McPhillamys Gold Project

Please see attached

Please see attached

Please see attached

Please see attachments

I object to this proposed mine for the following reasons:

The vast majority of Australia is in the grip of drought, claimed by some to be the most severe and widespread in recorded history. Most expert opinion is that, due to the now unavoidable climate change caused by global warming, such droughts are going to become the new normal. This will result in reduced rainfall, increased evaporation, and consequent scarcity of water for all purposes, including farming, on which we all depend for food production. Yet this project is seriously proposing to construct a tailings dam, full of potentially toxic sludge, on top of the headwaters of one of the few rivers in the country still in reasonable condition.
Tailings dams have been known to fail, with catastrophic consequences. Destroying this agricultural area for a 15 year project to extract gold at a concentration of perhaps 1.05gm/tonne, producing 60m+ tonnes of waste, and leaving a destroyed landscape and toxic legacy that will last forever just cannot be justified to produce a metal that will likely end up as jewellery, or be locked away as bullion. No doubt the financiers and engineers who are promoting and designing this project are highly skilled, but the risks posed by this project are way out of proportion with the benefit to be gained for the country as a whole.
Some towns in NSW are about to run out of water. It is morally problematic to say the least that water has been turned into a commodity in this country rather than an essential resource to which everybody has a right and human and animal interests are considered higher than the profits of organisations.
The use of cyanide to process the gold from ore and then pumped into the tailings dam. Cyanide has been banned in nine countries, Korea, Ecuador, Argentina, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, Greece, Turkey, Germany and Hungary and some US states and poses a dangerous and toxic threat to the water and land in the region.
Inevitable contamination of the Belubula and Lachlan Rivers, due to seepage through groundwater flows from the tailings dam
Traffic problems and caused by the continuous stream of heavy vehicles, and light vehicles at shift changes
The blot on the landscape caused by the “amenity bunds” and dust
Loss of natural land and environment for wildlife, and the impact of toxicity on surrounding wildlife
Noise, dust, vibrations, particulate pollution from diesel fumes, light pollution 7 days a week and 24 hours a day
The noise, vibrations and risks posed by regular explosions permitted for 12 hours a day. This will impact livestock and domestic animals on neighbouring properties and could damage heritage buildings
Permanent degradation of prime agricultural land and scenery
Loss of trees including high altitude yellow box that may be 200 years old
Impact on bee population due to loss of ground flora and contaminated water
Loss of the forest where the mine is proposed that is considered an ecologically endangered community as defined by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
The high probability that the developer will not be willing or able to rehabilitate the site when the mine eventually becomes unviable, as has happened so many times in the history of mining
The whole project proposes less than 1000 short terms jobs. Other industries in this area, with support a more diversified and resilient economy including tourism, renewables and sustainable agriculture offer far more employment.

Reasons for Objection

Summary: Many aspects of Australia's ecology are under severe pressure from mismanaged human interventions. To approve another project that could potentially create even more environmental damage to our struggling river and water systems would be an appalling mistake. Additionally, to approve an unnecessary project which directly disadvantages current residents is not representative of values we hold as Australians.

Water strategy is not environmentally justifiable or defensible

• There are dangers to a whole river system associated with any possible toxic spills into the Belubula River headwaters which run through the mine site and will be buried by the mine tailings for several kilometers.

Downstream from the mine the river flows through the town of Blayney, rich alluvial flats grazing land, and into Carcoar Dam. Tablelands Water supply could be polluted via the planned pipeline connecting Lake Rowlands and Carcoar Dam. Below Carcoar Dam the Belubula River passes through several rural communities, much grazing and cropping country and ultimately feeds into the Lachlan River west of Cowra.

• Possible disruption to the adjacent groundwater supply could occur by bores sunk on the mine site to provide water for construction and operation before the pipeline from Lithgow is operational. Until recently, Regis Resources denied this activity was planned. In addition, rain that falls on the mine site will be harvested far beyond the 10% allowed to farmers or other landholders, and will further reduce the presently available water in the Upper Belubula catchment. With the difficulties already being faced by rural and regional communities due to drought and with climate change challenges ahead, extraordinary rainwater harvesting is unwarranted and unconscionable.

• The plan to bring 13,000,000 litres of dirty saline water from Lithgow to the mine every day is flawed. This is water that Sydney does not want in Warragamba Dam, has its origins in the degrading wetlands of the western Blue Mountains, is polluted by being filtered through coal seams and by being used in a coal washery, and has its salt content multiplied by addition of brine, the waste product of a desalination plant at Mount Piper Power Station. The net result will be the introduction of a very large volume of poor-quality water and the supply of thousands of tonnes of salt to the already overburdened Murray – Darling Basin.

Intergenerational Inequity

• The McPhillamys gold mine project is a good example of intergenerational inequity. The present generation reaps the benefit of the sale of the gold won, whereas succeeding generations inherit a toxic tailings dam designed to leak into the headwaters of the Belubula River, and a pit that will leak water contaminated to a degree that it is unsuitable for cattle to drink into the groundwater reservoir and possibly to the Belubula River for tens or hundreds of years.

• Any proposed reduction in water available for replenishing downstream rivers and communities must be avoided, given the difficulties of managing available water supplies.

• Additionally, in the absence of any strategy to minimize greenhouse gas emissions from the site the miners will leave a legacy contributing to global climate change, principally global warming and increased extreme climatic events. The latter increases the possibility of high precipitation events with the risk of deep erosion of the engineered steep embankments and the catastrophic release of mobilized tailings and acid metaliferous drainage.

Effects on the 'near neighbours' of the mine

• The proposed mine would have a dramatic effect on the near neighbours of the mine especially, but not limited to, the settlement of Kings Plains on the south side of the valley facing the mine site that occupies almost the entire opposite northern side. Here the open cut pit will be excavated and a large waste rock disposal area including a high embankment will be constructed over a period of four years. This will be a continuous source of noise, dust and, at night, light pollution during the life of the mine.

If the mine were not to proceed, there would be no additional disadvantage to Blayney and Kings Plains residents. However, if the mine does proceed, it will very directly disadvantage Kings Plains residents living on the other side of the highway to the mine.

After the first six months of construction on the site it is proposed that mining activity will proceed for ten years, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and 52 weeks a year, with blasting permitted for 12 hours a day, with resultant increased dust, noise and sight pollution levels. How can one commercial operation be allowed to void the aspirations of current residents who specifically settled in an area for the rural views, a clean healthy environment and a brilliant dark night sky?

• Page 174 of the Social Impact appendix in the EIS notes that nearby property values may drop and 'the financial burden of any decline in property values rests with the existing property owners'. How can a non essential business proposal be approved to impose such an effect on existing property owners? The EIS does not detail any further compensation arrangements to be offered.

• There are a number of small businesses in the area around the mine site. Visitors will be reluctant to stay at Air BandB's near the mine. Equine pursuits may no longer be possible, riding tuition will cease due to the dangers associated with blasting potentially frightening horses. Horse breeding and agistment opportunities will cease due to the effects of blasting and toxic dust-coated grass being ingested by the grazing animals. Honey and queen bee production will also cease for the same reasons. It is likely clients will no longer wish to board their domestic animals at kennels/cattery close to the mine.

Effects on Blayney township

• Blayney is sufficiently close to experience the noise of blasting, the night-lights and, in adverse weather conditions, dust from the mine, including from the tailings which are enriched in elements including arsenic, copper, sulphur, zinc, cadmium and selenium.

• While the proponents of the mine speak of additional residents, business opportunities, employment and additional rate income, they are silent on the effects on tourism. Will accommodation be available for tourists? Will shops, cafes, hotels and motels lose tourism business? Will tourists still want to come? Will the presence of a mine waste dump be a welcoming sign for those travelling along the eastern entry?

• What will be the effect on the cost of renting in Blayney, which has limited such accommodation? Will people with limited finances be squeezed out by well-paid miners? Will local businesses lose skilled workers and potential apprentices for the same reason? The mine life is 10 years: what will happen to the work force resident in Blayney after that time? Will businesses buoyed by contracts with the mine survive the inevitable mine-closure downturn? Will the Shire adjust to the loss of rate income following the closure of the mine?

Native Flora and Fauna

• Development of the mine site will lead to the destruction of 44 ha of critically endangered Blakley’s Red Gum–White Box–Yellow Box grassy woodland, and habitat where Squirrel Glider and Koala have been recorded, as well as the more common fauna. All fauna will be displaced to some degree by destruction of habitat and the effects of ongoing noise and blasting, dust and destruction of potable water sources. Could the night light pollution detrimentally effect birds, bats and insects that migrate at night, like the bogong moth? How will potentially toxic dust effect pollinators and other insects, and could there be a carry-on effect on insectivorous birds and bats? There are already concerns about the world's populations of insects crashing and the flow-on effects from that. How can adding further burden to current population pressures, by a non-essential business, be considered?

Loss of Productive Land

• The development of the mine site will involve the loss of productive agricultural land, some permanently, for example the grassy woodland to be established on the site of the waste rock emplacement where grazing will not be possible. With the world population estimated to grow from 7.7 billion to 9.7 billion by 2050, the morality of preferring gold mining (of which more than 40% is locked up in vaults) over food production must be questioned.

Wildfire Fire Risk

• With increasing volatility due to climate change factors, wild fires are becoming more and more of an issue. The steep gradient of the proposed amenity bund could pose a fire hazard as it cannot be grazed to keep grass short. How will this be managed?

Mine Site Rehabilitation

• What is proposed for the mine pit void after the mine closes or how it will be managed in perpetuity? Similarly, what happens with the pipeline from Lithgow?

I object to this proposed mine for the following reasons:
• The vast majority of Australia is in the grip of drought, claimed by some to be the most severe and widespread in recorded history. Most expert opinion is that, due to the now unavoidable climate change caused by global warming, such droughts are going to become the new normal. This will result in reduced rainfall, increased evaporation, and consequent scarcity of water for all purposes, including farming, on which we all depend for food production. Yet this project is seriously proposing to construct a tailings dam, full of potentially toxic sludge, on top of the headwaters of one of the few rivers in the country still in reasonable condition.

• Tailings dams have been known to fail, with catastrophic consequences. Destroying this agricultural area for a 15 year project to extract gold at a concentration of perhaps 1.05gm/tonne, producing 60m+ tonnes of waste, and leaving a destroyed landscape and toxic legacy that will last forever just cannot be justified to produce a metal that will likely end up as jewellery, or be locked away as bullion. No doubt the financiers and engineers who are promoting and designing this project are highly skilled, but the risks posed by this project are way out of proportion with the benefit to be gained for the country as a whole.


• Some towns in NSW are about to run out of water. It is morally problematic, to say the least, that water has been turned into a commodity in this country rather than an essential resource to which everybody has a right and human and animal interests are considered higher than the profits of organisations.
• The use of cyanide to process the gold from ore and then pumped into the tailings dam. Cyanide has been banned in nine countries, Korea, Ecuador, Argentina, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, Greece, Turkey, Germany and Hungary and some US states and poses a dangerous and toxic threat to the water and land in the region.
• Inevitable contamination of the Belubula and Lachlan Rivers, due to seepage through groundwater flows from the tailings dam
• Traffic problems and caused by the continuous stream of heavy vehicles, and light vehicles at shift changes
• The blot on the landscape caused by the “amenity bunds” and dust
• Loss of natural land and environment for wildlife, and the impact of toxicity on surrounding wildlife
• Noise, dust, vibrations, particulate pollution from diesel fumes, light pollution 7 days a week and 24 hours a day
• The noise, vibrations and risks posed by regular explosions permitted for 12 hours a day. This will impact livestock and domestic animals on neighbouring properties and could damage heritage buildings
• Permanent degradation of prime agricultural land and scenery
• Loss of trees including high altitude yellow box that may be 200 years old
• Impact on bee population due to loss of ground flora and contaminated water
• Loss of the forest where the mine is proposed that is considered an ecologically endangered community as defined by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
• The high probability that the developer will not be willing or able to rehabilitate the site when the mine eventually becomes unviable, as has happened so many times in the history of mining
• The whole project proposes less than 1000 short terms jobs. Other industries in this area, with support a more diversified and resilient economy including tourism, renewables and sustainable agriculture offer far more employment.

To whom it may concern,

We are entering an age when clean water is going to become an increasingly precious resource. When good quality farmland with access to water will be worth more than all the gold you can pull out of the ground. I believe that, should this mine go ahead, it will be a catastrophe for local farmers and the cause of severe, ongoing problems that future generations are going to have to contend with.

I do not support this mine going ahead. Because I do not believe Regis has adequately addressed the myriad of problems the mine will cause to the local water supply. I am also concerned about the mine’s plans to ensure the local koala population will not be affected and because I fear that it will snuff out a fragile, emerging tourism industry in the area.

Regards,
Naomi

Reasons for Objection

Effects on the rural community near the mine

• The proposed mine, right beside the Mid Western Highway will have a dramatic and detrimental effect on the near neighbours of the mine especially, but not limited to, the settlement of Kings Plains on the south side of the valley facing the mine site that occupies almost the entire opposite northern side. Here the open cut pit will be excavated and a large waste rock disposal area including a high embankment will be constructed over a period of four years.
This will be a continuous source of noise, dust and, at night, light pollution during the life of the mine. After the first six months of construction on the site it is proposed that mining activity will proceed for ten years, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and 52 weeks a year, with blasting permitted for 12 hours a day, with resultant increased dust, noise and sight pollution levels.
• This project costing more than $200million will have a dramatic and detrimental effect on the environment and surrounding rural community, yet the EIS continually states that there will be "No material impact" to those adverse aspects mentioned above including increased road traffic.
• How can a non essential business be allowed to selectively acquire valuable rural properties in an existing popular rural community and then state that 'the financial burden of any decline in property values rests with the existing property owners'. Page 174 of the Social Impact appendix in the EIS.
• The rural community near the mine have spent considerable financial and personal resources establishing a rural lifestyle and business and the decline in the value and amenity of property in this area directly attributed to the mine is very distressing. Equally distressing is the real dangers to whole river systems, disruption to groundwater supply, loss of productive farming land and the displacement of neighbours and friends.

Name of application: McPhillamys Gold Mine Project
Application number SSD – 9505

I OBJECT to the proposal

I am extremely concerned by the impacts on water availability in Central West NSW and the future water quality that we can expect. We are already experiencing extreme drought and un-seasonally high temperatures, which are more usually found further west of the region.

Introducing another mine into this area will increase dust, water usage and a reduction in agricultural farmland. New South Wales' food bowls are shrinking dramatically.

The beauty of the Belubula Springs are that they flow all year round through drought and summer. Pouring concrete into these springs appears to be an act of environmental vandalism, considering current conditions, which brings me to my next concerns, those of the potential for future litigation in this area — costs that the government can ill afford at this moment.

There has been a rise in cases around the world, where communities are taking on decision makers and companies who are jeopardizing and destabilizing the world’s dwindling resources.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/20/can-climate-litigation-save-the-world

The risk of toxic spills into the Belubula River Headwaters that runs through the mine site is an example of the kind of environmental disaster that could potentially raise a legal challenge, especially since the risks are already known as reported in the news earlier this month with regards to the nearby Cadia gold mine at Orange.
https://www.afr.com/companies/mining/newcrest-pushes-ahead-with-685m-gold-mine-expansion-20191015-p530ra

Reporter Brad Thompson said “Cadia’s reputation as Newcrest’s golden goose has been tarnished by a series of incidents over the past three years including a mill failure, the breach in the tailings dam wall and an increase in seismic events that have damaged the block caves of the mining operations.

“Newcrest could also run out of water needed for processing at Cadia by July unless there is a break in the drought. The company has been buying high-security water rights to shore up supplies which include its own dams and bores and grey water from Orange and Blayney.”

Communities and farming land are at risk downstream from the Regis Resources mine including the town of Blayney, Carcoar Dam and Tablelands Water supply which might be polluted via the planned pipeline connecting Lake Rowlands and Carcoar Dam.
Below Carcoar Dam the Belubula River passes through several rural communities, grazing and cropping country and ultimately feeds into the Lachlan River west of Cowra.

Water disruption is not the only legal liability, but quality of water could be affected since the planned pipeline to cart 13,000,000 litres of dirty saline water from Lithgow to the Regis mine every day — water that is being diverted from the Sydney catchment of Warragamba Dam.
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/consent-for-polluting-coal-mine-in-sydneys-water-catchment-invalid-court-finds-20170802-gxnkrr.html

This waste product (millions of litres of untreated waste water) from the Springvale Mine run by Centennial Coal was being discharging directly into the Cox's River. Moving this toxic substance around the state is NOT fair to farmers and communities downstream from the proposed Regis Mine who may be looking at seeking compensation for lost income, sick animals, failing crops and illness in communities.

Supplying thousands of tonnes of salt to the already overburdened
Murray – Darling Basin will also risk a legal response from our interstate neighbours downstream, who may well declare New South Wales a rogue state and impose sanctions.

While Bathurst is a mere 30 kilometres from the mine site, I will leave those over the road from the mine to discuss effects of noise, dust and light and reduced asset values which contribute to physical and mental health.

I will say that regional communities are not won over any longer by the offers of jobs and economic benefits to local communities.
The stark reality of Wollar, a small town to the north east of Mudgee, received many promises, but in the end the town was in the way. I query where Blayney will be in 10 years time. In fact the benefits of mining are rarely distributed across the existing township.

The area around Kings Plains, Millthorpe and Carcoar is currently idyllic as a tourist travel route. It is far more built up and densely populated than the Western Australian remote regions in which Regis Resources is used to operating. Unfortunately Regis Resources already has form for “incidents” at its mining sites.
https://www.australianmining.com.au/news/regis-resources-suspends-operations-as-mines-flood/
Perhaps the most alarming aspect of the once-in-150-year rain event, which caused overflow into a nearby creek system, was that “the flooding events at Garden Well and Rosemont were not insurable events under the company’s various insurance policies”.

Since the evidence of tailings dams failures have become far more publicised, and potential disasters are on the public record…

https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2019-06-20/tailings-dam-audit-finds-high-failure-risks-across-australia/11223510

… it would seem foolhardy to go ahead with a project of this sort in a region of such high population and potential impact downstream.
The risk at this stage is unacceptable.

Not only that, the shareholder backlash and rising importance of ethical investment would create a headache for a company that cannot hide behind overseas ownership, and a government that needs to balance priorities between mining and population, gold versus water.

Thank you
Stephanie Luke

20/10/2019

I object to this proposed mine for the following reasons:
Australia is in drought. Such droughts are becoming more regular, with reduced rainfall, increased evaporation, and scarcity of water for all purposes, including farming. The Belubula River 8kms from Blayney is vital for the viability of the local rural towns, industry and farming. With some towns in NSW are about to run out of water should this essential resource be used to produce a metal that will boost company profits?

A tailings dam, full of potentially toxic sludge, including cyanide, is planned on top of the headwaters of this river. Failures of these dams do happen and have catastrophic consequences . The risks posed by this relatively short term project for profit are not in proportion to the long term future of the country as a whole.
Other risks include
Permanent degradation of prime agricultural land and scenery
Loss of trees including high altitude yellow box that may be 200 years old
Impact on bee population due to loss of ground flora and contaminated water
Loss of the forest where the mine is proposed that is considered an ecologically endangered community as defined by the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage
The high probability that the developer will not be willing or able to rehabilitate the site when the mine eventually becomes unviable, as has happened so many times in the history of mining.
Yet the whole project proposes less than 1000 short terms jobs.

Please see the attachment

I am writing to object to this project. There are many issues of concern that need to be taken into account. Some of these include:
1. Noise Levels - It is my concern that residents will be subjected to dangerous levels of noise 24 hours a day 7 days a week through out the estimated 10 year life of the mine, which in turn could have major health ramifications for residents
2.Dust levels - A project such as the proposed mine will definitely have high levels of dust which in turn will have major health concerns for residents especially those who suffer from lung conditions or asthma, which can result in increased attacks
3. Water - This is a major issue that needs to be addressed especially with the building of the tailngs dam which if not done properly can resut in leakge into the Belubula river which may have dire consequences for district farming properties and of course All residents of Blayney shire not just farming communities
4. Long term employment - This is of great concern as it cant be guaranteed that the workforce will come from blayney shire. My concern here is that a lot of workers will use the fly in fly out that is used in some western australian mines. If this happens this will take money away from the Blayney shire which will affect all businesses in town.
5. Use of the Land after 10 years - this is of major concern especially if they decide that they are not going to fill the hole in when they have finished mining the site as it will render it useless for agricultural use

I object to application McPhillamys Gold Project. My property is under 3kms to the proposed mine and I am extremely concerned about how this will affect my family and our property. We are a primary producer currently struggling with the drought like most people in this area.
We are significantly concerned with how the dust will travel from the mine and into our gutters and then on into our water tanks, which happens to be the only source of drinking water. The proposed dumping location for the mine will have trucks tipping towards us. We generally have high winds in this area. even as I write this today the winds are travelling in a NNW direction between 26km/h up to 35km/h. Mining Dust including dust that will come from the tails dam will travel to our property and we will be affected, how will I be able to let my children consume the tank water when I know that dust particles including heavy minerals and containments from the mining process including cyanide and reagents will be in the drinking water.
We are incredibly concerned with what noise the mining and ore processing plant will impact our quiet solace piece of heaven. We live in a very quiet location; the sounds of frogs and crickets are as loud as it gets here on our farm. I don't want to hear the sound of dump trucks, heavy vehicle horns and specifically track dozers tracking back and forth 24/7. I don't want to hear audible alarms as fixed plant equipment start up and the constant sound of humming mills. Regardless of what "noise quieting" solutions Regis might claim they will be using. We will still be significantly impacted especially at night when our children are trying to sleep, we are close enough to hear all of these noises. Noise travels so far in these valleys.
We will also be impacted by lighting over the night. Mobile equipment, lighting plants and fixed building lighting will create a visual night-time impact. We purchased this land to be able to see the stars at night and to give our children the greatest country life we could. By having the lights shining at night it will feel like we are in town.
I am very concerned with Wildlife been pushed through into our property as construction of the proposed mine starts. As you are aware, we are in drought and with what feed we have left on our property as the feed for wildlife is removed, I believe they will head towards our property taking feed away from our cattle and sheep.
Fitzgerald’s Mount is situated along a fault line. I am very concerned about seismic events in the area once the proposed mine starts. Including damage to our home and our land.
Upgraded powerlines will be required for this mine to go ahead, current supply from Blayney will not be enough to support the mine site. The current lines that run from Bathurst will require an upgrade, this will mean that the current corridor that exists and travels through our property will have to be upgraded and we will loose land due to the requirement of wider corridors plus the inconvenience of people on our property during this upgrade. We don’t know if there will be a need for transformers but the outlook from my front door will change and bigger wider powerline installation will be required.
Blasting will be required for this open cut mine. The storage of the High explosive’s container concerns as we are in an area affected by drought. If we were to have a fire caused by an explosion of high explosives the area would be ruined. A lot of farmers in this area are already on their last legs. I believe blasting clearance zones will impact the highway at some stage during their open pit mining. Due to fly rock from blasting and the location of the pit been so close to the road I believe the road will be shut down (as they do in the hunter) from time to time. As I travel this road multiple times a day this will have a huge inconvenience to my daily life.
I am extremely concerned about the cyanide use onsite. They can have all the safety requirements needed but you can’t stop operator error. To have a cyanide incident in this area it would devastate the environment. Not to mention the increased cyanide travelling on the road and storage facility onsite.
I am very worried about the potential decrease in land value if the mine goes ahead. I bought this property to hand on to my children, if the land isn’t worth anything what I have I worked for all my life, and what can I hand on to my children to ensure they are set up for life.
The landscape of this area will be changed for ever. This beautiful area of Kings Plains will be gone and the beautiful rolling hills will be turned into a dirt and rock dust hole that our children will have to live with for the rest of their lives. I travel these roads every day and it makes me sick to my stomach of how we can allow a mining company to come in and take away what precious little beautiful pockets of land we have left.
The amount of traffic that will be on the road specifically the mid-western highway during construction and normal running will be increased 10-fold. It scares me that we will be sharing this already busy highway with extra trucks carrying reagents, cyanide and other equipment to and from site.
I am incredibly concerned with the water table; we have spring fed dams and I am very worried about the aquifers and how they will be affected and how that will affect our springs. If we lose our springs, we may as well give up. We can hardly afford feed our livestock, if we had to pay for water as well, we wouldn’t be able to survive in these droughts affected times.
Approximately 1 year ago a representative discussed the possible option of purchasing or leasing some of our land as an offset, at this stage they have purchased property at least 15 kms away from the mine and are awaiting feedback on if this land will suffice the regulations. To purchase land in the area of the mine I believe would of been a better option for the native animals in the area as well as local landowners.
I have asked in the past if Regis would be willing to purchase our property, their response was they couldn’t buy everyone’s land in the area. I don’t want to live here if the mine goes ahead. I don’t want to look over the hill and see an increasingly large dump get built and have the lights and dust and noise affect my family.
The tails dam will be situated on the springs forever with the possibility of contamination of the belubula river. As our children get older this will affect our recreation and fishing as Carcoar dam is our closest water recreational area.
Regis have had over 5 years to put together and submit their Environmental Impact Statement. We have only been given the opportunity of a total of 6 weeks to review and reply to a library shelf worth of reading material. This is completely unfair and works in favour of the mining company.

I am very concerned about the mine going ahead and I don't want it to start where it is because it will hurt the environment forever and I am worried about getting cancer from our drinking water because of the dust travelling to our home and into our gutters

Hello, I am nine years old and live very close to the mine. I am writing to talk about life if the mines come. So, you see if the mines come things could turn around for me and my family and not in a good way. I am worried that the water could be polluted with mine waste and the same with the air, we will spend less time outside because of the mine dust. I would feel like I would have to wear a mask forever. Please look at the things that could happen to me and my family and all the other farmers in the area. I know that if the mines are here things would start to turn out horrible please look at the things that could happen like some of our building’s could fall down, and if its really hot inside we cant go outside, all of our green grass would be gone. The environment would be damaged and our cattle would have to get used to the noise and dust and that's not fair.

REASONS FOR OBJECTION:
EFFECTS ON MYSELF AND ‘NEAR NEIGHBOURS’ OF THE MINE
• The proposed mine will have a dramatic effect on near neighbours, particularly those living in the Kings Plains area. It will also have adverse effects on me, as I live about 5.5 kilometres in a straight line from the proposed mine.
• Our property value will be devalued by the mine, with no recompense from the mine. If we had known a large gold mine and processing facility was to be placed where it is proposed we would never have bought our property and I am sure that others would now not want to buy our property for the same reasons if this mine goes ahead.
• One of the reasons we moved to our location was because of the quiet and lack of city noises, the lack of light pollution and the rural aspect around our area. If this mine goes ahead we will lose all of this due to the 24 hours a day, seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a year noise pollution, dust, and light pollution. There will also be blasting permitted for 12 hours a day. We have a friend who visits a couple of times a year to conduct his astral photography because of the lack of significant light pollution at our place. He will no longer be able to do this at our place.
• There are proposals within the EIS during the post mining rehabilitation phase to potentially change the use of the land from rural to industrial by utilising the mine infrastructure areas for industrial purposes or by using the open cut void as a bioreactor to generate electricity from putrescible wastes. This would further destroy the rural lifestyle of the area, the reason why I and other residents of the area have chosen to live here.
• I am greatly concerned about the impact of dust pollution on our water supply. We rely on tank water, harvested from our roof for the majority of our water, including our drinking water. The prevailing winds come from the south and west, which means it will carry dust to us that will be polluted by the toxic wastes. The EIS states that the dust pollution won’t reach our property, however I fail to understand how dust blown a few kilometres from the mine site can’t be picked up again by winds and eventually wind up on our roof and in our water tanks, our only drinking water supply.
• I am also concerned about the effects on friends and neighbours who live closer to the proposed mine, including those within only one to two kilometres of the proposed mine. The effects on them and their livestock and pets will be catastrophic as they will contend with continual noise and light pollution 24/7 and blasting 12 hours a day. They also will have their visual amenity damaged by the mine.
EFFECTS ON WATER RESOURCES AND BELUBULA RIVER
• Possible disruption to adjacent groundwater supply by bores sunk on the mine site to provide water for construction and operation before the pipeline from Lithgow is operational. Until recently Regis denied this was planned.
• Rain that falls on the mine site will be harvested far beyond the 10% allowed to farmers and will further reduce the presently available water in the Upper Belubula catchment.
• There are dangers to the whole river system, from the Belubula River Headwaters, which runs through the mine site, through Blayney and rich alluvial flats grazing land, into Carcoar Dam then below Carcoar Dam, through several rural communities., much grazing and cropping country and into the Lachlan River west of Cowra. Any toxic spills into the Belubula River Headwaters may pollute and endanger this entire system. Australia is a dry continent, water is at a premium, and particularly during drought years, which are becoming more frequent and severe, the safety of water supplies should be a priority.
• The plan to bring 13,000,000 litres of dirty saline water from Lithgow to the mine each day will further endanger the river system from the Belubula River Headwaters through to the Lachlan River. This is water that Sydney does not want in Warragamba Dam. It has its origins in the degrading wetlands of the western Blue Mountains, that is polluted by being filtered through coal seams and by being used in a coal washery, and has its salt content multiplied by the addition of brine, the waste product of a desalination plant at Mount Piper Power Station. The net result will be the introduction of a very large volume of poor quality water and the supply of thousands of tonnes of salt to the already overburdened Murray-Darling Basin.
EFFECTS ON NATIVE FLORA AND FAUNA
• The development of this mine site will lead to the destruction of 44 Ha of critically endangered Blackley’s Red Gum, White Bos, Yellow box grassy woodland and the habitat of at least two colonies of squirrel gliders. It will also disrupt the koala population in the area, which use this area in their migration. We have seen koalas pass through our land and know that there have been many others sighted on Fitzgeralds Mount and Kings Plains by neighbours. These koalas, a threatened species, pass through this area, including the proposed mine site, which will place greater adverse impact on their survival. Kings Plains district also has a wide range of bird species, kangaroos, wallabies, wombats, echidnas, frogs and reptiles, all of which will be displaced to some degree, whether lesser or greater, by the destruction of their habitat and the effects of the continual noise, dust, night light and destruction of potable water sources.
COMMUNITY SAFETY
• There will be many heavy vehicle movement each week transporting dangerous and toxic substances to the mine. It is proposed that three trucks a day will carry 20 tons each of cyanide to the mine site. If there is an accident on the highway involving one of these vehicles and the cyanide is exposed to water or fire a toxic gas is released that can kill within minutes. The local RFS brigade, of which I am a member, will not be able to attend due to the dangers to brigade members, their only option would be to wait for NSW Fire and Rescue HAZMAT to arrive, which is likely to take at least half an hour. Advice given to me by NSW Fire and Rescue HAZMAT personnel is that RFS crews should not approach to within 250 metres of the accident, or within 800 metres if fire was involved as we do not have the appropriate personal protective clothing and equipment.
INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY
• The present generation will reap the benefits of the sale of the gold won from the mine, however succeeding generations will inherit a toxic tailings dam that is designed to leak into the headwaters of the Belubula River.
• Future generations will also inherit a pit that will be filled with acidic water, contain elevated metal levels and electrical conductivity, thus presenting a danger to human life, future cattle grazing in the area and fauna.
• The area of approximately 270 hectares that will be covered by the tailings dam, even after rehabilitation, will not be suitable for cultivation for future generations.
• The net effect to the Land and Soil Capability (LSC) levels of the mine after rehabilitation will be a reduction of the LSC levels from the current levels. The degradation of the LSC levels is yet another adverse impact of the mine to future generations.
OTHER POTENTIAL LOSSES
• There are numerous small to medium sized businesses in the area around the mine site that are likely to be destroyed by this mine. Visitors will be reluctant to stay at Air BNBs near the mine, equine pursuits may no longer be possible, riding tuition will cease because of the danger of blasting frightening horses, horse breeding and agistment may be ceased because of the effect of blasting and toxic dust coating grass ingested by close grazing animals, honey and queen bee production may be ceased by the effect of dust, clients will probably no longer wish to board their domestic animals at kennels or catteries close to the mine.

I have outlined my main concerns with regards to the proposed McPhillamy’s mine in the below attachment. I just cannot fathom how one company can propose to move into such a well populated area and ruin the productive farmland, utilise incredible amounts of precious water, change the flow of a river, ruin the peaceful ambience, the rural views, the air quality, to destroy the capacity to run established successful businesses and then leave the area contaminated with toxic chemicals for many hundreds of years to come, all in the pursuit of profit. Is this truly the legacy we wish to leave the generations of future Australians?

Against submission. Dust,water, traffic, heritage..
Please see attached reasons

PO Box 7 Millthorpe 2798
Planning Services,
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39, Sydney NSW 2001.

Mcphillamys Gold Project Ssd-9505

OBJECTION
For over 40 years we have been living in Eves’ Lane Millthorpe, around 15 kilometres from the proposed McPhillamy mine at Kings Plains. During this time, we have seen a worrying change in climate consistent with the predictions of the International Panel on Climate Change. (IPCC). For example, whereas our property was once permanently watered with a reliable well, in recent droughts our well has run dry and been abandoned. We have had to discontinue owning cattle because of the unpredictability of water supply. As members of the local Rural Fire Service we have been affected by the extension of the bushfire season across the state and supplies of water for fighting fires are in jeopardy. Despite dramatic increases in government investment in costly firefighting equipment, our brigade is being called upon to participate in strike teams fighting fires across the state not only in summer but now increasingly in Spring & Autumn. Warmer average temperatures have influenced patterns of insects and native animals, growing seasons of crops and quality of life. These changes are of major concern.
The proposed mine should be rejected for a number of reasons but primarily for its impact on climate and on water. The EIS prepared for LFB Resources NL states that the impact from carbon emissions of the mine operating heavy machinery 24/7 would only be ‘minimal’. (E.S4.1.6 pES11) This is a matter of opinion! Its own figures suggest that the level of the mine’s emissions would be about the same as those of the entire Shire of Blayney at present. This is at a time when the world needs to be lowering, not doubling, emissions if average temperature increases are to be kept below 2 degrees celsius. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ If the emissions are ‘minimal’, the mine operators should be willing to make it carbon neutral and this should be a requirement of any new gold mine.

While Regis has provided a number of assurances in relation to concerns about the mine’s impact on water quality and quantity locals have good reason to be skeptical. In 2000 mining activity at the Brown’s creek mine owned by Hargraves Resources within the Blayney Shire had to be terminated after an aquifer was broken and over two kilometres of the river dried up and the underground mine was flooded. The mine was closed and its employees dismissed. https://www.centralwesterndaily.com.au/story/749899/mine-blamed-for-dry-creek/
More recently thirty kilometres away at Newcrest’s gold mine at Cadia in March 2018 the wall of one of the tailings dams failed and tailing had to be pumped into the open pit https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/newcrest-shares-hit-after-dam-wall-collapse-at-cadia-gold-mine-20180312-p4z3x1.html
It would be foolish to make decisions based on the assurances of mining companies and the environmental consultants who depend upon those mining companies for their employment.
As an agricultural nation we depend upon water and climate. Building a mine over the source of the Belubula River is a risk not worth taking. Water is more important than gold! Long term jobs, a sustainable environment and combatting climate change are more important than short term profits.
We oppose the Regis Mine.
Yours sincerely,
Judy & Bob Hill