Development and conservation

TAI LONG SAI WAN, which tops theAgriculture, Fisheries and ConservationDepartment's list of Hong Kong's ten mostscenic spots, has been badly marred with excavation.It is most infuriating that officials seem to believethere is no law they can rely on to do anything about it.

We demand that the government declare whether TaiLong Sai Wan is worth conserving. If it is not, officials'wait-and-see attitude is understandable. If it is, theyought to find ways to protect it so that Mongolia Energychairman Simon Lo will shrink from difficulties and lestthe backyard citizens love best should be irretrievablydamaged.

The seven million citizens used to share betweenthem Tai Long Sai Wan's natural beauty. Lo paid about$20 million for a site there. Excavation subsequentlybegan on it, which has spoilt its scenery.

Thirteen years ago, when British rule over theterritory was to end in less than three months, ittranspired that a developer planned to develop TaiLong Wan. To protect its natural beauty, Chris Patten,the last Governor of Hong Kong, instructed that theTown Planning Board have the Tai Long WanDevelopment Permission Area (DPA) Plan gazetted.

The Plan pertains to about 50 hectares of land. Most ofit is designated for protection or for development ofspecial scientific value. Only about seven hectares isleft for rural development. What Lo has acquired ispresumably part or all of the seven hectares.

In the past few days, when they talked about TaiLong Sai Wan, officials only stressed the greatdifficulty the situation presented, saying there was nolaw they could rely on to do anything about it becausethe land was not included in the DPA Plan. However,according to some conservationists, the government isempowered by statute suddenly to promulgate DPAPlans. Were officials aware that the government hasthe power? They might not have been, but they arenow. Will the government use the power to protect TaiLong Sai Wan?

In June this year, the Agriculture, Fisheries andConservation Department, aware that there wasdevelopment in the area, had its officers find out howtrees had been felled there. It gave the LandsDepartment a report. The Antiquities and MonumentsOffice had conducted archaeological surveys there.

Under the mechanisms in force, the authorities shouldhave immediately told the Antiquities and MonumentsOffice what had happened in Tai Long Sai Wan. Wegathered that it received no such information. In ourview, it is not open to the government to keepprocrastinating about saving Tai Long Sai Wan. It musttake decisive action to give the area total protection.

Private land in or adjacent to country parksaccounts for 1% to 2% of Hong Kong's area. As suchland is not included in any DPA Plans, the governmentcan rely on no laws to protect them. That isconsequent on its misguided policy. The government isto blame for it. Some have suggested the governmentreacquire all such land with public money. It is worthdiscussing whether it is advisable to do so.

Nevertheless, the government must not just takepalliative measures. It should conduct acomprehensive review to decide which of such piecesof land may or may not be developed. It should makepublic a list of such sites so that people will know whatthey may do. This is the way of settling the questiononce and for all. This is the only way that trulyembodies the quintessence of a proper balancebetween development and conservation.

2010.07.23明報社評

大浪西灣毁容僅冰山一角發展保育平衡須全面審視

獲漁護署選為香港十大勝景之首的大浪西灣，被挖掘工程搞得滿目瘡痍，最使人氣憤者，是政府官員擺出一副無法可依的束手無策樣子。我們要求政府公開宣示大浪西灣是否值得保育，若認為不值得，現在官員的觀望取態，可以理解；若認為值得保育，則官員應該想辦法保護大浪西灣，使地主蒙古能源主席魯連城知難而退，使這片市民至愛的後花園，不致再遭更多毒手而無法挽回。

大浪西灣的自然美景本來為700 萬市民共有共享，魯連城先生以約2000 萬元買入土地，然後大興土木，不但先破壞優美環境。

13 年前，港英政府管治香港還剩下不到3 個月，鑑於有地產商欲發展大浪灣，末代港督彭定康為保護大浪灣美景，指示城規會將大浪灣《發展審批地區圖》刊憲，涵蓋約50 公頃土地，把大部分土地劃為「保護區」或「具特殊科學價值發展」，只留下約7 公頃土地作「鄉村式發展」用途。魯先生買入的，相信就是這7 公頃的全部或部分土地。

近日，政府官員論及大浪西灣事態時，只強調因為未納入地區圖，以至無法可依的困境；但是據環保人士說，法例賦予政府緊急發布地區圖的權力。政府官員對此權力，是否知之？若原本不知，現在知道了，政府會否據之以保護大浪西灣？

另外，漁護署今年6 月得知該處有發展，曾派員到場了解樹木被砍伐情况，然後轉告地政總署，古蹟辦曾在該處作考古調查，按既定機制，當局應該把情况立即通報古蹟辦，但是據知古蹟辦當時並未收到通報。由於涉及保護考古遺址，制止西灣的工程，顯得更為必要。關於此事，我們認為並無空間讓政府及官員繼續觀望、蹉跎，只有採取果斷手段，把大浪西灣全面保護起來的迫切。

現在全港郊野公園內、或「邊皮」鄉郊私人土地，約佔全港土地面積1%至2%，都不受發展審批地區圖規管，政府難以執法。這是政策失誤的結果，政府難辭其咎。有建議以公帑全部收購這些土地，是否恰當，值得商榷；但是政府不應頭痛醫頭、腳痛醫腳，應該全面審視這些土地，哪些可以發展，哪些不能發展，必須保育，開列清單，把情况攤在陽光下，讓大家知所遵行，才是徹底解決問題之道，也才真正體現發展與保育之間取得平衡的精髓。

Glossary

infuriating /In'fj ʊ?rI ?eItI ?? /enraging.

promulgate /'pr ?m ?l ?geIt/make known to the public.

palliative /'palI ?tIv/serving to alleviate a problem without solving it.