​Following is a question by the Hon Steven Ho and a written reply by the Secretary for Environment and Ecology, Mr Tse Chin-wan, in the Legislative Council today (November 4):
 
Question:

     It has been reported that a number of incidents involving mass casualties of animals in housing estate ponds have occurred in Hong Kong in recent years, raising public concerns and anxieties over potential legal risks. It is learnt that many housing estate ponds were originally designed for landscaping purposes only, lacking circulating oxygenation and filtration systems suitable for keeping animals (including fish and turtles). However, due to acts of animal abandonment or release by members of the public, these ornamental ponds have in effect become ponds for keeping aquatic animals (fish ponds), forcing the management parties to take on caretaking responsibilities. Some housing estates, due to tight finances and a lack of professional expertise, are unable to upgrade their equipment or carry out daily maintenance, and have also failed to properly relocate the animals in the ponds when faced with complaints. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether the authorities have compiled statistics on the number of ponds in various types of properties across the territory (including private housing estates, Home Ownership Scheme courts, public rental housing estates and parks under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department), as well as the number of ponds originally designed for ornamental purposes only but are actually used as "fish ponds"; if so, of the number of such ponds broken down by property type; if not, of the reasons for that, and whether it will compile such statistics;

(2) according to the service contracts awarded by the Government for the management of water features under its purview and existing guidelines, of the differences in the management and maintenance requirements between purely ornamental ponds and "fish ponds", including cleaning frequency, hardware equipment, water quality standards, maintenance personnel qualifications and animal welfare requirements; of the difference in the annual operating expenditure between ponds for these two uses;

(3) of the measures currently in place for the authorities to deal with the problem of housing estate ponds becoming "fish ponds" due to the release or abandonment of animals; of the existing channels available to management parties to properly handle the animals in the ponds should they wish to restore the ponds to purely ornamental use; whether the authorities will provide technical and financial support should the management parties wish to retain the "fish ponds";

(4) if members of the public knowingly release fish, turtles and other animals into ponds without oxygenation facilities, and if outsourced cleansing companies inadvertently cause mass animal casualties when cleaning the ponds, of the specific provisions under the existing legislation that are violated by such acts and the relevant penalties; of the preventive and regulatory measures that have been put in place by the authorities regarding such acts; and

(5) of the specific preventive and law enforcement measures that the authorities have put in place to reduce the release or abandonment of animals by members of the public; whether it will step up public education, and consider empowering or assisting housing estate management personnel to strengthen evidence collection and law enforcement against the relevant acts in the future?

Reply:

President,

     The Government has been committed to combating acts of cruelty to animals and improper release of animals through stringent enforcement, inter-departmental collaboration and sustained publicity and education. Artificial ponds and water feature facilities under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department (LCSD) and the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) form part of the overall design of the venues concerned. They are intended for public viewing and are not meant for keeping fish, turtles or other aquatic animals. Members of the public should not place or feed animals in these facilities.

     Having consulted the Culture, Sports and Tourism Bureau and the Housing Bureau, the reply to the question raised by the Hon Steven Ho is as follows:

(1) The LCSD and the Housing Department (HD) do not maintain statistics on the number of "ponds originally designed solely for viewing purposes but in fact used for keeping aquatic animals", and the Government does not keep data on ponds within private premises. However, both the LCSD and the HD require their service contractors to properly handle any animals found in ponds intended solely for public viewing when carrying out cleansing and maintenance works, hence there is no need to compile statistics on such cases.

(2) As specified in the service contracts of the LCSD and the HA, contractors are required to clear litter from ponds every day, and perform thorough cleansing regularly. The operational expenses for relevant works are included in the respective contract sums. Both the LCSD and the HD require their service contractors to properly handle any animals found in ponds intended solely for public viewing when carrying out cleansing and maintenance works. Venue staff will immediately dissuade any acts of abandoning or releasing animals observed during patrols.

     As the water feature facilities in different housing estates and parks differ in scale, design and hardware configuration, the Government does not maintain the breakdown of data on the annual operating expenditure of the various types of ponds across the territory.

(3) To assist venue managers in handling animals in artificial ponds and water features, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) has provided practical guidelines to the LCSD and the HD, as well as to property management companies across the territory through the Property Management Services Authority. The guidelines set out animal welfare matters that must be taken into account in managing ponds, covering sound management and supervision, water quality and environmental parameters, filtration and aeration systems, pond cleansing arrangements, as well as regular monitoring of animals and restoration of facilities. The guidelines also remind facility managers to seek professional advice, where necessary, on matters such as facility design, animal diet and disease prevention.

     Where a property management company intends to remove animals from a pond, appropriate measures must be taken to ensure that the animals are properly relocated. Venue managers may also approach animal welfare organisations, or call 1823 for referral to the AFCD's Animal Management Centres for assistance.

(4) and (5) Under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (Cap. 169), it is an offence to release animals improperly in a manner that causes them unnecessary suffering. Upon conviction, the maximum penalty is a fine of $200,000 and imprisonment for three years. Based on the evidence gathered, enforcement agencies will institute prosecution against persons, venue managers or service contractors suspected of cruelty to or abandonment of animals. Outsourced cleansing companies may also contravene the Ordinance if they unreasonably cause large-scale mortality of animals in a pond owing to improper procedures during cleansing.

     To address improper release of animals, apart from stepping up patrols and enforcement at release hotspots during specified festivals, the AFCD displays publicity posters and banners on public transport and at release hotspots to remind members of the public to carefully assess the impact of their acts on animals and the ecological environment before taking part in animal release activities. On the other hand, the AFCD actively promotes science-based restocking of fish as an alternative to improper release of animals. Since 2024, the Department has for three consecutive years invited religious bodies, fishermen's organisations, environmental groups and local teachers and students to take part in the nation-wide restocking activities held on June 6, the National Fish Releasing Day. Apart from enhancing fisheries resources and protecting the marine ecology, these activities also help drive the development of related industries such as the local supply of fish fry, thereby achieving a win-win outcome.

Ends/Wednesday, November 4, 2026
Issued at HKT 11:30

NNNN