Bowdens Silver

-

-

TG Ref: TG ID P2020/0034
Proposal: Bowdens Silver Mine (SSD 5765) - Invitation to Comment

Thank you for referring to TransGrid for review.

Please be advised of the following comments:

Property Comments:
• Given the 59km stretch of pipeline, any intersections with TransGrid infrastructure and easements within that stretch will need to comply with our easement terms and also receive TransGrid’s consent.

• As with the road re-location, the relevant roads authority will provide comment on the proposal and we should be privy to any decisions made that intersect our infrastructure.

• As always, if there is no impact on TG easements or freehold land, then the proponent is free to do as they please. But we encourage that TransGrid’s future network expansion intentions are factored into any decisions.


Environmental Comments:
Section 2.1.3 of the EIS states that:
“Bowdens Silver would seek to finalise approval in accordance with Part 5 of the EP&A Act from TransGrid for the re-alignment. This agreement would be finalised prior to commencing operations within the Mine Site.”
“An approval to construct the required 132kV power transmission line to the Mine Site would be sought separately in accordance with Part 5 of the EP&A Act. It should be noted that assessment of the power supply infrastructure and associated works is not included here but would be addressed in a future application to the relevant energy provider.”

TransGrid will not be seeking any approval for the existing transmission line relocation or new power supply (132kV transmission line) under Part 5 of the EP&A Act.
It is the responsibility of the proponent to ensure that all works associated with their project, including relocation of the transmission lines and grid connection works, are included in the development approval for the overall Silver Mine project.

TransGrid has had initial discussions with the mine for both the TL relocation and power supply. As indicated in the EIS, TransGrid will need to enter into formal agreements (Modification Agreement and a Connection Agreement) with the mine to undertake further scoping and finalise the works to support both the load supply and the TL relocation .

If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact our team.

Dear Ms Hawkeswood,

I am writing to object to the open-cut mine proposed as part of Bowdens Silver Project (no. 9641).

My family owns and operates a farm on the Lue Road near the site of the proposed mine. Although I live at present in London, when I am in Australia I frequently visit Lue and the surrounding area both to work at the farm and to enjoy the natural beauty of the area. The proposed mine could harm both the viability of farming activities and the attractiveness of the landscape, as well as proving potentially harmful to humans.

I am concerned about the harm to the water table. The area has been increasingly dry in recent years and the water table is struggling; the proposed mine could seriously harm the water table, and by extension harm farming activities as well as local flora and fauna. Once done, the harm to the water table would be permanent; as noted on page 5-14 of Part 5 of the EIS, 'groundwater take would occur in perpetuity', even after the mine has ceased operation.

I am also concerned about the risks of lead dust. Lead is of course highly toxic both to humans and animals, and, although the project is named 'Bowdens Silver', the proposed mine would extract very large quantities of lead. Mining and processing activities risk spreading lead dust from the mine site to nearby farmland (including ours) as well as to the village of Lue and its residents. The mine is too close to arable land and to Lue.

Yours sincerely,
Edward Armitage

To whom it may concern,

I grew up in the Mudgee area and made many visits to the Lue region – particularly around Havilah —throughout my childhood. Despite no longer calling myself a resident, I still feel strongly connected to the land and community that is currently earmarked for mining development by Bowdens Silver Pty Ltd, as per SSD application number 5765.

I am deeply concerned that this important ecological and historic region will be threatened by the open-cut mine if it is allowed to proceed.

I am particularly concerned by the following features of the proposed project:

• The proximity of the mine to the Lue township, including a local primary school, despite the large amounts of toxic material being processed and/or stored, including lead, cyanide, cadmium and arsenic.

• The proximity of tailings storage dam to Lawsons Creek, and the real potential for dangerous chemicals to leach into the creek and on to Cudgegong River.

• The significant amount of water required by Bowdens to operate the mine — up to 2000 megalitres per year. Nearby farmers and residents have already battled many years of increasingly devastating drought due to climate change, and this huge water requirement will undoubtably put further pressure on the area’s water table. This makes it unsuitable and unsustainable in this area.

• The destruction of local wetlands and waterholes caused by the proponent’s annual water use, which their own surveys estimate will reduce groundwater levels by 25 metres at the site. As a child I remember swimming in the series of waterholes bordering the proposed mine site, and I cannot fathom how this diverse and unique landscape could be so casually condemned.

• The destruction of known habitat for critically endangered species, including the Regent Honeyeater and koala. After the destruction of millions of acres of national park and bushland in fires across the State over the 2019-20 summer, it is more important than ever to preserve the country’s remaining habitat for already vulnerable wildlife.

• The social impact on local residents in Lue, Rylstone and Mudgee. Many friends, long-time business owners, investors, property owners, and tourism operators live in the localities directly affected by the proposed silver mine, and they are understandably upset at the thought of a toxic, noisy, polluting eyesore being approved in their backyard. These concerns should be given equal weight to the profiteering of corporate directors and shareholders.

• The insufficient consideration of and consultation with traditional owners of the land, including Wiradjuri and Gallanggabang peoples. Part 13 of the proponent’s specialist consultant study details claims from several Aboriginal Land Councils that Bowdens Silver has not provided adequate planning documents, reports, or opportunities for real consultation about the mine proposal. The Wiradjuri and Gallanggabang people have already suffered significant trauma in the last 230 years throughout the Mid-Western region. The proponent’s repeated assertions that damage to several identified burial sites, scar trees, and places of cultural significance within the mine site will be “minimised” or “mitigated” are grossly inadequatet. This point seems especially salient in light of the recent destruction of significant Aboriginal sites on other mining projects around Australia, and the public outcry that followed. Indeed, Mudgee LALC identified 26 significant cultural sites likely to be destroyed by the silver mine, in addition to the “multiple mining developments” already active in the region. Considered cumulatively, these act to perpetuate the ongoing destruction of traditional cultural heritage and disrespect to Aboriginal people.

Given these specific concerns, I urge the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to refuse Bowdens Silver Pty Ltd’s application SSD-5765 on the basis of its clear unsuitability due to ecological and cultural concerns.

Yours sincerely,
Lucy Robertson