Sutton Forest Sand Quarry

I fear that the magnitude of the project will have a detrimental impact
on the water table at Sutton Forest and consequently affect the bores
on which local residents depend for agriculture and domestic life.
Removing sandstone will affect the water quality in the aquifers and
as a consequence in the Nepean water catchment area. Moreover native
flora and fauna will suffer, including endangered species, due to air
and noise pollution associated with the development of the mine due to
blasting and truck movements. I strongly object to this project and
ask that it will be rejected

Submission relating to Application Number SSD 6334

I unreservedly adopt all the objections recently put at the public
meeting held at St Paul's Church, Moss Vale. These objections have
been echoed by many in submissions to the Department.
I am surprised that the proposal, first mooted in 2013, has progressed
this far given the resultant wholesale dismantling of the fragile
environment of the area if permitted to go ahead. I can only put this
down to the efforts of powerful, moneyed and self-interested lobbyists
who live elsewhere and whose minds are focused on profits.
No doubt the usual carrot of creating jobs under the mantra of
"progress" has been held out while conveniently ignoring the undoubted
debilitating effect on the local environment and amenities for the
adjacent populations, which will also adversely affect the employment
conditions and health of any workers at the site.
When I was young, I was captivated by the beautiful rolling sand hills
of Kurnell. They were so large and extensive that they were the set of
the movie "40 Thousand Horsemen". It took quite a few years but the
Metropolitan Sand Company managed to mine them all to ground level.
This had a serious impact on surrounding areas including the adjacent
environmentally sensitive mangrove swamps. All for the sake of making
millions of cubic metres of greenhouse gas producing concrete.
I assume that the sand- stone mining is also to produce sand for the
same purpose; except this enterprise will have far more disastrous and
far-reaching consequences.
I can understand the need for a certain amount of development to
enhance employment, housing and industry, but we are now in a
different era facing existential threats to the environment. The rate
of exploitation of resources is increasing at an alarming and
non-sustainable rate and proposals such as this belong to another
time.
We must as a nation and a community find other ways of addressing our
needs (which are mostly "wants") that do not have the effect of
ultimately destroying our way of life.
This is not a case of "not in my back yard". I live in Robertson, far
enough away not to suffer the worst of the effects of the mine.
Nevertheless, people in the Wingecarribee Council area are part of my
community and the cultural and environmental heritage must be
preserved and not whittled away piece by piece.

To whom it may concern: Regarding the Sutton Forest Quarry Project.

I am a resident of southern metropolitan Sydney and familiar with the
area where Sutton Forest Quarries are proposing to quarry for sand
having spent many years working on an adjacent property which was then
owned by my parents.

I write to raise concerns about the impact that this project will have
on the sensitive local hydrology and ecosystems and its ultimate
threat to the future water supply for Australia's most populous city
region, in Greater Sydney.

There is little doubt that a mine of this size and scale will have an
irreversible negative effect on the Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment.

The proposed excavation site borders Long Swamp Creek which has two
Endangered Ecological Communities (EEC), the Temperate Highland Peat
Swamps on Sandstone, listed under the Environment Protection and
Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Commonwealth) and Montane
Peatlands and Swamps of the South Eastern Highlands, listed under the
Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (NSW) (now Biodiversity
Conservation Act 2016).

The importance of perched peat swamps at the top reaches of water
catchments in mitigating stream flow and providing better quality
water cannot be underestimated.

The destruction of the swamps could lead to greater incidence of
downstream flooding, greater erosion and silting of the Paddy's River,
Wollondilly River and Sydney's major water-supplying dam at Lake
Burragorang.

A mine of the depth and scale proposed will obviously have a negative
impact on the water table of the local area and even a modest drop
could wreak devastation to this environmentally fragile ecosystem.

As the intended material mine will occupy an often-fully saturated
Hawkesbury sandstone aquifer - after all, that's the main reason the
material is friable - obvious questions arise as to how the mine's
operator intends to discharge a large amount of water it will extract
from the site.

Even the applicant notes in their EIS that the impact to the local
hydrological environment is potentially "high."

Additionally, I have concerns about these issues:

1. Threat to current and future water supply:
This sand mine will be located in the NSW Southern Highlands area
which is a critical source for clean water that enters the waterways
that feed into Sydney's water catchment. It has grave potential to
permanently pollute the catchment which currently supplies water to
Australia's largest city, of five million people. The project is
proposed to operate for 30 years, extracting sand at a rate exceeding
one million tonnes each year. By 2048, when the project concludes,
Sydney's water catchment will service a projected population of nine
million people. I believe this project constitutes a grave threat to
the water security of millions of Australians.

2. Issues raised by the Environmental Impact Statement supplied by
applicant:
The applicant, Mr R Bush of Sutton Forest Quarries, has commissioned
an environmental impact statement from R W Corkery & Co, with
specialist consultant L Cook of Tumbi Umbi engaged to provide a
groundwater impact statement.
The applicant's own commissioned report notes that the project
a) risks contaminating groundwater and
b) will reduce the water availability for agriculture and domestic
use.
The proposals to mitigate these impacts are untested, and present - by
the admission of the applicant - threats to local water security, at
least, and potentially to the security of the Greater Sydney water
catchment.

3. Likely changes in climate which will gravely affect the water
catchment and will greatly exacerbate the impact of the quarry on
Sydney's water supply, are not accounted for in the EIS supplied:

The Applicant's EIS has examined historical rainfall records however,
the Adapt NSW South East and Tablelands Climate Change Projections
Data contains significant evidence showing a projected reduction in
annual rainfall from 2020-239 for the South East and Tablelands
region. This is likely to be coupled with likely trends in response to
changing climate, as outlined by the Bureau of Meteorology which shows
that large variability in extreme rainfall events from decade to
decade is evident, with very wet events often associated with La Niña
years. Australia's south-east is subject to greater warming as the
East Australian Current transports tropical waters south and so will
be disproportionately adversely affected by the warming climate which
allows air to hold larger amounts of moisture, thus leading to a
larger number of high-rainfall events in short timeframes, likely to
put extreme pressure on downpour mitigation.

The Bureau of Meteorology has released figures showing that streamflow
in Australia's southeast since the mid-1990s is around half the
long-term average, co-inciding with rainfall reduction over the
period. Analysis of hydrologic stations with at least 30 years of
high-quality records shows a trend to lower streamflows for southeast
Australia. The well-supported, highly-concerning trend to lower
streamflow to Sydney's water catchment will be exacerbated by this
project at the same time that population in the area expands.


I strongly urge the Department of Planning to reject this proposal and
to require a far more detailed and better-substantiated environmental
assessment.

Water scientist Dr Ian Wright from Western Sydney University who has
decades of experience in waterway contamination is on record as
stating that the proposed quarry proposes "substantial and
unquantified risks" to both the local hydrology and to Sydney's water
catchment.

To proceed with this proposal would be a foolhardy risk to NSW and
Australian water security.

I object to this proposal on the following grounds
1 Significantly lowers the water table impacting bores at Sutton
Forest
2 Adverse health effects of windborne dust to population centres in
the Southern Highlands
3 Clearing of 63 hectares of land
4 Noise and light pollution to the surrounding district
5 Significant increase in heavy truck traffic on the Hume Highway.

I strongly OPPOSE the proposed sand mine at Sutton Forest. This is a
rural area, mainly consisting of small farms and their residences and
places where people go to quietly reflect and worship and live in
harmony with nature. This is not the place for a sand mine of this
size and every step should be made to protect this pristine native
area.
The proposed extraction and processing of sand will lead to widespread
environmental damage, impacting on the flora and fauna of the area and
the lives of not only the local residents but those in the greater
region.
The proposed sand quarry is adjacent to our family property. Set in
pastoral and agricultural country, we created productive fruit and
flower orchards on a portion of the land leaving most as untouched
bush. This is the place to escape the city, to breathe in fresh air
and to recharge.
Our family carry an asthmatic gene that afflicts many of our family.
The large quantities of dust, fine-particle air pollution and diesel
pollution caused by this mine, processing plant and trucking will be
hazardous to our health and the many local residents. Our nearest
hospital is at least half an hour drive away, and at least double that
if ambulance is required.
An asthma attack in a rural location can be fatal. There have also
been studies relating to the effect of silica dust (smallest and most
dangerous of dust particles - those smaller than 2.5 microns) with a
range of serious respiratory conditions including lung cancer. This is
not a hazard that we should be expected to accept as part of
individual wealth creation by others.
In closing, I would like to say that a sand mine at Sutton Forest
would drastically affect our ability to enjoy our farm that we love
and destroy the quiet, peaceful community. If a sand mine was granted,
the negative impact it would have on the environment and its
inhabitants is irreversible. It would compromise the health and safety
of our community and ruin the character of this unique place forever.
I thank you for taking the time to hear my concerns and hope you will
take them into consideration when making your decision about the
future of our community.
Alex Allenby.

I object to this proposed development being given permission...
- It will,because of its size and depth impact the water table and
local bores
- removal of the sandstone will impact the quality of the water
- the destructive impact on native flora and fauna in an important
wildlife corridor, from land clearing and also from the ongoing
destructiveness from noise, blasting and continuous lighting, for 24
hours a day......

There would be many more objections I think if this proposal was more
widely known in the community.. I found out about it only a week ago
anyone to whom I have since mentioned it is horrified by the idea of
this massive sand quarry 47 ha with a depth of 39 metres below the
current water table

PLEASE take 5 minutes to do this NOW Choose one, COPY and submit in
section 3 of the above link.
___________________________________________________________ I STRONGLY
OPPOSE the Sutton Forest Mine Proposal. This is an ill conceived plan
that is environmentally, socially and morally irresponsible. This is
not the place for a sand mine of this size and every step should be
made to protect this pristine native area. Australia is a big, arid
country. There is a lot of sand in remote regions that will not be as
environmentally fragile as this. Our water supply, a precious
commodity in our dry land, must remain clean. Our flora and fauna must
be protected. Destruction now is irreversible.
____________________________________________________________
I strongly OPPOSE the proposed sand mine at Sutton Forest. This rural
area contains residences, small farms, state forests and places of
worship spread throughout. I cannot agree to the ecology of the area
been seen as secondary to the destructive mining process. This is not
the place for a sand mine of this size and every step should be made
to protect and conserve this pristine native and the unique flora and
fauna of this area
._____________________________________________________________

I strongly OPPOSE the proposed sand mine at Sutton Forest. This is a
rural area, mainly consisting of small farms and their residences and
places where people go to quietly reflect and worship and live in
harmony with nature. This is not the place for a sand mine of this
size and every step should be made to protect this pristine native
area It is a The proposed extraction and processing of sand will lead
to widespread environmental damage, impacting on the flora and fauna
of the area and the lives of not only the local residents but those in
the greater region.
._______________________________________________________________

I strongly OPPOSE the Sutton Forest Quarry proposal. This is a quiet
rural residential area where the proposed extraction and processing of
sand will lead to widespread environmental damage, impacting on the
flora and fauna of the area and the lives of not only the local
residents but those in the greater region. . There are far too many
impacts environmentally and socially to accept this proposal. This is
not the place for a large sand mine.
_____________________________________________________________
I strongly OPPOSE the proposal to build a 47ha quarry at Sutton
Forrest. The direct and indirect impacts of sand mining on the
environment of the Southern Highlands, Sydney and the greater
Australia cannot be overlooked and the combined voice of the people
must be listened to. This is a quiet rural residential area where the
proposed extraction and processing of sand will lead to widespread
environmental damage, impacting on the flora and fauna of the area and
the lives of not only the local residents but those in the greater
region. _____________________________________________________________

I am submitting my OPPOSITION to the Sutton Forest Quarry Proposal.
Sand mining operations are out of place in this native bush/ rural/
residential area. The deforestation, habitat destruction and
biodiversity erosion due to a sand mine in this area can not be
considered. The "extraction techniques" of " ripping , pushing,
loading and haulage"(EIS Executive Summary) have no place in the quiet
rural, residential setting that is the proposed site. Mining and its
associated activities in this area will be responsible for
irreversible environmental and social damage .
______________________________________________________________

My OPPOSITION to the proposed large sand quarry at Sutton Forest is
based on many social, environmental and conservation and ethical
factors. The native flora and flora will be severely affected.
Conservation of our unique species should be paramount Our world is
constantly under threat due to excessive resource consumption. There
are limited natural resources and once we, as inhabitants, exceed the
threshold level of the earth system, irreversible consequences will
follow.
________________________________________________________________

I STRONGLY OPPOSE the proposal of The Sutton Forest Quarry. I am
concerned that the proposed sand mine will adversely affect the air
and water quality in The Southern Highlands region. Additionally,
noise pollution will infiltrate quiet residential farms and a
significant place of worship. The native flora and flora will be
severely affected. Conservation of our unique species should be
paramount. Remedial measures to combat any land and habitat
destruction as stated in the EIS are not feasible. Nature does not
work like that !

I strongly OPPOSE the proposed sand mine at Sutton Forest.

I was raised on Lot 13304 which neighbours the proposed mine and under
the proposal sees a 3.8m high wall being constructed blocking views
and visual appeal. The property remains in our family and is a quiet
sanctuary away from a busy city life.

I am an experienced business leader and understand the nature of
resource extraction developments, why they are required, the economics
as well as politics behind them. I also understand the need for
governments to continually identify natural resources for use in our
growing Sydney and surrounds. I work in the Barangaroo area and see
tonnes of concrete (using sand) poured every day.

That being said, I understand the requirements of governments and
developers to adequately consult with local communities, in
particular, direct neighbours. In regards to Lot 13304, very little
consultation has occurred. Further consultation would be required with
us given the significant impact on us as owners. Had more extensive
consultation occurred prior to this point, it may have been possible
that my view would be in support, rather than oppose. Consultation is
everywhere in the business and political community in order to get
things done. In this instance, where 'mum and dad' property owners are
involved, my view is that a more extensive consultation would yield a
better outcome for all parties. The lack of consultation disrespcts
the property owners and would not work in any other walk of life. I
imagine that you will receive significant negative feedback on this
apsect which I support and believe the developers could have managed
much better.

I will leave it to others to comment on environmental concerns which
appear to be significant and not adequately addressed by the
developers documentation. One only need view the environment left by
earlier quarry activities in the area to see the damage.

My views above are personal opinions and may not address specific
requirements of government legislation when it comes to development
activities. I am not an expert in this field but acknowledge that
regulation must be followed. Saying that, it is not clear to me how
the proposed access road complies with legislative requirements. The
proposed access road appears to take on land within Lot 13304 and this
is not factored into the development documentation. I understand the
developers ability to use the 'reserve road' access but to use private
land without owners permission, recompense or otherwise does not
appear to meet requirements.

Dear Planning and Environment Dept,

From the information available here and on reading reports of the mine
posing "substantial and un-quantified risks" to the local ecosystems
and ground water and creek systems and water supply to Sydney and
concerns from experts makes this a bad idea and one that should not be
approved by your Department to proceed.

The mine is on the area of the Greater Western Wildlife corridor that
must be protected. I understand there are species of threatened birds,
bats and other animals as well as plants on the site. There are
numerous "Likely" risks noted in the EIS including "Loss of local and
regionally impportant threatened species (flora and fauna)",
"Reduction in remnant native vegetation", "Reduced natural surface
water flows" etc all of which are significant.

Also I note the understandable and valid objections of neighbours and
people who live in the vicinity who are opposed to the idea due to
noise, dust and diesel pollution. All these risks are noted in the EIS
also.

Yours Sincerely

Destruction of forest this large is immoral and should not go ahead. The
destruction it will cause to the local flora and fauna will be
devastating. Do not move forward with this project.

I strongly object to the proposal, Sutton Forest Quarry Project because
it is so wrong for this beautiful area. This is agricultural land;
land for cows, land for grapes, land for olives, even land for deer,
emus and kangaroos, forests for birds, forests for reflection and
tranquility. Not an area for excavation, and trucks and blasting and
dust and pollution. Some of the people who live here have been here
for many decades, they purchased their land thinking they could grow
old in this peaceful environment. Its not right that they have the
prospect of living next to a sand mine, with trucks and machinery
working day & night, plus the water, oh my god, the water. Australia
is a dry continent and Southern Highlands is in drought and they want
to threaten the aquifer by drilling through it to reach the sandstone.
They don't care if we loose our water, because they don't need it
because they don't live here.
Please do not pass this project.

I strongly OPPOSE the proposal to build a 47ha quarry at Sutton Forrest.
The direct and indirect impacts of sand mining on the environment of
the Southern Highlands, Sydney and the greater Australia cannot be
overlooked and the combined voice of the people must be listened to.
This is a quiet rural residential area where the proposed extraction
and processing of sand will lead to widespread environmental damage,
impacting on the flora and fauna of the area and the lives of not only
the local residents but those in the greater region.

I Wish to make a personal objection to the Sutton Forest mine Project
Application SSD 6334
I feel like the proposed mine is inappropriately located within the
area of the Great Western Wildlife Corridor.
The Great Western Wildlife Corridor lies between Bullio and Bungonia
and is the only vegetated habitat corridor between the southern Blue
Mountains and Morton National Park, so is obviously the wrong place
for an open cut mine.

Apart from the impact this will have on the `fragile' ecosystem and
residents in the immediate area- who rely on their land for their
livelihood and consequently any damage to the terrain would be
disastrous to this, as a resident of Sydney I am concerned after
reading the ABC's online report dated 9th June, that the proposed mine
could contaminate waterways that feed Sydney's catchment, affecting my
family.

Surely there is another, more appropriately located option for this
mine - that doesn't come with as many adverse risks to the health of
our beautiful wildlife and citizens?
Aimee

I wish to make a personal objection to the Sutton Forest Mine Project
Application: SSD 6334

I feel the proposed mine is inappropriately located within the area of
the Great Western Wildlife Corridor; Any area within The Great Western
Wildlife Corridor is an inappropriate place for an open cut mine.

The Great Western Wildlife Corridor lies between Bullio and Bungonia
and is the only vegetated habitat corridor between the Southern Blue
Mountains and Morton National Park. @ Sutton Forest, New South Wales

The future possible health risks also to residents and animals from
mining is too high.

Any area within The Great Western Wildlife Corridor is an inappropriate
place for an open cut mine- NO Environment Minister could consciously
allow devastation of such significance; The Great Western Wildlife
Corridor lies between Bullio and Bungonia and is the only vegetated
habitat corridor between the Southern Blue Mountains and Morton
National Park.

*This mine will not enhance agritourism opportunities or value for the
Southern Highlands region or its producers.

*This mine is likely to have adverse effects on wildlife, the local
environment (specifically Long Swamp and its aquifier) and the
people/residents of Sutton Forest.
*There are agritourism businesses in this Region that will be impacted
by the approval of this mine.

I strongly disagree with this organisation to rune such a beautiful
forest. Please live the natural forest alone

I wish to make a personal objection to the Sutton Forest Mine Project
Application: SSD 6334

I feel the proposed mine is inappropriately located within the area of
the Great Western Wildlife Corridor; Any area within The Great Western
Wildlife Corridor is an inappropriate place for an open cut mine.

The Great Western Wildlife Corridor lies between Bullio and Bungonia
and is the only vegetated habitat corridor between the Southern Blue
Mountains and Morton National Park. @ Sutton Forest, New South Wales

I STRONGLY OPPOSE the proposal to destroy 67.9 Hectares of native
bushland for a sand mine at Sutton Forrest. The potential for
irreversible environmental damage, water and air pollution, noise
pollution, health risks and traffic hazards is of great concern

I believe this project should be rejected because of its negative impacts
on the Southern Highlands environment.

The long term serious threat to the Long Swamp and aquifer. The
removal of sandstone which filters the water which eventually flows
into Nepean catchment thus supplying Sydney water and then they plan
to fill the pit with Sydney's fill, thus threatening more pollution to
the aquifer.

The harm that it may cause to the native Fauna & Flora will be
irreversible & immense. We need to take this into consideration as
once its gone, its gone. The tranquility at The Shrine of Our Lady of
Mercy in Penrose Park will be lost with the noise of Blasting, trucks,
heavy machinery, lighting and noise. This area is a well known
attraction for local and overseas tourists.

The Sutton Forest Sand Quarry proposal should not be approved.

Please stop this as it is very close to our water source on the biggest
population in Australia.