Bowdens Silver

I think the Bowdens Silver project will be great for NSW. Especially in these unprecedented times when jobs are scarce. Construction and mining will be what brings us out of covid and into the future. It will bring many benefits to the local district by way of direct employment, the supply of support industries, economic investment into the local communities and support for local development, educational and sponsorship initiatives.Silver has many industrial, medical, clinical uses and this will only increase in the future with the increase in electric vehincles.

The Bowden Silver mine would release toxic lead emissions to the surrounding environment and community. Expert evidence overwhelmingly indicates that residents and environment within 2km of the Mine would almost certainly be affected and it was probable that residents and the environment out to 5km from the mine would be affected by Lead. The effect would be from dust blowing from the site. Due to the nature of the open cut mine, there would be no possible way to prevent the lead dust leaving the site and effecting the surrounding community and environment. The community is overwhelmingly opposed to the construction and operation of this mine.

The EIS at Appendix 9 gives some information on seven options for the route of a transmission line to supply the required electricity for the proposed mine.
It appears any powerline would be considered under Part 5 of the EPA Act, with the relevant power company deciding whether there was likely to be a significant effect on the environment of a route or routes favoured by the mining company.. My understanding is that there have been very few, if any, EISs for powerlines since the introduction of the Infrastructure SEPP. Thus further opportunities for comment may be limited.
It is unfortunate the transmission line was not treated as part of the proposal, unlike the included water pipeline.
I am a part owner of a property that the Queens Pinch (orange) route passes through (Fig. A of Appendix 9, page A-5).
My concerns are that:
• The route appears to parallel our sole access road (with no other feasible route), which is in a narrow valley which already has an 11kV powerline (supplying Windamere Dam). A powerline there would interfere with our management of the property (including leased land and easement) both during construction and operation.
• A 40-45 metre easement would span the entire valley making access for tall machinery problematic.
• The narrowness of the valley may present some technical challenges in achieving clearance.
• We have a conservation agreement with the NSW Government’s Biodiversity Conservation Trust by which we have agreed to preserve defined native vegetation. This agreement is registered on title. The route either passes through the area covered by the agreement or nearby. It is likely the clearing requirements for any powerline easement would require removal of trees and other vegetation within the protected area.
• The route though the shortest option crosses steep and dissected terrain, particularly between the section between the Cudgegong River and just south of the Lue road. This section is heavily vegetated. Construction could be both comparatively expensive, have significant environmental impacts and thus take more time in planning, approval and construction. It appears the existing 500kV line has skirted this hilly country, presumably for similar reasons.
• Possible interference between the 11kV and proposed 132kV line.
• It is not clear if a single or dual circuit is proposed, thus the size and type of poles and any easement cannot be judged.
• A 45 metre easement would span the entire valley making management generally and access for tall machinery problematic.
On this basis I object to the project proceeding using the Queens Pinch (orange) route.

We are residents who live beside the Lawson Creek and are totally opposed to a lead mine in the area. Reason... contamination to our creek and the water table.

-

We at Murong Gialinga are very concerned about this project and object to the silver mine being approved our concerns are as follows 1/.Aboriginal Culture . There is a area in the pipeline that has not been 100% surveyed this needs to be surveyed before any decision be made We have asked the mine when this will take place.We as Aboriginal stakeholders need to be given reports so our community can read themat meetings and they are aware what is happening and can make suggestions to the mine. All Aboriginal sites and Aboriginal objects are important to our people past/present we do not judge them by High Medium or Low significance. All contractors should be given Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Training we in the community are willing to do this.With the Triple c meetings we should be informed with the meeting minutes and any Aboriginal matters so we can have our say as Registered Aboriginal Stakeholders this is not happening. There should be a Aboriginal Man and a Aboriginal Woman on the triple c for Cultural reasons .There are areas in the mine that are culturally important to our people past/ present that could/will be destroyed our Culture is being destroyed on a daily basis .The wildlife will suffer .Its known that there has been Koala sightings and after so many perished in recent bush fires it would be horrific to see these local ones disrupted or destroyed there are also the wedge tail eagle and yellow tailed black cockatoo and the echidna all important culturally to our people. The country will never be the same if this mine goes ahead . 2/Ground Water Bowdens propose to use 1857 mega litres of water annually.They intend to take most of it out of the ground.There is potential for reduced frequency and depth of remnant pools during extended dry periods as a result of ground water draw down .The Bowdens study feasibility study shows that during mining they plan to store a pile approximately 40 million tonns of waste rock above the Lawson Creek water table.The pile would be between 50m and 90m high .Analysis shows that 54%of this waste rock is potentially acid forming meaning that it can create toxic sulfuric acid when disturbed.Sulfuric is toxic to aquatic life also drainage from this rock is reconised as a major source of heavy metal pollution to ground water and surface ways.The water ways in question here are Lawson Creek which flows into the Cudgegong River at Mudgee before flowing into Burrendong Dam.This water is source for feed many houses gardens, farms also vineyards. 3/LUE approximately 900 people live in Lue or its surrounds these people will be adversely affected by the mine if approved in some way shape of form.Examples if mine is approved there will be noise, dust, traffic,dust ,vibration from blasts.Property values will reduce in the area also the Locals will not benefit from employment as the jobs will go to out of town people like other mines and the workers will not live in Lue .The Silver mine LTD (SUL)have confirmed they will not be filling the void of the mine when mining if finished .Estimates indicate there will be a hole approximately 1.5 kms wide by 300 metres deep and a huge health risk to the surrounding environment.The proposal is to process 2 million tons of Ore per year over the next 17 tears. Extraction is expected to be in the vicinity of 4 million ton per year ,Movement will be approximately 6 million tons of materials per year around the sites and processing the of Ore on Site.They are our concerns we hope all these concerns are listened to .Kind Regards Debbie Foley on behalf of Murong Gialinga Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Corporation.

-

With my husband I hold around 800 acres which borders the project site on the Eastern side. We have been here for 35 years, during which time we have created or preserved over 350 acres of remnant vegetation, wildlife habitat, native grasses, Aboriginal sites and wetlands. This project threatens all this plus our home, memories, land, business and future in this community.

Silver Mines Limited has not earned the right to advance this devastating project with this grossly incompetent and inadequate EIS. A reading of the SEARS alongside the EIS shows the many ways the company has failed, through incompetence, negligence, obfuscation and deception to produce a document that can give locals, the people of the Mudgee district, the Midwestern Council or the Department of Planning any confidence in this project or this proponent.
I understand Consultants representing the Community will clearly demonstrate the failures in this EIS in their areas of expertise but I  want to highlight just a few areas of particular interest to me.

LEAD. In particular the baseline studies of lead levels at Lue Public School. 

The SEARS called several times for thorough baseline studies of lead in Lue. Clearly there are no up to date reliable figures showing the levels of lead in soil, water, surfaces and ceilings at Lue Public and this company shows no interest in or capability of providing them. SVL is content that there are figures, however questionable, showing pre-existing contamination at the school.

The mining company has an interest in being able to claim in future that there were always dangerous levels of lead at the school and it is grossly negligent at best for SVL to rely solely on such limited and now wholly discredited data as that produced by the previous proponent in 2013.

The guidelines quoted in that study are outdated and discredited. The company which did the study notes on its website that over 2000mg/kg lead in ceilings is "highly hazardous".
The findings at the school indicate 48000mg/kg. Also a figure such as 20-5600mg/kg in ceilings and surfaces when 300mg/kg is the maximum safe level is pitifully inadequate, great cause for concern and requires further investigation and remediation.  SVL ignored this either through incompetence or intent to deceive.
SVL has a consultant that the CEO has described as a lead expert who clearly is not. She has either not read the Kingsgate figures, not understood their gravity, or most concerningly has chosen not to follow them up with the people affected. This contamination is largely the result of lead paint and can be fixed.  The School should show as near to zero lead contamination as possible before a lead mine so close is even considered for approval.

SVL maintains this "is a historical matter that is not associated with Bowdens Silver." ( Blake Hjorth email). It shows no interest and sees no obligation to check the Kingsgate data or advise on remediation. The children and staff at Lue school are not safe if this proponent is allowed to conduct lead mining so close to the village.

ACID MINE DRAINAGE: It is not possible to say much about the way the EIS addresses Acid Mine Drainage because it doesn't even acknowledge the problem. This is beyond incompetence and negligence. It is unethical. There has never been a heavy metal mine that has failed to pollute surrounding streams and rivers. The company must be required to show what it will do to address this problem and how it will succeed where no other projects have.

ABORIGINAL HERITAGE: The SEARS require that the EIS also studies the potential effects on nearby Aboriginal Heritage sites even if outside the present project boundaries. It fails to do this.
Our land which borders the project contains several such sites, including correctly registered,  widespread and hugely significant grinding grooves. Effects on these and other sites nearby must be considered in the EIS.

KOALAS: An examination of registered koala sightings (collected by the University of Sydney)in the immediate surroundings of this project over many years demonstrates the inadequacy of what appears in the EIS in relation to koalas. There have been several recent unregistered sightings to my knowledge in the immediate area of this project. 

WATER SUPPLY:
The SEARS require that there be an adequate secured water supply demonstrated in the EIS. The company concedes that this requirement has not been met. Mining cannot be allowed to commence without this fundamental issue being fully addressed.

We will not be able to live here or continue production, nor will we able to sell our land, if lead is dug up, disturbed, processed and transported so close to our home.
I urge the Department of Planning  to  reject this EIS, this proponent and this devastating
project

Dear Ms Hawkeswood,

I wish to strongly protest about the proposed opening of this mine near the township of Lue.

This project will likely considerably disrupt the lives of neighbouring families in terms of numerous around the clock truck movements, blasting noise and dust generated.
However, from my personal point of view of a medical practitioner of almost
50 years' standing with a considerable experience in medico-legal examination of the effects of asbestos, I am also greatly concerned about the likely escape into the environment of

i) Lead, a byproduct of silver mining
ii) Cyanide, used in ore processing

The former results in the poisoning of our youth, while the latter will likely contaminate the water table with widespread effects on humans and animals, both domestic and wild.

I urge the Government to reconsider and not allow this particular project to proceed.

Yours sincerely,
Dr. Andrew Gal