Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I express my concerns over the loss of habitat and animal species as a result of the raising of the warragamba Dam wall. World Heritage value will certainly be reduced if this project is allowed to proceed. Intended housing and industry development below the flood plain epresents an incursion into the Blue Mountains escarpment that will degrade environmentally sensitive ecosystems. We know that continuing human population growth accelerates demand for space, and as this is happening, wild animal habits are ever being displaced by human habitats. This should not be allowed to happen in the Blue Mountains. Encroaching human habitation deteriorates wilderness and widerness is what tourists come here to see. Also our first nation's people also stand to lose culturally significant sites as the river rises towards the proposed height increase of the dam wall. All flora and fauna affected by inundation will be adversely affected. Threatened species may become extinct. Far right wing politics dismisses any of the alternative proposals to raising the Warragamba Dam wall and the astronomical cost of the construction would be much better spent in other areas of our economy.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Has the possible alternative to raising the dam wall being to lower the water levels required to be stored at Warragamba by building one or more desalination plants been considered.
It seems to me that this could alleviate the probnlems on the Nepean catchment and would also go some way to removing the need to eventually needing the dam to store any water at all whilst also dealing with the problems during possible prolonged droughts..
Helping out at evacuation centres and recovery centres I have mentiooned this possibility to quite a few of those seeking assistance and none of thes people have thought it a bad idea.
What cost analysis has been done for this alternative and how dodoes the cost compare with the cost of raising the wall?
Yours sincerely,

I oppose the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.
Inundating the lands and sacred sites of Traditional Owners is a travesty, as is the inundation of currently protected wilderness bushland. In this era of climate change, which I have experienced first hand attending unprecedented fires and floods, we need to be protecting more bushland not destroying it.
On page 2 of the Water NSW "Preferred Infrastructure Report Warragamba Dam Raising" there is an Acknowledgement of Country. I recommend everyone read it and consider the irony.
I'm a first responder and have seen first hand the devastation of flooding in the Nepean and Hawkesubury region. I've assisted families through three floods in 18 months, which is depressing work, but it pales in comparison to the experience of those families. So you might think I would support this project, but so far I'm only convinced that a taller dam wall will only bring more destruction.
If the aim of a taller dam wall is to protect existing communitites, show us the science. If the aim of a taller dam is to release more land on the floodplain for residential development, show us the science. At bear minimum, the community deserves due process in the form of a proper EIS. But this is limitee thinking.

Justification for the project must also consider Traditional Owners and the impact on their cultural heritage, the future impact of climate change and how destruction of wilderness will impact, and the wider economic impact on the Blue Mountains and other regions.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
We are opposed to raising the dam, as this will reduce water quality at times, i crease dam silting while reducing further silt deposits on the floodplains, will flood Aboriginal sites and damage World Heritage values, will not stop floods as floodwater also comes from the Nepean, Grose, Colo, South Ck, you name it. R znd has ignored traditional owners aising the wall will increase apathy to flooding risk, increase development on land that should never be built on, destroy valuable farmland, expose many more people to risk.
Furthermore the Government and Sydney Water have not adequately considered the alternatives,, mitigation measures, environmental impact and evacuation routes.
Raising the dam has been considered and dismissed before. With worsening climatic conditions and unpredictability, the outcome of any appraisal could only have been worese.
People before plants, profits before people.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Pls stop this out of control madness viz rasing the Warra.Dam Wall, as a very concerned Blue Mts voter. I will ensure all my votes head away from the LNP over this debacle.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the proposal for raising Warragamba Dam wall.
This ill conceived plan has absolutely no merit and fails to demonstrate any beneficial purpose for the taxpayers who will be expected to provide the funding.
The floodplains, downstream, will always be floodplains unless floodwater diversion measures are implemented.
Floodplains, evidently, are not sensible zones for residential development. Because they are plains. And they flood. Delaying the course of water from this upstream source will not change the fact that nearly half of the flooding water is from other sources.
There is no justification to destroy World Heritage listed enviroment or National Parkland. That would be shameful, irresponsible and disrespectful.
Particularly if it is of no benefit.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Leave our World Heritage area alone. Get your hands off the Warragamba Dam wall
This aria is irreplaceable. More useful to stop building on the floodplain, and relocate infrastructure that is already there.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the raising of Warragamba Dam Wall.
I live in the Blue Mountains and I frequently bushwalk and birdwatch in the area. I have camped at Kowmung and seen the fantastic Kowmung River and pristine bush and wildlife.
These are the facts for you to consider when making your decision to raise the dam wall or not:-
The NSW Government is ignoring the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committe by changing the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park World Heritage Area;
Serious concerns held by Sydney Water and Health NSW about the effects the dam project will have one Sydney's drinking water quality have been dismissed;
65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, 5,700 hectares of National Parks of which 1,300 hectares is within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, will be inundated by the Dam project;
The Kowmung River, declared a "Wild River", protected for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974;
The Camden White Gum and other unique eucalyptus species will be destroyed. These eucalyptus are recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area's World Heritage listing;
Grassy Box Woodland and other threatened ecological communities will be gone under the dam project;
The Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney's last Emu population habitat will be destroyed and other species we have yet to discover. Does NSW Government want to be responsible for yet another Extinction of the Regent Honeyeater and Emu and other critically endangered species? They cannot just move to another area. The Regent Honeyeater is dependent on the unique eucalyptus species to feed on and also old growth trees;
The report has again dismissed the concerns of Traditional Owners, not including important information about sacred sites that will be flooded and lost forever;
Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites will 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) fornot appropriately assessing cultural heritage in meaningful consultation with Gundungurra community members;
How long do we continue to ignore and dismiss our Traditional Owners?
Alternative options to raising the Warragamba Dam wall were not assessed in the EIS. No 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;
The NSW Government needs to stop development and developers building on the "flood plains". An easy and the most cost effective way to stop future disasters caused by floods.

Developing on the flood plains adds to more water run-off due to all the hard surfaces, roofs, roads, paving etc.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Nature's world heritage which humankind cannot duplicate will be destroyed.
Please can humankind with 8 bln seeking to live a powered life on mother Earth where per capita use makes the decades following WWII look like dark ones start to live within means rather than this idea of simply taking.
Stay safe, keep well,
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I cannot understand how the government thinks it should ignore the will of the people, majority of whom do not support this project. The expert concerns over water quality, ecological and environmental destruction, alongside public opinions dismissed. Absolutely no time or consideration given to any of the previous submissions.
The *sheer arrogance* of the government to ignore UNESCO advice.
The government has blinkers on and dollar signs in their eyes, pushing this project through without care or consideration for the millions of people each year who come from all over the world to experience this beautiful nature, including locals like me who visit frequently to hike and absorb this unique environment.
National Parks, like all nature, are for the people, for current and future generations to enjoy. That the government would endanger this land is an absolute travesty. This land belongs to the people, it is not the governments to sell and destory for profits.
The land belongs to Aboriginal Dharug, Gundungurra, Wanaruah, Wiradjuri, Darkinjung and Tharawal Nations: sovereignty was never ceded. They have been caretakers of this land for thousands of years, and this government now wants to destroy it for profit?
It's sickening how clearly this government despises its constituents and the environmental that we live in and on and with.
I strongly oppose this dam. Forests not profits.
Yours sincerely,

I oppose the raising of Warragamba Dam in order to increase water storage for Sydney. My reason is that the dam is a short term fix for a long term problem, but the ageless beauty of the Blue Mountains National Park will be lost forever. Future generations will regret the loss of beauty whilst they continue to battle floods.

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam Wall, and the object to the flaws in the 'Preferred Infrastructure Report'
This report seems to ignore many of the environmental and heritage concerns that have been raised with the EIS.
Inundating 65km more of wild rivers is not acceptable. NSW has an appalling record of species extinction, and this ill thought-out infrastructure will add to this process, with several endangered species and ecologies threatened.
The fact that the government could consider altering the borders of the world heritage area, shows how little they respect the natural environment, and how little they understand its degradation affects all of us.
The PIR has stated it will 'offset' environmental damage using the states 'offset scheme'. This scheme has been shown to be highly flawed, and almost totally ineffective. For the government suggesting it as an option just shows how insincere they are about addressing environmental concerns.
Economically this proposal is also flawed. Brisbanes Wivenhoe dam was built as flood mitigation, but now following multiple severe floods, the Queensland government has been forced to offer 'buy backs'. It would be much more prudent to spend the money upfront on buy-backs and the numerous other options that would help those living presently on the most severely affected areas.
And once again the first nations have not been adaquately consulted or their considerable concerns been adressed or even listened to.
For many reasons this infrastructure should not go ahead. To try to rush through such an enormous project before the next election is very poor governance, and the act of a very irresponsible government.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
i am writing to submit my disgust at the appalling political manipulation of the proposed heightening of the Warragamba Dam
This is not a good mitigation project!! The vast majority of inflow into the Nepean River occur downstream of the dam.
The world heritage status of the Blue Mountains will be threatened with upstream flooding as well as through enlargement of the catchment area. This will affect vegetation and biodiversity of the entire watershed.
This is purely a political stunt of a desperate government willing to sacrifice the environment in the pursuit of power.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the Warragamba damn wall for the following reasons: the report has dismissed the concerns of the community and govt agencies and ignored the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee as well as concerns held by Sydney Water and Health and Tradional Owners of over 1541 identified cultural Heritage sites. There are alternative options to raising the damn was but these hve not been adequately considered and raising the wall will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean valley floodplain where residential development never should have been considered in the first place. I do not live on the floodplain and am not directly affected by either flooding or the raising of the wall; however the Blue Mountains is a place I like to visit and walk, and I live in the vicinity of the Hawksbury river in an area sorrounded by National Park and I do care about our cultural and environmental heritage. I would not want this happening in my backyard, so why should it happen in someone elses.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Ahh! another grand plan to win votes in marginal electorates at tax payers expence. We've got a desal plant sitting in idle at Kurnell if you want water. Leave things as they are. Spend the money on flood proofing not flooding more native bushland. And what are going to do if a new raised dam overflows, keep raising it? Our states already in massive debt adding to it doesn't help. Think harder lads and ladies there has got to be a better way to resolve the problem.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Please consider the impacts of environmental damages this will incur not only for up stream fauna but also down stream affects.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the raising of the wall of the Warragamba Dam. Community concerns regarding this project have been largely ignored, which ngates any acceptance of the report's legitimacy. Again, the concerns of first nations peoples have been ignored. This project potentially harms any prospect for the protection of endangered species, specifically the regent honey-eater and Sydney emus. The flooding threatens ecological communities, unique eucalyptus species and one of our few remaining 'wild rivers, the Kowmung.
Resident in the Hawkesbury for for 12 years, the losses represented by the raising of the dam wall are unacceptable to me.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I pay tax l pay rates and I vote, the raising of the Warragamba Dam and destroying world Heritage (protected environment) is the most out rages proposal I have ever heard ! I will not stand by to watch environmental habitat destruction at this level, the habitat and wildlife loss would be too great , not to mention the refreshing mental health and enjoyment the people get from going to these amazing wilderness places after each week working in the crazy hustle and bussel of our world. My suggestion is to not raise the dam but to pay to monitor the water levels and releasing water at the appropriate time so as to not flood home's down stream Thank you for your time.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Ecosystems are the glue that keeps the world alive. Every living organism relies on ecosystems & nature to stay fit and healthy. Nature takes care of itself to keep everyone of us alive & happy. To mess with nature and raise Warragamba Dam wall will have a significant impact on people, ecosystems around them, nature , and the death of significant numbers of animals & plants. This will occur both upstream & downstream of the raised dam wall. Upstream areas will be flooded & downstream areas will be starved of usual water supplies & necessary flooding that keeps the river system clean & healthy.
As well as this, peoples economies & businesses (such as tourism) would be affected, world heritage listed areas flooded, aboriginal historic sites flooded, animals, plants, insects lives destroyed and their homes flooded and many other major impacts to ecosystems will occur both up and downstream of the raised dam.
The benefit of raising Warragamba Dam wall will be, in my opinion, to line the pockets of developers with money as they open up Sydney's farms, food supply & playground for development.
The negative impacts will far outweigh the gains.
River systems need to flood periodically to keep them healthy and raising the dam wall will interfere with the likelihood of floods occurring downstream of the dam. This is a negative impact, not a positive one. People need to be stopped from living in the natural flood plain of the Hawkesbury Nepean river , rather than messing with nature and raising the Warragamba dam wall. When man messes with nature, nature ultimately wins, as we can all see from the impact of climate change worldwide. We need to act now to retain all rivers in as healthy & natural state as much as possible, to enable the rivers to stay alive & healthy, both upstream & downstream of any existing dams. By caring for the Hawkesbury Nepean rivers to remain as natural as possible, this supports the whole population of Sydney, of people, animals & plants to stay alive & healthy.
If more homes are needed in Australia, they need to be built out of Sydney. Leave the Hawkesbury Nepean River System & floodplains as they are...a mostly healthy, bio diverse, ecosystem that sustains all the people, plants & animals of Sydney & beyond.
The only action that should be taken to any river systems, and in particular, the Hawkesbury Nepean River System, is to improve their natural capacity to sustain all life.
Yours sincerely,

The environmental impact will be far too high. Valuable ecosystems and aboriginal heritage sites will be destroyed. There are far better and more sustainable ways to secure water. Projects should be developed to recycling waste water. People should be encouraged to plant water wise lawns and gardens. Industry should be assisted to reduce water usage eg, invest in infrastructure and machinery with reduced water usage, recycle water.