Bowdens Silver

There are so many issues with this mine that it is difficult to know where to start. The region's coal mines are implementing best practice in terms of operation and site remediation while Bowdens' project, as depicted in the EIS, is positively 19th Century in its impact on the environment. It is totally unacceptable in the 21st Century.

Bowdens seem to be completely unaware of recent developments in mine site rehabilitation and site remediation. It is completely unacceptable that this company can lob into an area that has been settled for nearly 180 years dig a 1.5 km by 300 metre deep hole in the ground and walk away and leave it. I do not believe this mine should be approved but if it is, best practice mine rehabilitation must be required. Bowdens should not be allowed to dig a huge hole in the ground and leave it to fill with water which can leach heavy metals into the environment for hundreds of years. The waste rock, which Bowdens intends to dump on site is similarly toxic and both represent an unacceptable risk to the groundwater in the area.

While Bowdens call themselves a silver mine, in actual fact the company is mining nickel and lead, silver is just the most valuable component. The WHO has said that there is no safe level of lead exposure. The risks of health effects are highest in unborn babies, infants and children and Lue public school is less than 2 km from the proposed mine site - this is just too close. The children of Lue should not be subjected to the risk of lead exposure.

According to the EIS, the metal bearing ore will be processed on site and the tailings stored in a tailings dam that will cover 117 hectares with a 56m high wall and contain heavy metals and poisons such as cyanide, cadmium, arsenic, zinc and lead. There will be no secondary wall, and the dam will be less than 1km from Lawson Creek. Lawson Creek joins the Cudgegong at Mudgee, and flows on to join the Macquarie at Burrendong Dam and thence into the Murray Darling system. There is no rehabilitation available for these dams. They are capped and remain in place forever - that is, until they leak or collapse. A tailings dam collapse is a disaster that cannot be mitigated. Rivers which have had tailings discharged in them could remain dead and lifeless for hundreds of years if there is not sufficient flow to flush and disperse the contaminants downstream.

Bowdens plan to transport the processed concentrate in shipping containers on B-double trucks using our regional roads. These trucks will travel through the middle of Mudgee town and past local schools. All trucks will use the narrow and winding Lue Road to get to Mudgee. I use Lue road to get to Mudgee and know it well, hence I find it quite unbelievable that this road was approved for B-double traffic in the first place. In addition, the traffic created by the trucks will make an already slow trip even slower and increase the risk of accidents because there are few places where a car can pass a heavily laden B-double.

The mine will destroy 381.7 ha of native vegetation including 182.3 ha of the critically endangered Box Gum Woodland. This ecological community provides habitat for a large number of endangered species listed under NSW and Federal environmental legislation. Koalas have been sighted beside the project site and there are few, if any Australian mammals more iconic, but also more endangered, than koalas. Once numbering in the millions, the fur trade, disease, habitat loss, roads, domestic dogs, fragmentation and most recently, catastrophic bushfires, have seen the population crash to somewhere between 30,000 to 40,000 koalas in NSW according to government estimated prior to the bushfires.

The mine proposes to transfer up to 5.5 ML/day of water from coal mines on the top of the Goulburn River via a 60km pipeline. The excess mine water produced by coal mining at Ulan and Moolarben is predominantly valuable groundwater intercepted and extracted from the Goulburn/Hunter (eastern) catchment. Pumping from an eastern to a western catchment sets a bad precedent. This water is critical for the health and viability of the Goulburn River. The top priority for its use is maintaining environmental flows in the Goulburn especially during extended dry periods, when most pressure is on water access. Ulan/Moolarben water is Goulburn River water and should stay there.

If the EIS is anything to go by, Bowdens is not going to be a good neighbour and this mine should not be approved. The impact on endangered flora and fauna and the risks to groundwater, local rivers and the local population from the toxic heavy metals that will be released by the mine are unacceptable.

We have been landholders and primary producers (cattle) in the Lue region for the past 14 years and are very concerned about the proposed Bowdens Silver Mine (Mine) in Maloneys Road and wish to strongly object to its development. We are an affected property as per Appendix 6 in the EIS and are located 3.6km from the proposed location of the Project open cut mine.
We have summarised some of our key concerns, if the mine were to proceed, namely –
- Water concerns, use of local ground water by Mine, the negative effect on local ground water supplies and concerns about water contamination
- Dust particle emissions from mining operations on human and animal health and local ecosystems, potentially also contaminating the air and soil
- Increase traffic on Lue Road as 200+ workers commute to work at the mine daily, potential for increased accidents and degradation of the road which is currently constantly in need of repair by Mid Western Council, approx. 4 major road repairs in past 6 years.
- Increased noise and light pollution, from Mine operations at night, operational noise due to blasting and constant use of vehicles onsite
- Our concern for our agricultural enterprise should the Mine proceed

Water concerns
As pointed out in the Part 5 Ground Water Assessment Report (318 pages), it says that the Mine will require additional water other than rainfall. The Pt 5 report pg 5- 50 Table 5 shows the long term average rainfall data (yrs 1900-2018) and says that “the average annual evaporation is approximately 1514 mm/ year which is more than twice the average rainfall rate”. During the past 14 years (2007 – 2019) we have been keeping property rainfall records and our means monthly rainfall recorded show them to be nearly 10% lower than the Bowdens long term average data in Table 5. Our Lue property record mean average annual rainfall over the past 14 years is 603.1 mm.

Also it is concerning that the EIS despite being lodged in May 2020 doesn’t record last year’s ‘record’ drought year where our Lue property annual rainfall for 2019 was a total of 260mm, (we recorded 383.5mm in 2018 and 462.25 mm in 2017). Even the EIS Pt 2 Air Quality Report Pg 2 -32 Section 4.4 says “Analysis of the on–site data for the five year period 2013-2017 shows that the measured annual rainfall is generally lower than long-term averages for Mudgee. The annual rainfall for modelling period 2017 is 450mm for Lue Met01 and 483mm for Lue Met02”
The cumulative effect of the drought and lack of rainfall has emphasised the local farming reliance on spring fed dams and local bores. We are extremely concerned that the proposed Mine will have a negative effect on the local ground water available for local village of Lue and neighbouring farming properties. And this Project Mine will take a lot of water!

Pg 5 -117 of Pt 5 Ground Water Report says “that Bowdens Silver Mines are not seeking to source water from ground water bores for operational requirements (ground water bores would be used for water supply during site establishment and construction)” Pg 5- 17 of the Part 5 Ground Water Assessment Report says that water supply of approx. 0.5 ML/ d to 1 ML/ day would be required for site establishment and construction, principally for dust suppression” . So by our calculation, if the establishment phase is 1.5 years, the Mine will require 274 ML – 548 ML over the 1 ½ year time period. Most of this at present is planned to come from the local ground water aquifers as the Lue local rainfall with evaporation cannot hope to offset the Mine’s needs. Pg 5 – 48 Merrick, 2011 report found that “prior inflow estimates of 2ML/ day considered unlikely to be sustainable with longer term average inflow rates likely to be less than 0.5ML/ day” . So even the experts conclude that Lue ground water levels cannot support the Mines needs at the establishment phase, external water sources will be required from the start.
There is a concern for the negative impact of the Mine on the water for local farming properties, due to impact on local creeks through disturbed drainage by the Mine and no run off into local creeks. Finally there is the potential of water contamination, through adverse unexpected events by the Mine. Mine failures in other areas have been known to adversely affect local environments eg, tailings dams failures, eg Newcrest Cadia Gold Mine near Orange in March 2018.

Dust particle emissions
As has been noted in the Part 17 Social Impact Assessment report, the by-product of Silver is lead, and we and the local community are extremely concerned about the dust particles and effect on our health as there is the potential for these particles to land on shed and house structures which collect our rain water, contaminating human drinking water. Of extreme concern is the long term effect of lead on the brains of young children, meaning that the Mine will be trying to make money at the cost of some children’s health.
Similarly there could be adverse effects on our stock and local wildlife as they access their water from our dams located south-easterly direction of the Mine. Therefore we continue to have concerns for our family, workers, livestock and local wildlife from the potential contamination of water and soil from airborne dust particles.

Traffic

Should the Project proceed, the EIS currently expects more than 200 – 300 workers to be onsite with no onsite accommodation. All these workers will be travelling from nearby districts of Mudgee and Rylstone/ Kandos and further afield. The road is mostly 100km speed limit on Lue Road. There is the increased potential for accidents and further degradation of Lue Road, which has already had approx. 4 or 5 major road repairs, done by Mid-Western Council, in the past few years, the most recent road repairs to Lue Road, near Tongbong Road were done in April – May 2020.

Light and Noise Pollution
We expect the Project will adversely affect our amenity as light pollution will affect our current Dark sky and noise will be considerable from blasting and constant use of equipment, machinery and vehicles onsite.

Stakeholder engagement
We should point out that except for 3 newsletters posted to us, (last one in June 2019), no one at Bowdens or previously Kingsgate has ever sought our opinion on the project, despite attending at least one of the Open Days. Therefore our views are not represented in the survey results in Part 17 SIA report.

The Pt 14 Agricultural Impact Statement does not address the local businesses that we support in the Rylstone/ Kandos area, Table 2.5 only shows the Mudgee local businesses. We wonder if their interests have been consulted at all?

Impact on Agricultural Enterprise
Finally, whilst we are one of the smaller agricultural concerns referred to on Pg 14- 98, section 7.4.2 (Pt14 Agricultural report) we DO NOT agree with the statement. “It is unlikely that the project would have any discernible adverse impacts on the agricultural enterprises ….”. Based on our water concerns, dust emissions, traffic and accident concerns amongst others, these may very likely directly affect our ongoing agricultural enterprise into the future.
We ask that you reject the Mine’s application.

Dear Rose-Anne

My name is Phillip English and I am the owner of “Monivae Station” which is located approximately 4.5km south-east of the proposed mine site. This submission is lodged on behalf of my wife and my 3 young children who also reside at “Monivae Station” and is an Objection to the proposed Bowdens Silver Mine.
Our farming operation includes (1) Grazing & Cattle production whereby cattle are produced for both the domestic (Coles Australia) and export markets; and (2) Farming operations which include cropping and intensive agriculture via irrigation. Irrigation is achieved as a result of our significant investment in establishing the supporting infrastructure and via us maintaining the following licences:
1. WAL28515– Aquifer – 143 megalitres under the Lachlan Fold MDB Groundwater Source Water Source.
2. WAL34322 – Unregulated River – 24 megalitres under the Lawsons Creek Water Source Water Source.
3. WAL34299 – Unregulated River – 104 megalitres under the Lawsons Creek Water Source
It is noted that none of these licences have been identified and allocated to our farming operations within the EIS, however represent a critical component to the viability of our farming operations.
Whilst I support mining developments and the creation of local employment, after reviewing the EIS, I not believe that the Bowdens Silver Project represents a responsible development and addresses the key environmental and social risks applicable to the operation and the environment that it exists. On this basis, this submission is a formal objection to the Bowdens Silver Project.
My concerns from my review of the EIS relevant to my farming and family include:
• Lead emissions and health impacts from the potential dust from the site.
• The inability of Bowdens to legally access water from the Ulan or Moolarben compounding the dust emissions from the site.
• Over-extraction of local water sources from within the Lue area given the inability to access other water sources.
• Noise emissions from the operation given the extremely low background noise levels and the elevated nature of mining operations (including construction noise).
• Surface and groundwater contamination from the high volume of PAF extracted by the mining operations.
• Surface and groundwater contamination from the TSF from the presence of Walkers Lane Fault directly below the proposed facility.
• Surface and groundwater contamination from the TSF resulting from seepage of contaminated leachate from the facility as detailed within the ATC Williams Assessment.
• Devaluation of our farming business due to the proposed operations.
• Traffic related impacts and the increased traffic to Lue Road (including the capacity of sections of the road to cater for that traffic, e.g. Mount Knowles cutting).
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal.
Regards
Phillip English

I wish to voice my support for the Bowdens Silver Mine. Our small communities have taken quite a hit in the last couple of years with the loss of industry in the area. With the loss of jobs and no prospects a lot of families were forced to leave the area to find work. This has forced a lot of small business to close there doors. Along with the drought and now covid 19 our community has been struggling to stay alive. The Silver mine will give much needed employment opportunities as well as injecting money into our towns local business's, the prospect of families moving back to area helps school, preschool, sports, hospital, real estate and keeps our towns from turning into a ghost town. I hope that this project goes ahead and gives my children some hope for the future.
Thank you S Semple

Support

1. Is how much they will actually mine known by anyone, including SVL ? Has drilling so far identified the full ore extent ? Drilling is expensive. Has SVL only drilled as far as is needed to determine if opening up a mine will be profitable ? As the mine progresses and $ returns commence, will more drilling and other investigations including geophysical also progress ? When will be the full extent and grade of the entire orebody(s ?) be known ?

2. Will prices / returns for lead - zinc - silver vary, and consequently can the lifespan of the mine and its effective management be accurately forecast ?

3. Will technology and costs change, making the project extension viable ?

4. Will Government and political policies and expectations change, perhaps in response to public expectations changes ?.

5. What weather events may occur ? Have the implications of Climate Change been integrated into SVL planning ? Internationally, Climate Change experts advise that “As our climate changes, floods will become larger and more frequent.”

6. Could flooding and washaway of waste emplacements, stockpiles, settling ponds occur ? Have the impacts that may follow on water users downstream been assessed ? Have the circumstances of the Queensland 2010-11 open-cut coalmines flooding and massive, never to be measured pollution downstream been considered ? Were weather events such as those that led to the relatively nearby 1990 Nyngan flooding been considered with respect to SVL infrastructure stability ? These disasters followed outstanding examples of weather conditions not planned for. Is there certainty this will not happen at Lue ? The regular summer occurrence of the Westside Great Dividing Range Low Pressure Trough exacerbates this likelihood locally.

7. Could drought periods increase in strength and frequency leading to water scarcity and so make the ore concentration flotation process unviable ?

8. Will the proposed Ulan / Moolarbon water pipeline solve such a problem ? How certain is the construction of such a pipeline ? How long before all stakeholders will know the outcomes of related negotiations required prior to construction ?

9. Will this water diversion from a Pacific Ocean catchment outlet to a Great Southern Ocean lead to other irreconcilable issues, such as detrimental introduction of unwanted animal, plant, and algae species following catchment crossing?

10. Will the proposed water pipeline diverting water from the Hunter to Murray – Darling Basin catchments be a critical depletion for Goulburn River – Hunter River water users during drought periods ?

11. The incidence of dust storms also cannot be forecast. Do the meteorological records the SVL company consultants used adequately measure the incidence of severe very hot very dry northerly wind events (catastrophic fireweather) when lead - zinc contaminated dust may be deposited on the Lue village and populated surrounds within 3 km of the mine property ?

12. Everyone in Lue Village and surrounds relies on rainwater tanks for drinking and other purpose water. Lead and Zinc are toxic. The human body (and most other animals) have Zero tolerance of Lead. Even the tiny amounts of Lead in coal dust that was deposited on the roofs of the village of Wollar (about 30 km north of Lue) led to all school children there being issued bottled drinking water by the Education Department. Can the same situation occur at Lue school and surrounding homes ? The opencut COAL mine was about 4km from Wollar school. At Lue the opencut LEAD mine will be less than 3km from the school and village houses.

13. There are many Zinc / Lead / Silver mines in NSW with unacceptable pollution legacy outcomes, such as at Tarago (Woodlawn Mine), Yerranderie near Lake Burragorang / Sydney’s primary water storage, Sunny Corner north of Yetholme (between Sofala and Bathurst), Lake Burley Griffin and other locations downstream from Captains Flat Cu Au Zn Pb Ag mine, and many other yet to be resolved similar legacy issues, just in NSW. Can the company be certain not to dispose of the mine to another entity prior to completion of all rehabilitation and other on-going management needs ?

14. Will another entity be certain to not become bankrupt, with bonds not adequate to effectively manage the pollution issues ? On-going indefinite management issues of Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) from the tailings and waste rock emplacements will always require attention from whichever entity, which must never be the taxpayer. The locations listed above now have expensive management issues, rectification of which is being paid for by the taxpayer.

15. Could the example of the nearby Kandos cement plant and associated limestone mine being sold by a very large multinational company to several local entrepreneurs, who may not be able to manage complete rehabilitation of the works and mine, be repeated at Bowdens Silver ?

16. Will the thin membranes or other impermeable layers indefinitely provide adequate isolation of AMD and flotation process ore concentration reagent chemicals from downstream environments, both surface and groundwater ?

17. If any leakage problems ever arise, will it always be possible for the company to remedy the issue ?

18. Can the company provide local recent examples of Lead - Zinc – Silver mining operations that have been successfully concluded / rehabilitated, where all longterm management requirements will remain in place ensuring there will never be legacy environmental concerns resulting ?

I am a resident of Sydney City. I am concerned at the prospect of permission being given for the Silver Mines Limited company to “build” a so called silver mine in the Lawson Valley near Mudgee, one of the most beautiful areas of country available for native wildlife being quickly turned over to powerful and overbearing corporations.
It is really a lead and zinc mine, the proportion of silver expected to be a mere sliver on the pie chart of production. This at the cost of human health as in the case of Muswellbrook residents, and certainly at the cost of wildlife. No amount of guarantee given by Bowdens can prevent damage to both animals, already devastated by bushfire around Australia, and humans, as instanced in the rate of liver cancer (ten times the national average) around mining areas circling Muswellbrook.
Currently this is on the cusp of happening in the Lawson Creek Valley. It will ruin the area for generations to come.
What worries me particularly is the fact that this is being done under the veil of the Covid epidemic, the State Government dead keen for this to go ahead, and the Federal Government revisiting the Environmental Laws to “get rid of the (so called) red tape” surrounding environmental law, so making this whole process far speedier. A quick short term and convenient fix. More jobs at the cost of the environment and human health, when more could be gained by increased investment in renewables and in our native environment as a source for more jobs.
With mining being more and more robotised, there will be few jobs for humans anyway!
Governments are meant to be custodians of the country in which their constituents live. This is not caretaking. It is cynically being used to solve problems that both Governments are finding too hard to address in a more creative manner. Where is their vision?
I join with the residents of Lue, Rylstone and Mudgee in voicing their personal concerns. These include: a mine operating and blasting twenty four hours a day, trucking in and out of Mudgee twenty four hours a day; a massive tailings dam and a cyanide plant, injurious to human, animal and plant life, (we’ve seen what has happened in Bouganville in similar circumstances ) let alone the expected damage to the tourism industry, and the ravaging of the water supply at the expense of the residents, to line the pockets of this business. Jobs gained will be nullified by the cost of medical expenses ensuing for both residents and workers, and environmental damage, losses which result in extinction.

I write as a member of the Australian Labor Party as an environment activist. I have looked over the this project in considerable detail and find myself concerned about:

1/ Threats of acid mine drainage

Formation of acid mine drainage (AMD) is a widespread environmental issue that has not subsided throughout decades of continuing research. Highly acidic and highly concentrated metallic streams are characteristics of such streams. Humans, plants and surrounding ecosystems that are in proximity to AMD producing sites face immediate threats.

To the best of my knowledge, Bowden's Mining has not addressed these concerns satisfactorily and this project should NOT be approved until the company satisfies the local community of its due diligence. I should add that it is not obvious to me that this project can be fixed.

Consider:

- 57% of the waste rock excavated and 100% of Tailings is classified as Potentially Acid Forming (PAF)
- The Project Capital and operating costs are understated as they do not include contract mining, mining equipment or relocation of the High Voltage Transmission Line
- The Mine Closure and Rehabilitation cost allocation of $39.4M will be insufficient to cover leaking AMD.
- The mining equipment numbers used in the noise modelling look to be understated

2/ Dust pollution.

Bowdens Silver concedes that dust is the primary pollutant from the mine. But their EIS is vague and unclear for assessing community exposure to deposition of air-borne contaminants from mining operations for lead and heavy metals. It appears to underestimate community exposure levels as it doesn’t use concentrate, mine ore materials (stockpiled oxide material and tailings) as sources of dust. The EIS fails to assess all sources of lead and also arsenic bioaccessibility (as no data is provided) to enable reliable health risk assessment to be performed and assess ingestion pathways. The EIS references out of date compliance levels for acceptable community exposure and Blood lead modelling - concludes that existing (baseline) soil and dust lead levels are elevated therefore the mine will not adversely affect the community health.

It is also true that there is no safe level of lead. Toxic effects are evident at less than 5 μg/dL and have lifelong effects on multiple organs including the cardiovascular system (Lanphear et al. 2018).

Please do approve this project.

I support mining in general, great for jobs and small businesses in small communities, mining companies provide community support, funding, employment etc. I support mining.

Mining is necessary. I fully support the project and mining in general. Many many jobs are created by mining both at the mine and in the community.

We are very against Bowdens silver mine going ahead. We have a young family & we brought Our property in the hopes it would be our forever home 9years ago. We already hear noises from this mine during the day when machines are in use & we also see dust coming out from that area. We love the tranquility & beautiful country that is lue so for this mine to go ahead would be so devastating for us & the lue community. The harmful effects of the amount of lead that we will be exposed to is terrifying for our little family. We are less then 2kms from the mine sight & there’s no way we will be able to stay on our property if this mine goes ahead.

I object to the proposed Bowdens Silver mining on the grounds that 1. It will not bring significant employment to the surrounding community. 2. It is not inline with the identity of the surrounding community. This is a quiet rural setting with agriculture being the main source of income. The land in our community is best suited to growing crops and live stock. The richness of the surrounding soil needs to be enhanced not depleted. 2. Local small business will be negatively impacted. The surrounding small business rely heavily on passing traffic and holidaymakers as a source of income. Travellers primarily come to our region to relax in our natural surroundings, escape the industry of the city and give a little back to their rural communities. A mine in our area/industy will make the option of visiting our community less appealing to holiday makers. 3. I came to this community from Sydney because of health reasons. I was diagnosed with a life threatening illness and after receiving life saving treatment decided to continue my healing process in nature. I believe my illness was not helped by the secondary pollutants created by the industry I was surrounded by. Toxicity from runoff in the waterways, air pollution, micro toxins in the food I consumed are example of pollution from industry that over extended periods of time has been proven to impact negatively on the health of not only adults but children and babies (transferred through breast milk). I do not want this for myself or for my surrounding community. 4. The size and the scale of this proposed project is too big for the infrastructure of the small rural communities to take on. I do not want to expand to meet the needs of this proposed mine. I do not want major roads designed and created to 'allow' trucks, carrying unknown materials, to snake around our small villages, even if it is at times considered acceptable. This will alter significantly the character and ethos of our town. I do not want the land, rich in minerals and life, to be depleted and the produce shipped overseas for the benefit of countries outside of my own. I do not want the habitat within this large body of land to be strategically removed. I do not believe, when they have finished removing the silver and lead they are mining, that the by product they then use as land fill, and scattering of local fauna, will return this large expanse of land back to it's original level of abundance. 5. The level of toxic by product is not acceptable to me. Silver mining is one of the most expensive and invasive forms of mining. I know that a by product of this process is Lead. It is firmly established that Lead is a highly toxic metal and even when all measures are taken there are no guarantees of zero contamination. Any level of Lead contamination is not acceptable due to it's highly toxic nature. 6. It is a very rare thing to be surrounded primarily only by the sounds of nature. I value this and object to the proposed mine because the removal of nature from such a large area to house the mine AND the sound generated by the function of the mine itself, not to mention the earth movement and vibration, may be kept at a very minimum, but is just not wanted at any level. Thank you for considering my objections to this proposed mine.

I think the mine will be a great boost for Australias economy and will be positive for the nearby town of Mudgee

Hi, My name is Harry white,
I thank you for the opportunity to be heard, i am writing to you to voice my opion AGAINST the proposed BOWDENS SILVER MINE
To give an insight into who i am:
I am 28 years old and run a beef cattle operation with my brother jack here at Havilah North, 7 KM west of the village of Lue
both jack and i live on the property with our respective partners and as of 2 days ago jack and wife susie have a baby boy.
Earlier this year jack and i purchased our fathers property known as Havilah North, this makes us the 6th generation of whites to farm here.
I tell you this because i would like that to continue for along as it has already run.
The prospect of a insufficient water, brought about by excessive use at Bowdens is one that i find very hard to handle. Having just come through the worst drought on record, i have seen the water table at its lowest, we are situated on the lawson creek, as is bowdens,
the creek is our life line
as it is for many others up and down stream
to take 5 mega litres of water from that catchment everyday i feel is determental to my operation
I am aware that a tailings dam will be put in to store the sludge that is the remnants of the silver/lead washing process,
I am aware that this slugde is toxic
i am aware that these type of dams require life long maintenance, as there have been cases of them leaking and spreading toxic waste into natural waterways
causing countless damage to those down stream
Who will maintain this dam, who will see to it that no damage is ever to come from the toxic waste created by washing and processing lead and silver on site at bowdens silver mine?
i ask one more question on water,
there is a proposition to bring 15% of water required from Ullan or Moolarben Coal mines through pipe to the site at Lue
As a recently acquired land holder i am very aware of my property location and it would seem that it is situated in the most direct route for this proposed pipe line?
why have i not been informed personally?
What are the plans for the pipe line?
will it go through my property? No it will not.
What i need is more clarity on this and the above matters, it is all a bit of a mystery to me, and it causes a great deal of angst
that on top of running a considerable business i do not need.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak
kind regards
Harry White

I feel this would be very good for the people of Mudgee and surrounding districts

Thank you for allowing me to object to the Bowdens Silver Project...i have kept my notes as brief as possible..

Economics...
whilst a submission doesnt consider economics, its worth bearing in mind that a marginal project like this runs the risk of being abandoned during its life, resulting in an abandoned ruin that isnt rehabbed, or maintained.The risk then, is a mine that has detrimental effects on the local environment, a tailings dam left to nature, and likely, no funds available to rehabilitate.
As for job creation, most construction work and operations do not create as many new jobs as is projected..., they are allocated to contracting firms with existing staff. The benefits are usually short term in nature...i do concur that employment is created, especially in admin and smaller maintenance areas, however, the number of new jobs would be contentious, and projections therefore, somewhat misleading.

Water...
Of concern is the proposal to pipe water from the coal mines near Ulan..these mines are compelled to return water to the Goulburn river catchment, which has major agricultural use. Surely it is wrong to transfer water from an important catchment, and transfer it to a mining operation, where the water cannot be re-released to a catchment system. The reduced flow to the Goulburn river system would be of detriment to agricultural and domestic users along the Goulburn and Upper Hunter catchments.
Bowdens, i believe has grossly understated the negative effect that water drawdown will have on Lawsons Creek. As per attachment, Bowdens have not studied the flow but used a generic flow model... I have estimated that normal flows for the last 2 years would only be up to 20lt per second (1.7ml/day).. a .5ml drawdown is significantly more than a 2.5% reduction and would have a devastating effect on the creek, which has suffered reduced flows over the last 10 years, and for the last 2, has been basically dry. My estimated flow is based on recent rainfall, and a return to somewhat normal conditions.

Tailings dam...

There is a high risk in having a tailings dam on a creek catchment, bearing in mind, Lawsons Creek has a predominant agricultural use, and, 30km downstream, is Mudgee, which derives some of its water supply from wellfields that draw from aquifers fed by Lawsons Creek, as well as the Cudgegong river....these borefields are in close proximity to Lawsons Creek......any major leak, or worse, catastrophic failure of the tailings dam would have a devasting effect on the above uses of the creek, the catchment of which, also supplies water to the Macquarie catchment. Any release of toxic materials would have a long term, possibly permanent effect on those uses, let alone the environmental damage.

Noise, light, dust.....

the mine proposal is only 2km from a long established village,with around 200 people in the village area alone, it is large enough to have a well attended primary school. I consider it reasonable to suggest such a close location would produce noise levels that would have an effect on village life. Initially the mine proposes to operate during daylight hours, but given its marginal economics, it is well understood that they intend to push for 24 hour operation as quickly as possible. Light pollution then, would come into consideration, particularly on overcast or cloudy weather, when light and noise would be reflected outwards. I believe the noise from continuous production drilling, as well as dump truck operations would far exceed the limits of what could considered acceptable, or comfortable...In addition, should the project proceed, and go to 24hr operation, the effect of noise would be of great detriment to normal life of the residents in the surrounding area.
Dust.... many people are concerned about dust, with a particular concern to any lead that may be present in the dust. Also of concern is the fact that the orebody (and waste rock) is a volcanic rhyolite, known to be high in silica, the injestion by the lungs causing silicosis. I understand that mining projects have dust suppression systems in place, but it is well known that dust regularly leaves mine sites for various reasons and cannot be controlled, (blasting being a prime reason).....there can be no "acceptable " level of dust release when it contains both lead and silica in fine particles....

Although I don’t live in the Lue area, I have family that live close to the proposed lead mine. Over the years of visiting, we have come to know many locals and their concerns are very real. The ongoing lead mine proposal has had a detrimental effect on many; the stress and anxiety of knowing your children’s health and that of your environment and livelihood is very real.
I am extremely concerned that a lead mine is being considered in such close proximity to a town and more importantly a primary school. There is no need to tell you the effects of lead on children. It is impossible to guarantee lead dust will not drift across the town.
The ongoing and increasing occurrences of drought in the area only serves to highlight the importance of water security. The mine has the potential to not only pollute the nearby waterways but by taking such huge amounts of water from the environment it will affect the flows of creeks and rivers and therefore all life that relies on that water.
I understand the need for mining but the location of this lead mine so close to a town is just not a wise decision.
Please reconsider.

To boost the local economy and provide employment for the local communities.

I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this mining proposal, & wish to support the Lue action group in requesting that it be rejected. We have friends who are landholders 2 kms from the proposed mine site, who despair that their efforts to produce in this valley will become worthless if the mine proceeds.
The village of Lue is 2 kms from the proposed mine site, & it’s Aboriginal meaning of “chain of waterholes” describes the presence of groundwater in this long-standing farming area.
Bowdens propose using 2050 megalitres of water each year, 780 to be taken from the Lawson creek valley, equivilant to more than 1 Olympic swimming pool per day. They admit they will reduce the water table by 25 metres on site, apparently scrapping ideas for water storage. Farmers are rightly concerned that with increasing droughts water will dry up.
There are already recent examples of this happening in the Werris creek area, & the Hunter valley, where the Hunter river water supply has diminished dramatically from the high water usage of coal mines & power stations upstream.
My major concern is that mining & agriculture cannot co- exist.
The Hunter valley also experiences fine dust pollution, now known to damage lungs. The Bowdens mine will produce 83,000 tons of lead, only 2 kms from Lue school. The risk of lead contamination of water sources in the surrounding area is not worth the risk, when there are known examples of environmental damage in the Boolaroo area of Lake Macquarie where the Pasminco Sulphide lead smelter contaminated land which is still being remediated & lead to unacceptable lead levels in children.
The Lue community cannot be confident that Bowdens will be responsible in managing the environment. There are no plans for rejuvenation of the site, the main pit & tailings dam will remain forever & pollution will be ongoing. There are too many examples of irreversible damage to the environment from mining companies such as Ok Tedi in New Guinea.
In the Mudgee area, residents are acutely aware of the impact of existing & proposed mining ventures on established communities like Wollar & Bylong, where mining companies bought up most of the properties, destroying the fabric of those communities & the productivity of the land.
In February 1919, the Independent Planning Commission rejected the Rocky Hill mine application on the basis of proposed Greenhouse emissions. It found “the environmental impacts , particularly on groundwater & productive agricultural land, would last long after the mine is decommissioned.” It has become urgent that we take action on climate change & the costs to future generations.
This is mining proposal is dangerous, with long term risks far outweighing any short term employment benefits. We ask you to seriously reject it.