Follow the number to its source.
Evidence checked: 15 October 2026

Each entry pairs a published figure with its scope and a direct supporting passage. PDF viewer pages may differ from printed report pages. Source links do not remove document-version or scientific uncertainty.

For journalists, planners and funders: use the claim table alongside the dated policy chronology and source library. The institutional baseline, consultant predictions and advocacy positions answer different questions.

429 · Reported inventory entries
2023 compilation drawing on historical and regional records; not a current deduplicated census. Fish rows 96–97 repeat.
Conclusion, report p. 36 / PDF p. 37
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=37
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

7 · Seagrasses
Seagrasses listed for Middle Bank.
Table 8-1; report p. 18 / PDF p. 19
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=19
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

14 · Macroalgae
Macroalgae listed for Middle Bank.
Table 8-2; report p. 19 / PDF p. 20
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=20
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

5 · Mangroves
Mangrove trees listed for Pulau Gazumbo.
Table 8-3; report p. 19 / PDF p. 20
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=20
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

10 · Coastal vegetation
Coastal vegetation listed for Pulau Gazumbo.
Table 8-4; report p. 20 / PDF p. 21
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=21
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

139 · Commercial fishes
Source fish rows are preserved, including repeated rows 96–97.
Table 8-5; report p. 21–24 / PDF p. 22
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=22
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

102 · Birds
Middle Bank and surrounding coastal areas; not 102 resident species on the bank.
Table 8-6; report p. 25–27 / PDF p. 26
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=26
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

7 · Marine mammals
Records from Penang waters; not a census of Middle Bank residents.
Table 8-7; report p. 28 / PDF p. 29
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=29
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

2 · Marine turtles
Records from Penang waters; not two confirmed resident species at Middle Bank.
Table 8-7; report p. 28 / PDF p. 29
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=29
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

100 · Molluscs
Molluscs listed for Middle Bank; source names and counting are retained.
Table 8-8; report p. 29–31 / PDF p. 30
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=30
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

23 · Arthropods
Marine arthropods listed for Middle Bank.
Table 8-9; report p. 32 / PDF p. 33
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=33
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

20 · Echinoderms
Echinoderms listed for Middle Bank.
Table 8-10; report p. 33 / PDF p. 34
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=34
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

≈65 ha · Mapped seagrass meadow
Historical mapped area; not today’s measured habitat extent.
Figure 6-1, report p. 16 / PDF p. 17; 649,532.60 m²
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=17
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

10.46 km² · Proposed sanctuary area
The whole proposed area, distinct from seagrass coverage. Historical baseline; not a gazetted boundary.
Table 5-1, report p. 10 / PDF p. 11; Figure 6-1, p. 16
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf#page=11
Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.

70 acres · Proposed reclamation
Proposed project area in the EIA version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; not measured habitat loss or proof of current approval.
Chapter 5, Table 5.1, p. 5.1 / PDF p. 1
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report/main/10.%20PLB%20-%20Chp%205.pdf#page=1
YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report

90 acres · Proposed landfill rehabilitation
Proposed project area in the EIA version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; not measured habitat loss or proof of current approval.
Chapter 5, Table 5.1, p. 5.1 / PDF p. 1
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report/main/10.%20PLB%20-%20Chp%205.pdf#page=1
YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report

160 acres · Combined proposed project area
Proposed project area in the EIA version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; not measured habitat loss or proof of current approval.
Chapter 5, Table 5.1, p. 5.1 / PDF p. 1
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report/main/10.%20PLB%20-%20Chp%205.pdf#page=1
YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report

70% · Assumed silt-curtain efficiency
A modelling assumption, not a measured result or guarantee. The nearby Middle Bank receptor requires scrutiny.
Chapter 7, p. 7.230 / PDF p. 230
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report/main/12.%20PLB%20-%20Chp%207.pdf#page=230
YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report

“slight” · Consultant’s predicted seagrass/sanctuary impact
Conditional consultant assessment; not observed damage, an independent replication or a current approval.
Chapter 7, p. 7.224 / PDF p. 224
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report/main/12.%20PLB%20-%20Chp%207.pdf#page=224
YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report

500 m · Land-use study radius
Defines a study area; not a demonstrated ecological protection buffer.
Chapter 6, Figure 6.52, p. 6.73 / PDF p. 73
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report/main/11.%20PLB%20-%20Chp%206.pdf#page=73
YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report

EN · 2024 · Far Eastern Curlew: globally Endangered
BirdLife assessment; a regional occurrence record does not establish today’s local abundance.
Species factsheet; assessment year 2024
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/far-eastern-curlew-numenius-madagascariensis
BirdLife International. (2024). Far Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis species factsheet [Global IUCN Red List assessment, 2024]. BirdLife DataZone. Retrieved October 14, 2026.

DD · Two listed horseshoe crabs: Data Deficient
Tachypleus gigas and Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda in the IUCN specialist summary. Local concern and global category differ; DD does not mean secure.
Specialist-group overview; no new assessment date inferred
https://iucn.org/our-union/commissions/group/iucn-ssc-horseshoe-crab-specialist-group
IUCN SSC Horseshoe Crab Specialist Group. (n.d.). IUCN SSC Horseshoe Crab Specialist Group. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Retrieved October 14, 2026.

2 · 2022 · Sea-cucumber species described in the cited paper
Taxonomic descriptions do not establish endemism, population size or threat status.
Zootaxa 5128(1), pp. 107–118
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5128.1.6
Teoh, V. Y. J., & Woo, S. P. (2022). Two new species of sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) from the seagrass meadow of Penang, Malaysia. Zootaxa, 5128(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5128.1.6

10 Aug–9 Sep 2026 · Draft-plan public-display period
The stated period has ended. It does not establish plan adoption or sanctuary gazettement.
Official final-draft publicity notice
https://www.planmalaysia.gov.my/epublisiti/article?id=978ee570-95f0-11f1-8ca8-005056b167b0
PLANMalaysia. (2026). Kajian Rancangan Struktur Negeri Pulau Pinang 2040 (Kajian Semula) peringkat laporan draf akhir [Publicity and public participation notice for the final draft of the Penang State Structure Plan 2040 review]. ePublisiti 2.0.

2 Mar 2026 · EIA rejection reported on 8 May
The official account also reports resubmission. It does not identify the public mirror as that exact version or establish today’s approval status.
Buletin Mutiara, 8 May 2026; attributed statement
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-to-decide-on-jelutong-landfill-rehabilitation-after-eia-rejection-says-exco-man/
Buletin Mutiara. (2026, May 8). Penang to decide on Jelutong landfill rehabilitation after EIA rejection, says exco man. https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-to-decide-on-jelutong-landfill-rehabilitation-after-eia-rejection-says-exco-man/

18 Oct 2026 · Extension deadline reported on 13 August
A dated official report of an extension; proceeding remained subject to EIA approval and legal compliance. Not proof of approval on 15 October.
Buletin Mutiara, 13 August 2026
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-prioritises-legal-compliance-before-deciding-on-jelutong-landfill-project/
Vimal, K. (2026, August 13). Penang prioritises legal compliance before deciding on Jelutong Landfill project. Buletin Mutiara. https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-prioritises-legal-compliance-before-deciding-on-jelutong-landfill-project/

A dated record, with the remaining questions visible
8 May 2026: Rejection and resubmission reported
Buletin Mutiara reports the state executive councillor’s account of a DOE rejection on 2 March 2026 and a subsequent resubmission with updated technical details. As of 8 May, the state had not decided whether to continue or stop the project.
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-to-decide-on-jelutong-landfill-rehabilitation-after-eia-rejection-says-exco-man/

13 Aug 2026: Extension reported; EIA approval still a condition
The official state outlet reports an extension of time until 18 October 2026. The Chief Minister says proceeding remains subject to EIA approval and legal requirements. The reported extension does not establish environmental approval.
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-prioritises-legal-compliance-before-deciding-on-jelutong-landfill-project/

9 Sep 2026: Draft-plan consultation period ends
PLANMalaysia’s notice sets the final-draft publicity and public participation period at 10 August–9 September 2026. This period has closed. The notice alone does not establish adoption of the plan, permission for a project or sanctuary gazettement.
https://www.planmalaysia.gov.my/epublisiti/article?id=978ee570-95f0-11f1-8ca8-005056b167b0

Current-status limit: this edition has not verified a later DOE decision letter, an EOT instrument, an adopted structure-plan instrument or completed sanctuary gazettement. The dated accounts below must not be read as a live approval status.

This page’s EIA discussion is based on the version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period, linked through the public mirror. Its project areas, impact predictions and modelling assumptions relate to that version. The date identifies its public availability, not an approval date or a report revision number. Later revised submissions and decision records must be assessed separately; this version is not presented as the latest approved EIA.

References
Martin, B. C., Bougoure, J., Ryan, M. H., Bennett, W. W., Colmer, T. D., Joyce, N. K., Olsen, Y. S., & Kendrick, G. A. (2019). Oxygen loss from seagrass roots coincides with colonisation of sulphide-oxidising cable bacteria and reduces sulphide stress. The ISME Journal, 13, 707–719. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-018-0308-5
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-018-0308-5
Two seagrasses studied outside Middle Bank; root-tip effects do not demonstrate whole-seabed sulfide removal.

Seagrass-Watch. (n.d.). What is seagrass? Retrieved October 18, 2026, from https://www.seagrasswatch.org/seagrass/
https://www.seagrasswatch.org/seagrass/
An educational reference, not a Middle Bank field survey. Global numerical comparisons and thresholds on the source page are not adopted here.

Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. (n.d.). Enhalus acoroides (L.f.) Royle. Plants of the World Online. Retrieved October 18, 2026, from https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:160634-3/general-information
https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:160634-3/general-information
A botanical reference, not a measurement of Middle Bank plants. It does not corroborate the report’s 1.5 m root-depth claim or a global size superlative.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2008). An introduction to the basic concepts of food security. https://www.fao.org/4/al936e/al936e00.pdf
https://www.fao.org/4/al936e/al936e00.pdf
Conceptual guidance, not a Penang household survey or a measurement of seafood supply, prices or nutrition.

Nordlund, L. M., Unsworth, R. K. F., Gullström, M., & Cullen-Unsworth, L. C. (2018). Global significance of seagrass fishery activity. Fish and Fisheries, 19(3), 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12259
https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12259
An expert-survey study across locations, not a local catch census. Its findings do not quantify Middle Bank’s landings, household dependence or habitat-specific production.

Unsworth, R. K. F., Nordlund, L. M., & Cullen-Unsworth, L. C. (2019). Seagrass meadows support global fisheries production. Conservation Letters, 12(1), e12566. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12566
https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12566
Published online in 2018 and in the 2019 journal volume. A global analysis, not a Middle Bank production estimate. Seagrass use does not establish obligatory dependence or recruitment to adult catches for every species.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2015). Voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries in the context of food security and poverty eradication. https://www.fao.org/4/i4356en/I4356EN.pdf
https://www.fao.org/4/i4356en/I4356EN.pdf
Voluntary guidance, not Malaysian legislation, a sanctuary zoning decision or a survey of Penang households. Local rules and impacts require their own evidence.

Yasin, Z. (2022, January 14). Tebing Tengah: Lindung laut buat masa depan. Penang Institute. https://penanginstitute.org/publications/suara-nadi/tebing-tengah-lindung-laut-buat-masa-depan/
https://penanginstitute.org/publications/suara-nadi/tebing-tengah-lindung-laut-buat-masa-depan/
An institutional public essay, not a legal boundary instrument, current census or peer-reviewed impact assessment. The place-name does not define the proposed sanctuary’s legal extent; numerical claims require their own evidence and dates.

Yasin, Z., Tan, A. S. H., Lee, A., Woo, S. P., & Razali, N. (2023). Protecting Penang’s marine biodiversity: Establishing the Middle Bank Marine Sanctuary (MBMS). Penang Institute.
https://penanginstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Monograph_MBMS.pdf
A historical inventory compiled from long-term research and the 2021–2022 surveys, not a 2026 census. Bird records include surrounding coastal areas; mammal and turtle records include wider Penang waters. Fish rows 96 and 97 repeat Plicofollis platystomus, so the reported total is not a deduplicated species count. Sanctuary and meadow areas differ, and some habitat-area text and percentages require reconciliation.

Teoh, V. Y. J., & Woo, S. P. (2022). Two new species of sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) from the seagrass meadow of Penang, Malaysia. Zootaxa, 5128(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5128.1.6
https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5128.1.6
A species description is not a population survey. Newly described does not necessarily mean endemic, abundant or restricted to Middle Bank.

Reidenbach, M. A., & Thomas, E. L. (2018). Influence of the seagrass, Zostera marina, on wave attenuation and bed shear stress within a shallow coastal bay. Frontiers in Marine Science, 5, 397. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00397
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00397
Different species, climate and coastal setting. Its numerical results must not be presented as measured protection or predictive values for Penang.

Gallagher, J. B., Prahalad, V., & Aalders, J. (2021). Inorganic and black carbon hotspots constrain blue carbon mitigation services across tropical seagrass and temperate tidal marshes. Wetlands, 41, Article 65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-021-01460-3
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-021-01460-3
Accounting assumptions and sampled ecosystems need careful interpretation. No whole-sanctuary offset or annual sequestration estimate is inferred here.

Lavery, P. S., Lafratta, A., Nair, D., Ponnampalam, L., Ng, J. E., Fairul Izmal, J. H., Serrano, O., & Masqué, P. (2023). Blue carbon opportunities: Seagrass carbon storage and accumulation rates at Johor and Penang, Malaysia. Edith Cowan University and The MareCet Research Organization. https://doi.org/10.25958/zfxg-0y62
https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2022-2026/3187/
A technical report, not a journal article. Sampling conditions, core depth and spatial coverage must be reviewed before extrapolating any figures to the meadow or sanctuary.

Buletin Mutiara. (2025, November 19). 槟政府重视中途滩生态保护 孙达拉祖：宪报需策略推进 [State response on Middle Bank ecological protection and gazettement].
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/%E6%A7%9F%E6%94%BF%E5%BA%9C%E9%87%8D%E8%A7%86%E4%B8%AD%E9%80%94%E6%BB%A9%E7%94%9F%E6%80%81%E4%BF%9D%E6%8A%A4/
A dated policy statement is not a gazette instrument. It does not verify the current legal status or every associated project approval.

Buletin Mutiara. (2026, May 8). Penang to decide on Jelutong landfill rehabilitation after EIA rejection, says exco man. https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-to-decide-on-jelutong-landfill-rehabilitation-after-eia-rejection-says-exco-man/
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-to-decide-on-jelutong-landfill-rehabilitation-after-eia-rejection-says-exco-man/
A dated report of an official statement, not the DOE decision letter. It does not identify the publicly mirrored EIA as the rejected or resubmitted version and does not establish the project’s current status. Read the later 13 August account alongside it.

Vimal, K. (2026, August 13). Penang prioritises legal compliance before deciding on Jelutong Landfill project. Buletin Mutiara. https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-prioritises-legal-compliance-before-deciding-on-jelutong-landfill-project/
https://www.buletinmutiara.com/penang-prioritises-legal-compliance-before-deciding-on-jelutong-landfill-project/
This is the state’s reported position on 13 August, not an approval instrument or a live status feed. Neither the EOT document nor a later DOE decision was verified for this edition. The report’s separate discussion of Penang Gateway must not be treated as a mapped finding about Middle Bank.

Protect Karpal Singh Drive Action Committee. (2026, September). Penang’s marine sanctuary plan undermined by structure plan’s reclamation clause. Aliran.
https://m.aliran.com/civil-society-voices/penangs-marine-sanctuary-plan-undermined-by-structure-plans-reclamation-clause
Evidence of the committee’s position, not independent validation of every scientific or planning claim. The cited September 2026 consultation deadline has passed.

PLANMalaysia. (2026). Kajian Rancangan Struktur Negeri Pulau Pinang 2040 (Kajian Semula) peringkat laporan draf akhir [Publicity and public participation notice for the final draft of the Penang State Structure Plan 2040 review]. ePublisiti 2.0.
https://www.planmalaysia.gov.my/epublisiti/article?id=978ee570-95f0-11f1-8ca8-005056b167b0
This consultation period has closed. The notice is not proof of an adopted plan, a project approval or sanctuary gazettement. Specific planning clauses and map boundaries require review of the complete official draft; a supplied extract alone cannot authenticate them.

BirdLife International. (2024). Far Eastern Curlew Numenius madagascariensis species factsheet [Global IUCN Red List assessment, 2024]. BirdLife DataZone. Retrieved October 14, 2026.
https://datazone.birdlife.org/species/factsheet/far-eastern-curlew-numenius-madagascariensis
A global extinction-risk category does not establish current Middle Bank abundance, visit frequency or a local population trend. The monograph’s local occurrence records and the global assessment answer different questions.

IUCN SSC Horseshoe Crab Specialist Group. (n.d.). IUCN SSC Horseshoe Crab Specialist Group. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Retrieved October 14, 2026.
https://iucn.org/our-union/commissions/group/iucn-ssc-horseshoe-crab-specialist-group
Data Deficient means evidence is insufficient to assess global extinction risk; it does not mean secure. The monograph describes local decline and uses “critically endangered here”. That wording is not a global IUCN Critically Endangered classification for these two species.

Protect Karpal Singh Drive Campaign. (n.d.). Middle Bank sanctuary at risk: Reclamation vs. science. Retrieved October 14, 2026, from https://protect-middle-bank.pages.dev/ecosystem
https://protect-middle-bank.pages.dev/ecosystem
An advocacy interpretation, not an independent assessment or current approval record. Campaign map annotations do not establish legal or habitat boundaries. Its quantitative claims require checking against the original reports.

YES Bizs Sdn. Bhd. (2025). Environmental impact assessment for proposed landfill rehabilitation and land reclamation works for mixed development at Seksyen 8, Bandar Jelutong, Daerah Timur Laut, Pulau Pinang [Proponent-commissioned EIA; version made publicly available on 12 February 2025 during the public feedback period; public mirror]. Prepared for PLB Engineering Berhad. https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report
https://github.com/field05/PLB-EIA-Report
Commissioned by the proponent, not a peer-reviewed study or verified current government-approved version. Predictions assume 70% silt-curtain efficiency and use dated inputs. Tables 5.9 and 5.15 give inconsistent fill volumes/material descriptions. A 500 m land-use study radius is not a verified ecological buffer; location at “middle banks” does not establish mapped seagrass overlap. Boundary, baseline, cumulative-impact and monitoring assumptions require independent review.