Warragamba Dam Raising

I have taken an active interest in the amazing wild areas of NSW all my life and have walked and swum many of the state’s wild rivers including the lower Kowmung River. The proposed destruction of this significant portion of a World Heritage Area, I would have thought laughable before it has become very real. And make no mistake it is destruction, whether straight away or in twenty years.

This has absurdly been described as the most cost-efficient way to reduce flooding in Western Sydney – only if something of incalculable value, the lower Kowmung region is considered of no value! It is pristine World Heritage, wild river country, something that barely remains in this state. I would go further into the rather desperate attempt at an environmental impact statement that is trying to bury the basic facts under an avalanche of words, but that would be evading the main point.

Please reject outright this egregiously bad proposal

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam due to the project's unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species.
The draft EIS concludes that the project poses significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that "cannot be avoided or minimised."
Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.
The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.
It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for any avoidable loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur.
The Project suggests an offset strategy for the Regent Honeyeater. I strongly oppose this strategy. Offsets are rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss and especially for critical habitat for the survival of a species, especially for a Critically Endangered species such as the Regent Honeyeater. There is no evidence that the breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters can be successfully offset and any offsets would be unlikely to provide direct benefits for both the local affected population and the species.
I urge the Government to reconsider this project. Other ways can be found to achieve the objectives without further jeopardising the Regent Honeater and important Aboriginal sites within the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.

Dear Sir/Madam
I am strongly opposed to the NSW Government's proposal to raise the walls of the Warragamba Dam.
If this proposal goes ahead, this will cause devastation to the thousands of hectares of critically endangered Regent Honeyeater breeding habitat by massive flooding of these key areas for Regent Honeyeaters. This has to be avoided at all costs.
We must protect (and do it better than we already have) the remaining areas of breeding habitat of this beautiful bird before they are lost forever.
Please don't let this happen. This project should have a resounding NO.
Please take the time to study this beautiful bird and agree they should be protected at all cost.

As a bushwalker of many years, I have walked throughout the Blue Mountains National Park as well as many others in NSW and other states.
I object to the raising of the dam on a number of grounds. Firstly there have been a number of systemic failures of the environmental impact statement on this project. These are:
• The engineering firm (SMEC Engineering) who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project have an established history abusing Indigenous rights, recently being barred from the world bank.
• Severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken.
• Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
• Threatened species surveys are substantially less than guideline requirements. Where field surveys were not adequately completed, expert reports were not obtained.
• No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.
• The integrity of the environmental assessment is fundamentally flawed, and cannot be accepted as a basis for further decision-making by the Minister for Planning.
Secondly world heritage and cultural sites are under attack. The Blue Mountains World Heritage area is not just a world class National Park. In 2000 it was inscribed on UNESCO’s prestigious World Heritage list in recognition of the Blue Mountains Outstanding Universal value for the whole of mankind. Raising the Warragamba dam wall and consequent damage to natural and cultural values would be a clear breach of these undertakings and Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention. An estimated 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, and 5,700 hectares of National Parks, 1,300 hectares of which is within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, would be inundated by the Dam project. This includes:
• The Kowmung River - declared a ‘Wild River’, protected for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974;
• Unique eucalyptus species diversity recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing such as the Camden White Gum;
• A number of Threatened Ecological Communities, notably Grassy Box Woodland;
• Habitat for endangered and critically endangered species including the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney’s last Emu population.
Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention mean it is critical for the Blue Mountains World Heritage site to be managed to protect its ecological integrity and authenticity. Any damage within its boundaries is completely unacceptable and inconsistent with World Heritage management principles.
Gundungurra Traditional Owners have not given Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the Dam proposal to proceed.
• Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal.
• The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report has been severely and repeatedly criticised by both the Australian Department of Environment and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) for not appropriately assessing cultural heritage in meaningful consultation with Gundungurra community members.
There are alternatives to raising the Warragamba dam. These are:
• There are many alternative options to raising the Warragamba Dam wall that would protect existing floodplain communities. A combined approach of multiple options has been recommended as the most cost-effective means of flood risk mitigation.
• Alternative options were not comprehensively assessed in the EIS. Any assessment of alternatives does not take into account the economic benefits that would offset the initial cost of implementation.
• On average, 45% of floodwaters are derived from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment. This means that no matter how high the dam wall is constructed, it will not be able to prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley downstream.
Allowing developers to raise the wall of this dam to allow them to build thousands of homes on the western Sydney floodplains, should not be contemplated.

Yours sincerely,

Suraya Coorey

I strongly oppose raising the walls of the Warragamba Dam due to unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including the Blue Mountains world heritage area and threatened species.
The draft environmental impacts statement concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat of the regent honeyeater that can’t be avoided or minimised. This bird is critically endangered at both the Federal and State level.
Once we lose it, we can’t get it back.
BirdLife Australia modelling suggests about 50% of contemporary regent honeyeater habitat was burnt in 2019-20. Protection of the remaining unburnt habitat is the highest conservation priority. There are only a few contemporary breeding sites. During assessment of the project a total of 21 regent honeyeaters were found including active nests. There are only 350 birds left in the wild. Breeding habitat is considered critical for survival under the National Recovery Plan. It states that it is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites. The project is likely to render the regent honeyeater extinct.
Destruction of habitat is incongruous with the efforts of government in the recovery program.
It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for avoidable loss and degradation of breeding habitat.
I oppose the offset strategy. Regent honeyeaters survive in habitat which specifically suits them. Offsetting is rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss. There is no evidence it can be successfully offset.

As a traditional owner I oppose the Dam Project due to the destruction of our country and culturally significantly important sites.
As a descendant of both side my grandfather Frank Marlin helped constructed the dam in the 1950's and cause destruction and the loss of sacred land to my indigenous ancestors. I don't agree with anymore loss of our culture & country!!!
Thank you,
Kind Regards.
Alissa Riley

I object to the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam for following reasons :
1. The assessment for this project has not been thorough enough- as to-
Indigenous Heritage sites that will be destroyed should the dam wall be raised.

2. The areas that would be inundated include a pristine river, Kowmung river, and huge areas of what is a World Heritage National Park.

3. Nearly half of floodwaters come from rivers outside the proposed dam catchment area - therefore raising the dam wall is useless to prevent flooding to the plains below.

4. Lack of modelling of where flood waters would go; and exit plan for populations who would be affected.

5. There is a general conclusion that this is a scheme to develop more housing in the West Sydney low lying areas without due care for the population involved and profit without outlaying research into safety for everyone who would buy into living there.

If the NSW Government approves the proposal, huge areas of World Heritage-listed National Park and culturally significant land in the Blue Mountains and thousands of hectares of Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater breeding habitat would be at risk of extended flooding and potential destruction.
Please do not approve the project.

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species.

The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that “cannot be avoided or minimised.”

The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. 

Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.

There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.

Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.

The destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for Regent Honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole.

The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.

It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for any avoidable loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur.

I strongly oppose the Project’s offset strategy for the Regent Honeyeater.

Offsets are rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss and especially for critical habitat for the survival of a species, in this case breeding habitat for the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater.

There is no evidence that breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters can be successfully offset and any offsets would be unlikely to provide direct benefits for both the local affected population and the species.

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species. The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that “cannot be avoided or minimised.” Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”. The destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for Regent Honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole. The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.

I strongly object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species.

The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that “cannot be avoided or minimised.”

The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. 

Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.

There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.

Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.

Dear Minister and to whom it may concern,

I am objecting to the Warragamba Dam wall raising. I have been living in Sydney for the last 16 years and enjoy bushwalking in the Blue Mountains. I appreciate its diversity of both plant and animal life, and it would be heartbreaking to see more of this World Heritage area erased.

Please consider:
1. the effect on Tourism, which is already reeling from the impact of Covid-19
2. the unique species in the area: Camden White Gum, the endangered Grassy Box Woodland, the critically endangered regent honeyeater and the last of Sydney's emu population
3. nearly half of floodwaters come from areas outside the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment. No matter how high the dam is raised, it will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley below.

Please remember our future generations.
Indian proverb: “Blessed is he who plants trees under whose shade he will never sit.”

Yours sincerely,
Ricardo

I object strongly to this project. It will destroy habitat for many species, destroy much flora, and is a really ridiculous idea all round not least because, once again, the feelings of the indigenous people is being completely disregarded.
We have destroyed so much of Australia and have rendered extinct so many animals and plants. This is a national park so where is the protection?
It is high time this government stopped destroying habitat. I am so angry this project is even being considered. Money is not all that matters.
By their actions, this current NSW government is responsible for the removal of a great deal of habitat and urban tree cover. Please stop doing this as it is distressing to anyone who cares.

Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, sites of Aboriginal cultural heritage, and threatened species.
The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that “cannot be avoided or minimised.” The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. 

After the devastating bush fires of 2019 - 2020, these birds are even more threatened. Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.
There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area. Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.
The destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for Regent Honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole. The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program. It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for any avoidable loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur.

I also strongly oppose the Project’s offset strategy for the Regent Honeyeater. Offsets are rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss and especially for critical habitat for the survival of a species, in this case breeding habitat for the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater. There is no evidence that breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters can be successfully offset and any offsets would be unlikely to provide direct benefits for both the local affected population and the species.

The proposal also threatens many areas of Aboriginal cultural heritage and spiritual significance. It is simply unacceptable to destroy these areas, when so much vital landscape and cultural heritage has already been destroyed. I strongly oppose any destruction of sites considered spiritually and cultural significant to many Aboriginal peoples around the area.
Yours sincerely
Jane Gibian

i strongly oppose the proposal to raise the warragamba dam due to the projects unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including the blue mountains world heritage area and threatened species. the draft eis concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the regent honeyeater that "cannot be avoided or minimised". the regent honeyeater is listed as critically endangered at both a state and federal level with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. there are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for this bird and during the assessment of the project a total of 21 honey eaters, including with active nests, were recorded in the impact area. the destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for regent honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole. it is unacceptable and inconsistent with the national recovery plan for any avoidable loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur. i strongly oppose the projects offset strategy for the regent honeyeater. offsets are rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss and especially for critical habitat for the survival of a species, in this case the critically endangered regent honeyeater.

I am making this submission as an extremely active and concerned nature-lover and environmentalist. I have been interested in nature’s plants and animals since I was a child in the UK and since I moved to Australia in 1980 I have developed an intense interest and commitment to Australia’s fauna, flora and landscapes. I walk frequently in the bush and along the coast around Sydney and venture further afield when allowed. I visit the Blue Mountains 2-3 times per year. My wife and I are also strong financial and practical supporters of various environmental charities, including volunteering on Bush Heritage properties.

I am strongly opposed to this proposal to raise the height of Warragamba Dam for two reasons: it has completely unacceptable impacts on the precious environment, the flora and fauna and landscapes, of the Blue Mountains; and if that on its own is not bad enough, it is completely unnecessary. There are perfectly acceptable, better even, alternatives to achieve the desired outcome of protecting homes on floodplains.

The value of the environment and ecosystems of the Blue Mountains is recognised in NSW, in Australia and internationally. I very much hope that I do not need to detail to you the details of the recognition that the Blue Mountains has received.

Also, the land that will be destroyed by this proposal has immense cultural and heritage value to the traditional owners. This must be respected.

The lands that will be flooded by the raised dam contain many threatened species. I will highlight the Regent Honeyeater which is listed as Critically Endangered at state and federal level. There are probably fewer than 350 individual birds left in the wild - this is as a result of past destruction of their natural habitat and more recently bushfires. Clearly, in such a situation any further destruction of the Regent Honeyeater’s foraging and breeding habitats will push the species even closer to extinction. Yet, this is what will happen if the dam is raised - even the EIS recognises this and cavalierly suggests that this cannot be avoided. What is the point of listing species as Critically Endangered if governments approve schemes to make them even more endangered! This is ridiculous.

At the best of times, ‘offsetting' destruction of the environment is questionable but when it comes to species that have very special habitat requirements and have already lost most of their natural habitat, offsetting is nothing more than a sham. It is not possible to offset the destruction of the the habitat of Regent Honeyeaters.

I very much hope that this proposal will be rejected and that the government will formulate a much more sensible, environmentally sustainable and culturally sensitive plan.

Many thanks for considering my submission.

This project should not go ahead because it will be highly destructive for one of Sydney's great environmental and tourism assets and because doing so will only partially address a problem which can be better mitigated by other means. I am a frequent bushwalker in the Blue Mountains and Nattai national parks. I grew up in SW Sydney, and it is well known in the area that the river system behind Warragamba dam is not the key contributor to the flood-risk in the downstream parts of the Hawkesbury-Nepean. The vast majority (>50%) of water contributing to floods comes from the section of the Nepean river hydrologically above the Warragamba-Nepean junction [1]. This upper section of the Nepean is a growing contributor to flooding because of badly planned development in SW Sydney, which drives huge amounts of water down the Hawkesbury-Nepean system in any flood event. Raising the dam wall is not going to prevent flooding in the lower Hawkesbury-Nepean, no matter how high the wall is.

The environmental and cultural cost of raising the dam wall will be enormous, and appears to be underestimated. We're talking about a world-class national park with UNESCO world heritage listing that's within 2hrs drive/train ride of the Sydney CBD, with enormous wilderness and wild-river systems. A park like this close to a major city is essentially irreplaceable. One of the great assets of Sydney as a liveable city is that it is ringed by untouched wilderness country, including habitat for threatened and critically endangered species. Raising the dam wall will destroy significant parts of this, all to pretty ineffectively prevent flood risk for areas that people shouldn't even be living in! The only reason we have people living in hastily built suburbs on river floodplain is decades of poor city planning at state and local government level. Why should everyone else, including the future inhabitants of a city (and planet) where far too much wilderness country has been ruined for short-term gain by developers, have to suffer for a scheme that will be minimally effective at preventing floods in an area that has been badly planned in the first place! There's an accountability and responsibility issue here, if developers have to look elsewhere for land to turn into yet more suburban hellscape, then that's their problem.

There are better options, which include relocating the most flood-prone residents by buying back the land they are living on to non-residential use (i.e., undoing bad planning decisions), adopting international best practice on flood-plain approvals for residential land, and reducing the full storage level and using desalination plants to cover the gap on water-supply capacity. Desalination technology has improved rapidly, it is deployed internationally, including in Sydney, and it can be powered by renewable energy, as we have shown. Additionally, the ocean is always full, even in a drought, unlike a dam -- so this approach would also enhance water security as a positive side-effect. The EIS does not appear to properly canvas these alternatives, which the NSW Government cannot not know about, since they were part of a published study several years ago [2]. The alternatives should be more properly considered and driven forward because they appear far superior in terms of making Sydney a liveable city for the long-term and protecting a UNESCO world-heritage area that's of vital importance to Sydney's history and future.

[1] Department of Primary Industries (2014), Office of Water. Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley Flood Management Review Stage One.
[2] J. Pittock (2018), Managing flood risk in the Hawkesbury-Nepean valley, Australian National University.

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project's unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species. The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that 'cannot be avoided or minimised'. The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both state and federal levels.

Raising the wall will cause environmental devastation.