data were lacking. From March 2014 to September 2018, the size of major population decreased and more small individuals (i.e. lower whisker) were recorded after June of every year. It indicated new round of spawning. Also, there were similar increasing trends of body size from September to June of next year between 2014 and 2017. It indicated a stable growth of individuals. The larger juveniles (i.e. upper whisker usually ranged 60-80 mm in prosomal width except one individual (prosomal width 107.04 mm) found in March 2017. It reflected juveniles reaching this size would gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats.

3.6.33 For Tachypleus tridentatus, a consistent growing trend was observed for the major population from December 2012 to December 2014 regardless of change of search record. The prosomal width increased from 15-30 mm to 60-70 mm. As mentioned, the large juveniles might have reached a suitable size for migrating from the nursery soft shore to subtidal habitat. From March to September 2015, the size of major population decreased slightly to a prosomal width 40-60 mm. At the same time, the number of individuals decreased gradually. It further indicated some of large juveniles might have migrated to sub-tidal habitat, leaving the smaller individuals on shore. There was an overall growth trend. In December 2015, two big individuals (prosomal width 89.27 mm and 98.89 mm) were recorded only while it could not represent the major population. In March 2016, the number of individuals was very few in ST that no box plot could be produced. In June 2016, the prosomal width of major population ranged 50-70 mm. But it dropped clearly to 30-40 mm in September 2016 followed by an increase to 40-50 mm in December 2016, 40-70 mm in March 2017 and 50-60mm in June 2017. Based on overall higher number of small individuals from June 2016 to September 2017, it indicated another round of spawning. From September 2017 to June 2018, the major size range increased slightly from 40-50 mm to 45-60 mm indicating a continuous growth. In September 2018, decrease of major size was noted again that might reflect new round of spawning. Throughout the monitoring period, the larger juveniles ranged 60-80 mm in prosomal width. Juveniles reaching this size would gradually migrate to sub-tidal habitats.

3.6.34 As a summary for horseshoe crab populations in TC3 and ST, there were spawning of Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda from 2014 to 2018 while the spawning time should be in spring. The population size was consistent in these two sampling zones. For Tachypleus tridentatus, small individuals were rarely found in both zones from 2014 to 2015. It was believed no occurrence of successful spawning. The existing individuals (that recorded since 2012) grew to a mature size and migrated to sub-tidal habitat. Hence the number of individuals decreased gradually. From 2016 to 2018, new rounds of spawning were recorded in ST while the population size increased to a moderate level.

3.6.35 Although no horseshoe crab was recorded in TC3 and ST in March 2019, it was the first monitoring of 2019. The search record of horseshoe crab was usually fluctuated and influenced by weather condition and tidal level. Overall population growth of horseshoe crab in 2019 should be evaluated from the results of the following surveys as well, while it is estimated to maintain a moderate level as 2018.

Impact of the HKLR project

3.6.36 It was the 26th survey of the EM&A programme during construction period. Based on the monitoring results, no detectable impact on horseshoe crab was revealed due to HKLR project. The population change was mainly determined by seasonal variation, no abnormal phenomenon of horseshoe crab individual, such as large number of dead individuals on the shore) had been reported.

Seagrass Beds

3.6.37 Only seagrass species Halophila ovalis was found in present survey, which was found in ST. There were one medium -large sized and three smalls sized of seagrass bed. The largest rand had area ~1000m² in medium vegetation coverage (50-60%) and located at tidal zone 1.5- 2.0 m above C.D nearby mangroves plantation. At close vicinity, three smalls sized of Halophila ovalis beds with area ~ 1 m² were observed. Two of them were in high vegetation coverage (90-100%) and the remaining one was in medium vegetation coverage (50-60%). Another seagrass species Zostera japonica was not found in present survey. Table 3.2 of Appendix O summarizes the results of present seagrass beds survey and the photograph records of the seagrass are shown on Figure 3.9 of Appendix O. The complete record throughout the monitoring period is presented in Annex III of Appendix O.

3.6.38 Since the commencement of the EM&A monitoring programme, two species of seagrass Halophila ovalis and Zostera japonica were recorded in TC3 and ST (Figure 3.10 of Appendix O). In general, Halophila ovalis was occasionally found in TC3 in few, small to medium patches. But it was commonly found in ST in medium to large seagrass bed. Moreover, it had sometimes grown extensively and had covered significant mudflat area at 0.5-2.0 m above C.D. between TC3 and ST. Another seagrass species Zostera japonica was found in ST only. It was relatively lower in vegetation area and co-existed with Halophila ovalis nearby the mangrove strand at 2.0 m above C.D..

3.6.39 According to the previous results, majority of seagrass bed was confined in ST, the temporal change of both seagrass species were investigated in details:

Temporal variation of seagrass beds

3.6.40 Figure 3.11 of Appendix O shows the changes of estimated total area of seagrass beds in ST along the sampling months. For Zostera japonica, it was not recorded in the 1st and 2nd surveys of monitoring programme. Seasonal recruitment of few, small patches (total seagrass area: 10 m2) was found in Mach 2013 that grew within the large patch of seagrass Halophila ovalis. Then, the patch size increased and merged gradually with the warmer climate from March to June 2013 (15 m²). However, the patch size decreased and remained similar from September 2013 (4 m²) to March 2014 (3 m²). In June 2014, the patch size increased obviously again (41 m²) with warmer climate followed by a decrease between September 2014 (2 m²) and December 2014 (5 m²). From March to June 2015, the patch size increased sharply again (90 m²). It might be due to the disappearance of the originally dominant seagrass Halophila ovalis resulting in less competition for substratum and nutrients. From September 2015 to June 2016, it was found coexisting with seagrass Halophila ovalis with steady increasing patch size (from 44 m² to 115 m²) and variable coverage. In September 2016, the patch size decreased again to (38 m²) followed by an increase to a horizontal strand (105.4 m²) in June 2017. And it did no longer co-exist with Halophila ovalis. Between September 2014 and June 2017, an increasing trend was noticed from September to June of next year followed by a rapid decline in September of next year. It was possibly the causes of heat stress, typhoon and stronger grazing pressure during wet season. However, such increasing trend was not found from September 2017 to March 2019 (present survey) while no patch of Zostera japonica was found.

3.6.41 For Halophila ovalis, it was recorded as 3-4 medium to large patches (area 18.9-251.7 m²; vegetation coverage 50-80%) beside the mangrove vegetation at tidal level 2 m above C.D. in September 2012. The total seagrass bed area grew steadily from 332.3 m² in September 2012 to 727.4 m² in December 2013. Flowers were observed in the largest patch during its flowering period. In March 2014, 31 small to medium patches were newly recorded (variable area 1-72 m2 per patch, vegetation coverage 40-80% per patch) in lower tidal zone between 1.0 and 1.5 m above C.D. The total seagrass area increased further to 1350 m². In June 2014, these small and medium patches grew and extended to each other. These patches were no longer distinguishable and were covering a significant mudflat area of ST. It was generally grouped into 4 large patches (1116 �V 2443 m²) of seagrass beds characterized of patchy distribution, variable vegetable coverage (40-80%) and smaller leaves. The total seagrass bed area increased sharply to 7629 m². In September 2014, the total seagrass area declined sharply to 1111m². There were only 3-4small to large patches (6-253 m²) at high tidal level and 1large patch at low tidal level (786 m²). Typhoon or strong water current was a possible cause (Fong, 1998). In September 2014, there were two tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong (7th-8th September: no cyclone name, maximum signal number 1; 14^th-17^th September: Kalmaegi, maximum signal number 8SE) before the seagrass survey dated 21^st September 2014. The strong water current caused by the cyclone, Kalmaegi especially, might have given damage to the seagrass beds. In addition, natural heat stress and grazing force were other possible causes reducing seagrass beds area. Besides, very small patches of Halophila ovalis could be found in other mud flat area in addition to the recorded patches. But it was hardly distinguished due to very low coverage (10-20%) and small leaves.

3.6.42 In December 2014, all the seagrass patches of Halophila ovalis disappeared in ST. Figure 3.12 of Appendix O shows the difference of the original seagrass beds area nearby the mangrove vegetation at high tidal level between June 2014 and December 2014.Such rapid loss would not be seasonal phenomenon because the seagrass beds at higher tidal level (2.0 m above C.D.) were present and normal in December 2012 and 2013. According to Fong (1998), similar incident had occurred in ST in the past. The original seagrass area had declined significantly during the commencement of the construction and reclamation works for the international airport at Chek Lap Kok in 1992. The seagrass almost disappeared in 1995 and recovered gradually after the completion of reclamation works. Moreover, incident of rapid loss of seagrass area was also recorded in another intertidal mudflat in Lai Chi Wo in 1998 with unknown reason. Hence, Halophila ovalis was regarded as a short-lived and r-strategy seagrass that could colonize areas in short period but disappears quickly under unfavourable conditions (Fong, 1998).

Unfavourable conditions to seagrass Halophila ovalis

3.6.43 Typhoon or strong water current was suggested as one unfavorable condition to Halophila ovalis (Fong, 1998). As mentioned above, there were two tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong in September 2014. The strong water current caused by the cyclones might have given damage to the seagrass beds.

3.6.44 Prolonged light deprivation due to turbid water would be another unfavorable condition. Previous studies reported that Halophila ovalis had little tolerance to light deprivation. During experimental darkness, seagrass biomass declined rapidly after 3-6 days and seagrass died completely after 30 days. The rapid death might be due to shortage of available carbohydrate under limited photosynthesis or accumulation of phytotoxic end products of anaerobic respiration (details see Longstaff et al., 1999). Hence, the seagrass bed of this species was susceptible to temporary light deprivation events such as flooding river runoff (Long staff and Dennison, 1999).

3.6.45 In order to investigate any deterioration of water quality (e.g. more turbid) in ST, the water quality measurement results at two closest monitoring stations SR3 and IS5 of the EM&A programme were obtained from the water quality monitoring team. Based on the results from June to December 2014, the overall water quality was in normal fluctuation except there was one exceedance of suspended solids (SS) at both stations in September. On 10th September 2014, the SS concentrations measured during mid-ebb tide at stations SR3 (27.5 mg/L) and IS5 (34.5 mg/L) exceeded the Action Level (≤23.5 mg/L and 120% of upstream control station��s reading) and Limit Level (≤34.4 mg/L and 130% of upstream control station��s reading) respectively. The turbidity readings at SR3 and IS5 reached 24.8-25.3 NTU and 22.3-22.5 NTU respectively. The temporary turbid water should not be caused by the runoff from upstream rivers. Because there was no rain or slight rain from 1^st to 10th September 2014 (daily total rainfall at the Hong Kong International Airport: 0-2.1 mm; extracted from the climatological data of Hong Kong Observatory). The effect of upstream runoff on water quality should be neglectable in that period. Moreover, the exceedance of water quality was considered unlikely to be related to the contract works of HKLR according to the ��Notifications of Environmental Quality Limits Exceedances�� provided by the respective environmental team. The respective construction of seawall and stone column works, which possibly caused turbid water, was carried out within silt curtain as recommended in the EIA report. Moreover, there was no leakage of turbid water, abnormity or malpractice recorded during water sampling. In general, the exceedance of suspended solids concentration was considered to be attributed to other external factors, rather than the contract works.

3.6.46 Based on the weather condition and water quality results in ST, the co-occurrence of cyclone hit and turbid waters in September 2014 might have combined the adverse effects on Halophila ovalis that leaded to disappearance of this short-lived and r-strategy seagrass species. Fortunately, Halophila ovalis was a fast-growing species (Vermaat et al., 1995). Previous studies showed that the seagrass bed could be recovered to the original sizes in 2 months through vegetative propagation after experimental clearance (Supanwanid, 1996). Moreover it was reported to recover rapidly in less than 20 days after dugong herbivory (Nakaoka and Aioi, 1999).As mentioned, the disappeared seagrass in ST in 1995 could recover gradually after the completion of reclamation works for international airport (Fong, 1998).The seagrass beds of Halophila ovalis might recolonize in the mudflat of ST through seed reproduction as long as there was no unfavourable condition in the coming months.

Recolonization of seagrass beds

3.6.47 Figure 3.12 of Appendix O shows the recolonization of seagrass bed in ST from December 2014 to June 2017. From March to June 2015, 2-3 small patches of Halophila ovalis were newly found co-inhabiting with another seagrass species Zostera japonica. But the total patch area of Halophila ovalis was still very low compare with previous records. The recolonization rate was low while cold weather and insufficient sunlight were possible factors between December 2014 and March 2015. Moreover, it would need to compete with seagrass Zostera japonica for substratum and nutrient, because Zostera japonica had extended and covered the original seagrass bed of Halophila ovalis at certain degree. From June 2015 to March 2016, the total seagrass area of Halophila ovalis had increased rapidly from 6.8 m² to 230.63 m². It had recolonized its original patch locations and covered its competitor Zostera japonica. In June 2016, the total seagrass area increased sharply to 4707.3m². Similar to the previous records of March to June 2014, the original patch area of Halophila ovalis increased further to a horizontally long strand. Another large seagrass bed colonized the lower tidal zone (1.0-1.5 m above C.D.). In September 2016, this patch extended much and covered significant soft mud area of ST, resulting in sharp increase of total area (24245 m²). It indicated the second extensive colonization of this r-selected seagrass. In December 2016, this extensive seagrass patch decreased in size and had separated into few, undistinguishable patches. Moreover, the horizontal strand nearby the mangrove vegetation decreased in size. The total seagrass bed decreased to 12550 m². From March to June 2017, the seagrass bed area remained generally stable (12438-17046.5 m²) but the vegetation coverage fluctuated (20-50% in March 2017 to 80-100% in June 2017). The whole recolonization process took about 2.5 years.

Second disappearance of seagrass bed

3.6.48 In September 2017, the whole seagrass bed of Halophila ovalis disappeared again along the shore of TC3 and ST (Figure 3.12 of Appendix O). Similar to the first disappearance of seagrass bed occurred between September and December 2014, strong water current (e.g. cyclone) or deteriorated water qualities (e.g. high turbidity) was the possible cause.

3.6.49 Between the survey periods of June and September 2017, there were four tropical cyclone records in Hong Kong (Merbok in 12-13^th, June; Roke in 23^rd, Jul.; Hato in22-23^rd, Aug.; Pakhar in 26-27^th, Aug.) (online database of Hong Kong Observatory). All of them reaches signal 8 or above, especially Hato with highest signal 10.

3.6.50 According to the water quality monitoring results (July to August 2017) of the two closest monitoring stations SR3 and IS5 of the respective EM&A programme, the overall water quality was in normal fluctuation. There was an exceedance of suspended solids (SS) at SR3 on 12 July 2017. The SS concentration reached 24.7 mg/L during mid-ebb tide, which exceeded the Action Level (≤23.5 mg/L). But it was far below the Limit Level ((≤34.4 mg/L). Since such exceedance was slight and temporary, its effect to seagrass bed should be minimal.

3.6.51 Overall, the disappearance of seagrass beds in ST has believed the cause of serial cyclone hit in July and August 2017. Based on previous findings, the seagrass beds of both species were expected to recolonize in the mudflat as long as the vicinal water quality was normal. The whole recolonization process (from few, small patches to extensive strand) would be gradually lasting at least 2 years. From December 2017 to March 2018, there was still no recolonization of few, small patches of seagrass at the usual location (Figure 3.12 of Appendix O). It was different from the previous round (March 2015 - June 2017). Until June 2018, the new seagrass patches with small-medium size were found at the usual location (seaward side of mangrove plantation at 2.0 m C.D.) again, indicating the recolonization. However, the seagrass bed area decreased sharply to 22.5 m² in September 2018. Again, it was believed that the decrease was due to the hit of the super cyclone in September 2018 (Mangkhuton 16^th September, highest signal 10). In March 2019 (present survey), the seagrass bed area increased again. Relatively, it would occur later and slower than the previous round (more than 2 years).

Impact of the HKLR project

3.6.52 It was the 26^th survey of the EM&A programme during construction period. Throughout the monitoring period, the disappearance of seagrass beds was believed the cause of cyclone hits rather than impact of HKLR project. The seagrass bed is recolonizing since there has been a gradual increase in the size and number of that after the hit of the super cyclone in September 2018.

Intertidal Soft Shore Communities

Substratum

3.6.53 Table 3.3 and Figure 3.13 of Appendix O show the substratum types along the horizontal transact at every tidal level in all sampling zones. The relative distribution of substratum types was estimated by categorizing the substratum types (Gravels & Boulders / Sands / Soft mud) of the ten random quadrats along the horizontal transect. The distribution of substratum types varied among tidal levels and sampling zones:

�P In TC1, high percentages of ��Gravels and Boulders�� (H: 70%; M: 60%) were recorded at high and mid tidal levels. Relatively higher percentages of ��Gravels and Boulders�� (40%) and ��Soft mud�� (40%) were recorded at low tidal level.

�P In TC2, higher percentage of ��Sands�� (50%) was recorded at high tidal level. At mid tidal level, there was higher percentage of ��Soft mud�� (50%) followed by ��Gravels and Boulders�� (30%). At low tidal level, the major substratum type was 'Soft mud' (60%).

�P In TC3, higher percentage of ��Sands�� (60%) was recorded followed by ��Soft mud�� (30%) at high tidal level. At mid tidal level, higher percentages of ��Soft mud�� (70%) and ��Sands�� (30%) were recorded. At low tidal level, the main substratum type was ��Gravels and Boulders�� (80%).

�P In ST, ��Gravels and Boulders�� was the main substratum type (100%) at high tidal level. At mid tidal level, there were even distributions of ��Gravels and Boulders�� (50%) and ��Sands�� (50%). At low tidal level, ��Sands�� was the main substratum type (70%).

3.6.54 There was neither consistent vertical nor horizontal zonation pattern of substratum type in all sampling zones. Such heterogeneous variation should be caused by different hydrology (e.g. wave in different direction and intensity) received by the four sampling zones.

Soft shore communities

3.6.55 Table 3.4 of Appendix O lists the total abundance, density and number of taxon of every phylum in this survey. A total of 14803 individuals were recorded. Mollusca was the most abundant phylum (total abundance 13903 ind, density 463 ind. m^-2, relative abundance 93.9%). The second and third abundant phya were Arthropoda (698 ind., 23 ind. m^-2, 4.7%) and Annelida (128 ind., 4 ind. m^-2, 0.9%) respectively. Relatively other phyla were very low in abundances (density £1 ind. m^-2, relative abundance £0.3%). Moreover, the most diverse phylum was Mollusca (46 taxa) followed by Annelida (9 taxa) and Arthropoda (6 taxa). There was 1 taxa recorded only for other phyla.

3.6.56 The taxonomic resolution and complete list of recorded fauna are shown in Annexes IV and V of Appendix O respectively. As reported in June 2018, taxonomic revision of three potamidid snail species was conducted according to the latest identification key published by Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (details see AFCD, 2018), the species names of following gastropod species were revised:

�P Cerithidea cingulata was revised as Pirenella asiatica

�P Cerithidea djadjariensis was revised as Pirenella incisa

�P Cerithidea rhizophorarum was revised as Cerithidea moerchii

Moreover, taxonomic revision was conducted on another snail species while the specie name was revised.:

�P Batillaria bornii was revised as Clypeomorus bifasciata

3.6.57 Table 3.5 of Appendix O shows the number of individual, relative abundance and density of each phylum in every sampling zone. The total abundance (3268- 4322 ind.) varied among the four sampling zones while the phyla distributions were similar. In general, Mollusca was the most dominant phylum (no. of individuals: 3037-4119 ind.; relative abundance 92.4-95.3%; density 416-549 ind. m^-2). Other phyla were much lower in number of individuals. Arthropoda (78-255 ind.; 2.4-6.5 %; 10-34 ind. m^-2) and Annelida (11-81 ind.; 0.3-2.5 %; 1-11 ind. m^-2) were common phyla relatively. Other phyla were very low in abundance in all sampling zones.

Dominant species in every sampling zone

3.6.58 Table 3.6 of Appendix O lists the abundant species (relative abundance >10%) in every sampling zone. In the present survey, most of the listed abundant species were of low to moderate densities (42-100 ind. m^-2). Few listed species of high or very high density (> 100 ind. m^-2) were regarded as dominant species. Other listed species of lower density (< 42 ind. m^-2) were regarded as common species.

3.6.59 In TC1, the substratum was mainly ��Gravels and Boulders�� at high and mid tidal levels. The high tidal level was clearly dominated by rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (190 ind. m^-2, relative abundance 37%) at high density followed by gastropod Monodonta labio (61 ind. m^-2, 12%). At mid tidal level, rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (108 ind. m^-2, 22%), Monodonta labio (74 ind. m^-2, 15%) and Batillaria multiformis (63 ind. m^-2, 13%) were abundant at low - moderate densities. At low tidal level (main substratum types ��Gravels and Boulders�� or ��Soft mud��), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (146 ind. m^-2, 26 %) was more abundant at moderate density and gastropods Lunella coronate (81ind. m^-2, 15%) was found at low-moderate densities.

3.6.60 In TC2, the substratum types were mainly 'Sands' at high tidal level. Gastropods Pirenella incisa (102 ind. m^-2, 21 %) was abundant at moderate density. Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (87 ind. m^-2, 18 % attached on boulder), Pirenella asiatica (74 ind. m^-2, 16%) and Monodonta labio (66 ind. m^-2, 14%) were abundant at low-moderate densities. At mid tidal level (main substratum type ��Soft mud��), gastropods Pirenella incisa (81 ind. m^-2, 19 %) and Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (74 ind. m^-2, 17%) were abundant at low- moderate density. At low tidal level (main substratum type ��Soft mud��), Rock Oyster Saccostrea cucullata (99 ind. m^-2, 34%) was abundant at moderate density and followed by gastropod Monodonta labio (42 ind. m^-2, 10 %) at low- moderate density.

3.6.61 In TC3, the substratum types were either ��Sands�� or ��Soft mud�� at high and mid tidal levels. At high tidal level, Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (111 ind. m^-2, 20%) was dominant followed by gastropods Batillaria multiformis (87 ind. m^-2, 16%) and Monodonta labio (55 ind. m^-2, 10%) at low-moderate densities. At mid tidal level, Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (118 ind. m^-2, 17%) was dominant followed by gastropods Batillaria zonalis (111 ind. m^-2, 16%) and Batillaria multiformis (88 ind. m^-2, 12%) at low-moderate densities .At low tidal level (major substratum: ��Gravels and Boulders��), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (135 ind. m^-2, 28 %, attached on boulders) was dominant at moderate density and followed by gastropod Pirenella incisa (70 ind. m^-2, 15 %) and Lunella coronate (50 ind. m^-2, 10%) were abundant at low-moderate densities.

3.6.62 In ST, the major substratum type was ��Gravels and Boulders�� at high tidal level. At high tidal level, Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (147 ind. m^-2, 31%) was dominant at high density and followed by gastropods Batillaria multiformis (117 ind. m^-2, 24%) were dominant at moderate densities. Batillaria zonalis (61 ind. m^-2, 13%) was abundant at low-moderate density. At mid tidal level (even distribution of ��Gravals and Boulders�� and ��Sand��), Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (165 ind. m^-2, 30%) was dominant at high density and followed by gastropods Batillaria zonalis (85 ind. m^-2, 15%), Pirenella incisa (78 ind. m^-2, 14 %) and Batillaria multiformis (66 ind. m^-2, 12%) at low-moderate densities. At low tidal level (major substratum: ��Sands��), rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (90 ind. m^-2, 32 %, attached on boulders) was dominant at moderate density and followed by gastropod Pirenella incisa (50 ind. m^-2, 18 %) at low-moderate densities.

3.6.63 In general, there was no consistent zonation pattern of species distribution across all sampling zones and tidal levels. The species distribution was determined by the type of substratum primarily. In general, Rock Oyster Saccostrea cucullata (847 ind.), gastropods Batillaria multiformis (246 ind.), Batillaria zonalis (146 ind.), Monodonta labio (135 ind.), Pirenella incise (128 ind.) and Lunella coronate (81 ind.) were the most common species on gravel and boulders substratum. Rock oyster Saccostrea cucullata (624 ind.), Pirenella asiatica (226 ind.), Batillaria multiformis (176 ind.), Monodonta labio (162 ind.), Batillaria zonalis (111 ind.), Pirenella incise (102 ind.) and Lunella coronate (50 ind.) were the most common species on sandy and soft mud substrata.

Biodiversity and abundance of soft shore communities

3.6.64 Table 3.7 of Appendix O shows the mean values of species number, density, biodiversity index H�� and species evenness J of soft shore communities at every tidal level and in every sampling zone. As mentioned above, the differences among sampling zones and tidal levels were determined by the major type of substratum primarily.

3.6.65 Among the sampling zones, the mean species number was similar (7-12 spp. 0.25 m^-2) among the four sampling zones. The mean densities of TC1 and TC3 (524 and 572 ind. m^-2) were higher than ST (438 ind. m^-2) followed by TC2 (436 ind. m^-2). The higher densities of TC1 and TC3 are due to the relatively high number of individuals in each quatrat. Moreover, TC1 and TC3 was relatively higher in H' (2.0) and J (0.8) due to higher species number and even taxa distribution. Lower H�� (1.6) was resulted in TC1, which was due to the lower species number. The value of J at TC2 was 0.8, which was similar to that of TC1 and TC3. In ST, higher densities were mainly accounted by 1-2 abundant gastropods. It resulted in lower H�� (1.4) and J (TC2: 0.7).

3.6.66 In the present survey, no clear trend of mean species number, mean density, H�� and J observed among the tidal level.

3.6.67 Figures 3.14 to 3.17 of Appendix O show the temporal changes of mean species number, mean density, H�� and J at every tidal level and in every sampling zone along the sampling months. In general, all the biological parameters fluctuated seasonally throughout the monitoring period. Lower mean species number and density were recorded in dry season (December) but the mean H' and J fluctuated within a limited range.

3.6.68 From June to December 2017, there were steady decreasing trends of mean species number and density in TC2, TC3 and ST regardless of tidal levels. It might be an unfavorable change reflecting environmental stresses. The heat stress and serial cyclone hit were believed the causes during the wet season of 2017.From March 2018 to March 2019, increases of mean species number and density were observed in all sampling zones. It indicated the recovery of intertidal community.

Impact of the HKLR project

3.6.69 It was the 26^th survey of the EM&A programme during the construction period. Based on the results, impacts of the HKLR project were not detected on intertidal soft shore community. Abnormal phenomena (e.g. rapid, consistent or non-seasonal decline of fauna densities and species number) were not recorded.

3.7 Solid and Liquid Waste Management Status

3.7.1 The Contractor registered with EPD as a Chemical Waste Producer on 12 July 2012 for the Contract. Sufficient numbers of receptacles were available for general refuse collection and sorting.

3.7.2 The summary of waste flow table is detailed in Appendix K.

3.7.3 The Contractor was reminded that chemical waste containers should be properly treated and stored temporarily in designated chemical waste storage area on site in accordance with the Code of Practice on the Packaging, Labelling and Storage of Chemical Wastes.

Monitoring Activity		Monitoring Date
Monitoring Activity		Mar 2019	Apr 2019	May 2019
Air Quality	1-hr TSP	4, 8, 14, 20, 26 and 29	3, 9, 12, 18, 24 and 30	6, 10, 16, 22 and 28
Air Quality	24-hr TSP	1, 7, 13, 19, 25 and 28	2, 8, 11, 17, 23 and 29	AMS5: 3, 9, 15, 21, 27 and 31 AMS6: 3, 9, 15, 24, 27 and 31
Noise		4, 14, 20 and 26	3, 9, 15, 24 and 30	6, 16, 22 and 28
Water Quality		1, 4, 6, 8, 11, 13, 15, 18, 20, 22, 25, 27 and 29	1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, 26 and 29	1, 3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17, 20, 22,24,29 and 31
Chinese White Dolphin		4, 11, 13 and 18	10, 15, 23 and 25	2, 7, 21 and 23
Mudflat Monitoring (Ecology)		21 and 22	-	-
Mudflat Monitoring (Sedimentation rate)		21	-	-
Site Inspection		1, 6, 13, 20 and 29	3, 10, 17 and 26	3, 8, 15, 22 and 31

Description of Activities	Site Area
Dismantling/trimming of temporary 40mm stone platform for construction of seawall	Portion X
Construction of seawall	Portion X
Loading and unloading of filling materials	Portion X
Works for diversion	Airport Road
Establishment of site access	Airport Road/ Airport Express Line/ East Coast Road
Finishing works for Highway Operation and Maintenance Area Building	Portion X
Finishing works for Scenic Hill Tunnel West Portal Ventilation building	West Portal
Landscaping works	Portion X

	North Lantau Social Cluster
	NEL	NWL
Action Level	STG < 70% of baseline & ANI < 70% of baseline	STG < 70% of baseline & ANI < 70% of baseline
Limit Level	STG < 40% of baseline & ANI < 40% of baseline

	North Lantau Social Cluster
	NEL	NWL
Action Level	STG < 4.2 & ANI < 15.5	STG < 6.9 & ANI < 31.3
Limit Level	(STG < 2.4 & ANI < 8.9) and (STG < 3.9 & ANI < 17.9)

1 Introduction

1.1.5 This is the twenty-seventh Quarterly Environmental Monitoring and Audit (EM&A) report for the Contract which summarizes the monitoring results and audit findings of the EM&A programme during the reporting period from 1 March 2019 to 31 May 2019.

1.2.1 The project organization structure and lines of communication with respect to the on-site environmental management structure with the key personnel contact names and numbers are shown in Appendix A.

1.3 Construction Programme

1.3.1 A copy of the Contractor��s construction programme is provided in Appendix B.

1.4 Construction Works Undertaken During the Reporting Period

1.4.1 A summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting period is shown in Table 1.1. The Works areas of the Contract are showed in Appendix C[KE2] .

2 EM&A Requirement

2.1 Summary of EM&A Requirements

2.1.1 The EM&A programme requires environmental monitoring of air quality, noise, water quality, dolphin monitoring and mudflat monitoring as specified in the approved EM&A Manual.

2.1.2 A summary of Impact EM&A requirements is presented in Table 2.1. The locations of air quality, noise and water quality monitoring stations are shown as in Figure 2.1. The transect line layout in Northwest and Northeast Lantau Survey Areas is presented in Figure 2.2.

2.2.1 Table 2.2 presents the Action and Limit Levels for the 1-hour TSP, 24-hour TSP and noise level.

2.2.2 The Action and Limit Levels for water quality monitoring are given as in Table 2.3.

2.2.3 The Action and Limit Levels for dolphin monitoring are shown in Tables 2.4 and 2.5.

2.3 Event Action Plans

2.3.1 The Event Actions Plans for air quality, noise, water quality and dolphin monitoring are annexed in Appendix D.

2.4 Mitigation Measures

2.4.1 Environmental mitigation measures for the contract were recommended in the approved EIA Report. Appendix E lists the recommended mitigation measures and the implementation status.

3 Environmental Monitoring and Audit

3.1 Implementation of Environmental Measures

3.1.1 In response to the site audit findings, the Contractor have rectified all observations identified in environmental site inspections undertaken during the reporting period. Details of site audit findings and the corrective actions during the reporting period are presented in Appendix F.

3.1.2 A summary of the Implementation Schedule of Environmental Mitigation Measures (EMIS) is presented in Appendix E.

3.1.3 Regular marine travel route for marine vessels were implemented properly in accordance to the submitted plan and relevant records were kept properly.

3.1.4 Dolphin Watching Plan was implemented during the reporting period. No dolphins inside the silt curtain were observed. The relevant records were kept properly.

3.2.1 The monitoring results for 1-hour TSP and 24-hour TSP are summarized in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 respectively. Detailed impact air quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are presented in Appendix G.

3.2.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of 1-hr TSP and 24-hr TSP were recorded at AMS5 and AMS6 during the reporting period.

3.3 Noise Monitoring Results

3.3.1 The monitoring results for construction noise are summarized in Table 3.3 and the monitoring results and relevant graphical plots for this reporting period are provided in Appendix H.

3.3.2 No Action/Limit Level exceedances for noise were recorded during daytime on normal weekdays of the reporting period.

3.3.3 Major noise sources during the noise monitoring included construction activities of the Contract and nearby traffic noise and insect noise.

3.4.1 Impact water quality monitoring was conducted at all designated monitoring stations during the reporting period. Impact water quality monitoring results and relevant graphical plots are provided in Appendix I.

3.4.2 No Action and Limit Level exceedances of turbidity level and dissolved oxygen were recorded during reporting period. No Limit Level exceedance of suspended solids were recorded during the reporting period.

3.4.4 Water quality impact sources during the water quality monitoring were the construction activities of the Contract, nearby construction activities by other parties and nearby operating vessels by other parties.

Data Analysis

3.5.9 During the period of March to May 2019, six sets of systematic line-transect vessel surveys were conducted to cover all transect lines in NWL and NEL survey areas twice per month.

3.5.11 The total survey effort conducted on primary lines was 572.37 km, while the effort on secondary lines was 222.54 km. Survey effort conducted on both primary and secondary lines were considered to be on-effort survey data. A summary table of the survey effort is shown in Appendix J.

3.5.13 In addition, all dolphin groups were sighted in NWL, and no dolphin was sighted at all in NEL. In fact, since August 2014, only two sightings of two lone dolphins were made in NEL during HKLR03 monitoring surveys.

Distribution

3.5.14 Distribution of dolphin sightings made during HKLR03 monitoring surveys conducted from March to May 2019 is shown in Figure 1 of Appendix J. These sightings were all scattered at the western portion of the North Lantau region, with no particular concentration (Figure 1 of Appendix J).

Encounter Rate

Group Size

Table 3.8 Comparison of Average Dolphin Group Sizes between Reporting Period (Mar �V May 2019) and Baseline Monitoring Period (Sep �V Nov 2011)

3.5.31 Notably, all five groups were very small with 2-3 individuals per group only (Annex II of Appendix J).

Habitat Use

3.5.33 Notably, all grids near HKLR03/HKBCF reclamation sites as well as TMCLKL alignments did not record any presence of dolphins at all during on-effort search in the present quarterly period (Figures 4a and 4b of Appendix J).

Mother-calf Pairs

3.5.37 During the present quarterly period, no young calf was sighted at all among the five groups of dolphins.

Activities and Associations with Fishing Boats

3.5.38 None of the five dolphin groups was engaged in feeding, socializing, traveling or milling/resting activity during the three-month study period.

3.5.39 Moreover, none of the groups was found to be associated with any operating fishing vessel during the present impact phase period

Summary Photo-identification works

3.5.40 From March to May 2019, roughly 400 digital photographs of Chinese White Dolphins were taken during the impact phase monitoring surveys for the photo-identification work.

3.5.42 Notably, none of these individuals was sighted in WL waters during the HKLR09 monitoring surveys from the same three-month period of March to May 2019.

Individual range use

3.5.43 Ranging patterns of the five individuals identified during the three-month study period were determined by fixed kernel method, and are shown in Annex V of Appendix J.

Action Level / Limit Level Exceedance

3.5.55 It was concluded that the HZMB works is one of the contributing factors affecting the dolphins. It was also concluded the contribution of impacts due to the HZMB works as a whole (or individual marine contracts) cannot be quantified nor separate from the other stress factors.

3.5.56 The dolphin specialists of the projects confirmed that the CWD sighting around the North of Sha Chau and Lung Kwu Chau Marine Park (SCLKCMP) has significantly decreased, and it was likely related to the re-routing of high speed ferry (HSF) from Skypier.

3.5.57 ET will keep reviewing the implementation status of the dolphin related mitigation measures and remind the contractor to implement the relevant measures.

3.5.58 It was recommended that the marine works of HZMB projects should be completed as soon as possible so as to reduce the overall duration of impacts and allow the dolphins population to recover as early as possible.

3.5.59 It was also recommended that the marine works footprint (e.g., reduce the size of peripheral silt curtain) and vessels for the marine works should be reduced as much as possible, and vessels idling / mooring in other part of the North Lantau shall be avoided whenever possible.

3.5.63 There was a discussion on exploring possible further mitigation measures, for example, controlling the underwater noise. It was noted that the EIA reports for the projects suggested several mitigation measures, all of which have been implemented.

3.6 Mudflat Monitoring Results

Sedimentation Rate Monitoring

3.6.2 This measurement result was generally and relatively higher than the baseline measurement at S1, S2, S3 and S4. The mudflat level is continuously increased.

Water Quality Monitoring

3.6.3 The mudflat monitoring covered water quality monitoring data. Reference was made to the water quality monitoring data of the representative water quality monitoring station (i.e. SR3(N)) as in the EM&A Manual. The water quality monitoring location (SR3(N)) is shown in Figure 2.1.

3.6.4 Impact water quality monitoring in San Tau (monitoring station SR3(N)) was conducted in March 2019. The monitoring parameters included dissolved oxygen (DO), turbidity and suspended solids (SS).

3.6.5 The Impact monitoring result for SR3(N) were extracted and summarised in Table 3.11:

Sampling Zone

Horseshoe Crabs

Seagrass Beds

Intertidal Soft Shore Communities

3.6.13 All collected fauna were released after recording except some tiny individuals that were too small to be identified on site. These tiny individuals were taken to laboratory for identification under dissecting microscope.

3.6.14 The taxonomic classification was conducted in accordance to the following references: Polychaetes: Fauchald (1977), Yang and Sun (1988); Arthropods: Dai and Yang (1991), Dong (1991); Mollusks: Chan and Caley (2003), Qi (2004), AFCD (2018).

Data Analysis

3.6.15 Data collected from direct search and core sampling was pooled in every quadrat for data analysis. Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index (H��) and Pielou��s Species Evenness (J) were calculated for every quadrat using the formulae below,

where S is the total number of species in the sample, N is the total number of individuals, and Ni is the number of individuals of the ith species.

Mudflat Ecology Monitoring Results and Conclusion

Horseshoe Crabs

1.4.1 A summary of the construction activities undertaken during this reporting period is shown in Table 1.1. The Works areas of the Contract are showed in Appendix C [KE2] .

where S is the total number of species in the sample, N is the total number of individuals, and Ni is the number of individuals of the i^th species.