Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the Warragamba Dam Wall raising.
The project;
- is exorbitantly expensive - money that should be spent on other less destructive and more harmonious means of achieving the same outcome
- will destroy 65 kilometres of wild rivers and 5,700 hectares of pristine unspoiled native forest and ecological communities within a protected National Park. Once gone these are lost forever - the world cannot afford to keep losing its natural biodiversity to prop up the whims of human habitation.
- tries to use biodiversity offsetting, a short sighted and flawed process that does not come close to compensating for environmental losses
- will remove habitat of Sydney's last emu population
- has once again disregarded the concerns of traditional owners - the White Australia policy is still evident
- dismisses all previous concerns raised in submissions about the EIS and ignores advice from UNESCO World Heritage Committee
- dismisses concerns raised about water quality issues from both construction works and subsequent holding patterns following rainfall events
- is short sighted to think that we can control nature, we must work with it, not try to suppress it
- will not prevent flooding during extreme rainfall events
- once constructed, cannot be undone.
We must do our utmost to preserve what we have not already lost. Floodplains can be depopulated, forests must be kept, biodiversity is key.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the raising of the dam wall.
My biggest concern is regarding the destruction of World Heritage and National Parks area. As a wildlife carer and rehabilitator I have seen way too much habitat destruction which brings our native animals into conflict with humans and to the brink of extinction.
The critically endangered Regent Honeyeater and the last known Emu population in the Sydney basin are at risk. Also significant flora such as the Camden White Gum and the Grassy Box Woodland ecological communities.
Community and government has previously raised many concerns to the initial EIS and these don't appear to have been properly addressed in the 'Response to Submissions'.
With climate change and global warming you cannot predict the number of 'temporary' inundations (as the report calls them) that are going to occur within the critical World Heritage areas. Any inundation is destructive and raising the dam wall only increases the likelyhood of many, if not permanent inundation and permanent loss of habitat.
I live downstream from the dam at Leonay so I'm well aware of the flood potential. There are alternatives to raising the dam and I don't believe that its raising will even have significant effect on future flooding, particulalry further downstream in the Hawkesbury region.
Please consider the views of the community who live in this area and truly understand the beauty and importance of this critical biodiverse area to Australia and the planet.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
The proposal to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam by 14 metres cannot be justified; scientifically, economically or environmentally.
The proposal by the Perrottet government is political and cynical in its determination to continue developing large numbers of densely packed dormitories on Hawkesbury flood plains.
The proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall by 14 metres is an assault on the landscape; destroyin native forests not by land clearing but by drowning the trees. The proposal constitutes an egregious ignorance and denial of climate change. The proposal involves the destruction of biodiversity, the natural environment and Indigenous heritage.

A rational and demonstrably objective strategy to balance the see-saw of floods and droughts in Sydney’s water supply would be to fully investigate the plans proposed by Professor Stuart Khan UNSW, to integrate the management of Warragamba Dam and Sydney’s desalination plant. This plan would mitigate floods and ensure the security of Sydney’s water supply within an accelerated timeline and economic framework.
Professor Khan presented his comprehensive plan in detail to a large and diverse audience of community members in the Hawkesbury on Saturday 20 August 2022. His plan was unanimously endorsed by all present, including the publicly stated endorsement of Ms Robyn Preston MP, NSW Parliament, Member for Hawkesbury.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the Warragamba Dam raising for the following reasons:
1.The concerns raised in the 2,500 community, expert and government agency submissions to the initial EIS in 2021 have not been addressed.
2.The report dismisses the impacts of the dam wall raising on Sydney's drinking water quality and concerns raised by Sydney Water and Health NSW.
3.The report minimises the destruction of World Heritage and National Parks. The dam project would inundate approx. 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, and 5,700 hectares of National Parks. Of this, 1300 hectares is within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
This dam project would destroy
-the Kowmung River which is protected for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974;
- unique eucalyptus species diversity such as the Camden White Gum, all which have Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing
- Grassy Box Woodland which are threatened ecological communities
- Habitat for endangered and critically endangered species including the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney’s last Emu population.
4.The NSW Government proposes to change the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park World Heritage Area so that the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee can be ignored.
5.The report has also again disregarded the concerns of Traditional Owners. It does not include important information about 1541 identified cultural heritage sites that would be flooded by the Dam proposal.
The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report does not appropriately assessing cultural heritage in meaningful consultation with Gundungurra community members. The report has been criticised a number of times by both the Australian Department of Environment and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS)
6.There are alternative options to raising the Warragamba Dam wall that would protect existing floodplain communities. Alternative options and their cost effectiveness and economic benefits were not assessed in the EIS. No matter how high the dam wall is constructed, it will not be able to prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley downstream. On average, 45% of floodwaters come from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment.
The NSW government has the opportunity to meet its obligations under the World Heritage Convention and preserve the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area for future generations.
I urge the NSW government to not raise the Warragamba Dam Wall and consider alternative options that would protect existing floodplain communities
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. My primary concerns are the negative and irreversible damage to the valuable natural and indigenous areas upstream.
The proposed variation to the Blue Mountains National Park incorporating UNESCO listed areas and World Heritage Areas are unacceptable and will work toward further endangering rare and endangered flora and fauna in these areas.
The current climate crisis will not be assisted by the loss of forest cover and bush land.
Whilst appreciating the need to protect downstream communities during periods of flooding, simply raising the wall will not achieve this. Indeed no matter how high, it can always be topped, and when it does, disaster downstream will follow.
As noted in the recent flood inquiry undertaken in 2022, the Valley is 'a bathtub' with high volume inlet but low outlet, significant number and range of population, uses, transportation etc. The solutions here are better landuse planning and controls - a government solution - not a violent abuse of the natural environment.
I ask that you reconsider this misguided and expensive proposal and consider more practical, sensible and less environmentally catastrophic alternatives.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I OPPOSE THE RAISING OF THE DAM WALL for the following reasons:
* A series of Government Departments, International Authorities, environmental groups and Indiginenous Traditional Owners have all raised a litany of concerns with this project that have not been addressed by the Government in the latest report.
*The health Department has scientific concerns about the effects on the quality of Sydney's water during the construction and their ability to provide safe water to Sydney during this long construction period.
* The Government proposal ignores the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee on changing the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park World Heritage area. 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.
There are many threatened species and Aboriginal cultural areas contained in this area.
This alone is enough reason for scrapping this proposal. These areas must be preserved at all costs and should never be exploited for any reason. They will be crucial in our increasing battle against global overheating and the resultant change in the climate.
* The financial cost alone of last 2 years of increasingly severe wild weather, drought, bushfires and flooding, across Australia, with our climate warming by only 2.2 degrees C has the IPCC scientists extremely concerned about our current overheating trajectory of 2-3 degrees.
The modelling is clear and incontrovertible these extremes of climate will only increase resulting in an uninhabitable climate unless immediate urgent counteraction is taken.
Big picture thinking is required. It is way past time that development is allowed on floodplains. The costs are far too great. Further the Government must consider future risks by moving whole communities to flood free areas.
The goverments stated aim of protecting existing floodplain communities by raising the dam wall is flawed. 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.
The above reasons can only lead one to the conclusion that it is political ideology driving the decision to raise the dam wall rather than logic and science of less costly alternatives.
Yours sincerely,


I have spent a great deal of time over the past 40 years in the Blue Mountains National Park camping, bushwalking, rockclimbing, abseiling and canyoning. These environments possess a spiritual, healing quality that cannot be appreciated from afar. Our aboriginal elder brothers and sisters attest to these qualities when they talk of "connection" to Country, land, water and sky, and are willing to explain to us who are willing to listen. To dilute this part of our environment and thus a part of everyone's inner essence, erases something which cannot be replaced by the sterile environment of densely populated areas.

To whom it may concern,
The plan to raise Warragamba Dam is a bad plan.
it will flood and destroy World Heritage areas.
it will flood and destroy Aboriginal heritage sites: bear in mind that Aboriginal people have occupied this land for 60,000 years without wrecking it. And they did not build permanent structures in flood plains.
What is Australian heritage if not Aboriginal heritage?
Raising the wall will not solve the flood problem; little more than half the flood waters come from the mass of water stored.
You have ignored expert opinion; you have ignored community objections; you have not considered alternative ideas.
please do not consider raising Warragamba Dam walls.
Yours sincerely,

2 December 2022 @ 8:53 AM
To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. I became very concerned when I read about the impacts this would have on the World Heritage Listed Blue Mountains National Park. The threat and destruction the raising of the dam wall would have on protected rivers (The Kowmung 'wild river') unique plant species and endangered animals such as the Regent Honey Eater is terrifying. I have been visiting the Blue Mountains National Park regularly with my family for the past 20 years. Bush walking, camping and enjoying the natural beauty of this very special place. It saddens me to think that this may be destroyed.
Please consider alternative options of reducing flood risk and do not raise the dam wall. The Blue Mountains National Park is a very significant place and needs to be saved.
Yours sincerely,


Fri 2/12/2022 @ 8:58 AM
To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. I became very concerned when I read about the impacts this would have on the World Heritage Listed Blue Mountains National Park. The threat and destruction the raising of the dam wall would have on protected rivers (The Kowmung 'wild river') unique plant species and endangered animals such as the Regent Honey Eater is terrifying. I have been visiting the Blue Mountains National Park regularly with my family for the past 20 years. Bush walking, camping and enjoying the natural beauty of this very special place. It saddens me to think that this may be destroyed.
Please consider alternative options of reducing flood risk and do not raise the dam wall. The Blue Mountains National Park is a very significant place and needs to be saved.

Firstly I would like to state that I completely and totally oppose the raising of the dam wall.
Ignoring the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee is arrogant, self serving and an absolute disgrace to this country. This unique and precious area does not belong to the Liberal Party, it belongs to the world and all its inhabitants. Australia has a lot to be ashamed of but this is absolutely outrageous.
The initial EIS reports have stated that this proposal will not even remedy the problem, as 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.
There are also serious concerns held by Sydney Water and Health NSW regarding the effects that the dam project would have on Sydney's drinking water quality.
Traditional owners have been disregarded yet again - an ongoing issue on this continent, and again part of Australia's shameful history of ignoring and destroying.
Alternative non destructive options must be explored, as raising the wall is absolutely not an option, Mr Perrottet does not have the right to make such a decision on behalf of the planet.
Yours sincerely,

I have not made a reportable political donation in the past two years.
7 creeks and rivers flow into the Nepean, and Warragamba is only one. I cannot see how raising the dam wall is going to reduce flooding in the Windsor & Hawkesbury regions; which are known floodplains…so why are these areas developed for housing. More so, l haven’t seen any evidence that the dam wall can even withstand this extra weight. And l am totally disgusted and disappointed that none of the submissions against raising the dam wall have been taken seriously.

The government's refusal to accept scientific opinion and press on with this flawed scheme is disturbing. At a time when Sydney's population has turned it into one of the world's largest cities, 5 million plus, it is more important than ever to have a management plan which preserves, not destroys, the environment we live in. Sydney's good fortune in having a ring of national parks and in the Blue Mountains, a World Heritage site, so close to it's population centre it is the result of foresight and bold decision making many years ago. In the 1960's The Cumberland Plan was dismantled. We put trees before people then when our population numbered 2 millions The result is the urban sprawl we see today and additional pressure placed on it when settlement is sited in marginal locations prone to flood. Establishing a World Heritage Site and then trashing it with this monstrous proposal represents bad faith and shows how little we really respect the environment. This decision trashes our brand internationally. The alternatives are available to those who choose to reflect and recognise that now especially, conservation and stewardship should be our social and political imperatives.

I am totally opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. There are other alternatives to alleviate the flooding of personal property already existing. A raised wall will destroy aboriginal cultural sites as well as important vegetation.

I strongly object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall because it will destroy
1. World Heritage areas
2. wild rivers
3. threatened species
4. unique biodiversity
5. Traditional Owners cultural heritage sites
The new report dismisses community concerns along with many other reports. One states that 45% of floods are derived from areas outside the catchment and so raising the dam wall won't make any difference.
I have seen recent photographs of the Colo River flowing rapidly where it meets the Hawkesbury causing the waters from the Hawkesbury River to back up.
The low lying areas of the Hawkesbury will continue to flood as they have for thousands of years and yet you have allowed people to build there.
Both Sydney Water and the NSW Health Department fear that raising the wall could harm Sydney's drinking water. about https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/24/warragamba-dam-health-department-feared-raising-wall-could-harm-sydneys-drinking-water
STOP ALLOWING DEVELOPER MATES TO BUILD IN AREAS THAT FLOOD

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the dam wall as 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, and 5,700 hectares of National Parks, would be inundated by the Dam project.
I oppose any destruction of
1. The Kowmung River- declared a ‘Wild River’, protected for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974. I have spent many trips exploring this wonderful wild river.

1. Unique eucalyptus species diversity recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing such as the Camden White Gum.

1. A number of Threatened Ecological Communities, notably Grassy Box Woodland

1. Habitat for endangered and critically endangered species including the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney’s last Emu population.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the dam wall.
The up-stream imacts are un-acceptable.
The total length of richly biodiverse and heritage rich inundation/destruction is close to 100km.
The width of this inundation combined with the length make this truly disastrous for a World Heritage value area.
Please do not proceed with the dam raising.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Please do NOT raise the wall of the dam. More than enough destruction of habitat and First Nations treasures has already occurred - no more is reasonable. How can you ignore the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee by changing the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park World Heritage Area?
The government is meant to be protecting the environment, not enabling its continued destruction so that more homes can be recklessly built on the flood plains of the Hawkesbury. There are alternative optionsto 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.
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.
Our future relies on us making better decisions in matters such as this. Please do your job as our elected representatives and say no to the Dam Raising Project.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I have previously reviewed the Environmental Impact Statement and had indicated my objection to the proposal. Having reviewed both of the above documents, there is no new information or analysis that would dissuade me from the view that the proposal is deeply flawed and Water NSW has failed to present a compelling argument to proceed with the raising of the dam wall.
Rather than comment on all of the issues that reflect poorly on the proposal, I choose to focus on the issue of public recreation and the impact of the proposal on bushwalking and related activities.
Social Impact on Public Recreation

On page 392 of the Submissions Report, it is stated that access to designated wilderness areas will be maintained and the Project will not restrict opportunities for solitude and appropriate self-reliant recreation.
I flatly reject this conclusion. There will be impacts on rivers such as the Kowmung and Nattai and this will affect opportunities for remote area bushwalking and related activities.
On page 403 of the Submissions Report, it is stated that social impacts can be highly subjective and perceived impacts may differ……………compared to the reality.
This seems a remarkably dismissive attitude to those who have raised objections in relation to social issues. I simply request that Water NSW adopts a more respectful attitude and takes the time to better understand why some would have a different perception of this proposal than Water NSW.
On page 404 of the Submissions Report, it is stated that Water NSW acknowledges the importance of the natural values of the upstream area but considers that these cannot be considered in isolation from the substantial societal benefits that the Project would provide.
I can only disagree. I consider that the impacts on the environment of the upstream are simply too substantial to be dismissed and Water NSW abandons this flawed proposal and considers other measures for flood management in the Nepean-Hawkesbury catchment.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I write to strongly object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall, on the following grounds -
1) destruction of sites of Aboriginal cultural significance
2) destruction of sites of ecological sensitivity. Rising water levels will adversely impact threatened plant/ animal species
3) flawed logic that raising the dam wall will mitigate flood risk to housing on the plains. i have Concerns that raising the dam wall will rezone areas as lower flood risk and increase development on flood plains. They will subsequently be in the flood zone and furhter needless flood damage to citizens due to poor planning decisions
4) inadequate assessment process across with regard to surveying of aboriginal cultural sites, sites of environmental significance and the bulldozing approach of Stuart Ayers and Dominic Perrotet to push through a destructive idea of raising the dam wall with nadequate justification.
I have lived in the Blue Mountains in Blackheath for the past 18 years and recreated here for the past 25 years as an active rock climber, bushwalker and trail runner. I have raised my 2 children here as lovers of the wilderness heritage and with a respect for the traditional owners and their deep knowledge. I see my role as an active custodian of the world heritage area and i will not stand by as short term interests are served to push forward another inappropriate development.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am against the raising of the dam. I see this as the Government falling to the whims of developers to increase housing in the flood plains.The raising of the dam isn't going to stop the flooding when most of the flooding comes from the streams and rivers that run into the Nepean/Hawksberry after the dam. Rasing of the wall will not stop the flooding in any way. They will destroy the blue mountains which the government regularly does, they will wipe out endangered species of fauna and flora that live in the area. They will destroy First Nations people's history that's been here for thousands of years and wipe it like it never happened.
I will not back any government policy that thinks its perfectly fine to take money over the environment and heritage. Heritage listing of the blue mountains should be one of the main reasons to find or use alternative solutions to prevent the destruction that this policy would bring. Heritage listing was put in place to protect the blue mountains and no government should have the right or the ability to back door that
If they go ahead with this policy I will vote for any party that is against the raising of the dam
Yours sincerely,