Ministry rejects appeal to save Senoko bird habitat
By Dominic Nathan
THE Ministry of National Development (MND) has rejected an appeal backed by 25,000 Singaporeans to conserve 70 hectares of land in Senoko as a nature park.
An MND spokesman told The Sunday Times yesterday: "If these 70 ha are conserved, we will lose about 6,000 flats and an industrial site of 20 ha." The flats will take up about 50 ha.
The ministry’s decision also received the support of Environment Minister Mah Bow Tan, who said in a separate interview:
"The arguments, persuasive as they are, have not detracted from the fact that if you keep this land for the birds, something has got to give. A few thousand people would actually have to be housed elsewhere."
He added that he was encouraged that there were 25,000 people who cared enough about the environment to raise the issue.
"But I think they also need to be realistic about it. I hope that at the end of the day, they will realise that we have taken their views into consideration," he said.
The appeal, coordinated by National University of Singapore lecturer Dr Ho Hua Chew, and backed by well-known people such as Nominated MP Kanwaljit Soin, playwright Kuo Pao Kun and architect Tay Kheng Soon, asked for about 70 ha — 40 per cent of the 168 ha Senoko area — to be turned into a nature park.
The appeal was sent to the Prime Minister’s Office last month.
It was the latest bid to save the bird habitat in Sembawang after initial efforts to conserve all 168 ha was turned down this year because this would have meant a loss of 17,000 housing units.
Explaining the grounds for turning down the latest appeal, the MND spokesman said that conserving the site will immediately mean a delay to people queueing for HDB flats, particularly in the North Zone.
All the Sembawang flats scheduled to be allocated in the first quarter of next year would have been affected, she said.
The affected site also lies immediately north of the MRT line and MRT station. With a nature reserve taking up land on one side of the station, the number of people who can live close to the station would be reduced drastically, said the spokesman.
Another point the ministry considered was Sembawang New Town’s amenities.
As part of the affected site lies in the middle of the planned town centre, the MND would not have been able to develop it to its optimum size if 70 ha were to be conserved.
"While the few nature lovers may clamour for Senoko’s preservation because it is a good habitat for birds and other species, we have to remember that this was never a traditional nature area... While the land lay fallow, the birds and other species came, claiming territorial rights."
The spokesman added that the decision not to conserve Senoko was not taken independently.
A work group on nature conservation, with representatives from both the public and private sectors, looked into various options before making its decision.
She added that by not conserving Senoko, the MND was not depriving Singaporeans of the joys of nature.
The habitat in Senoko is similar to that at Sungei Buloh, which the Government has conserved.
"Contrary to popular belief, the birds at Senoko are not unique to the area.
"Most of the species of birds found in Senoko are found elsewhere in Singapore, such as Sungei Buloh and Khatib Bongsu, both of which are ecologically similar."
When contacted yesterday, Dr Ho said that he would have to speak to the others involved in the appeal before commenting on the ministry’s decision.
Source : The Sunday Times, November 6, 1994
Recycling Point Dot Com
(C) 2000 All Rights Reserved