Warragamba Dam Raising

Please see attached submission

I believe Chapter 15 requires more investigations regarding the influence of multi flood events in a given year and how this may prove to be a failure of for the purpose of raising Warragamba Dam. Check the history of multi flood events in a given month, successive months and separated months in a given year in the recorded flood history of the floods at Windsor.
There needs to be more investigations on the influence of the Nepean and other rivers for the future flooding events if no water comes from Warragamba as there will be false hope and expectations of residents and property owners along the Hawkesbury -Nepean Valley.

To whom it may concern,
Accept the past mistakes of approving the building of homes on a floodplane and stop using "quick fixes" to placate people to win their votes.
Instead put in long term solutions that show respect to our amazing environment.
Avoid going down in Australian history as the state government that approved this environmental folly.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
To whom reads this
I send my best wishes to you
I am asking that the Warragamba Dams level stay the same.
Educate the peoples to manage their water usage and care for climate.
Leave the surrounding environment alone is is World Heritage and why do you need to raise the dam?
• 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.
• Please leave the Dam Wall at the height it is 🙏🏽
Yours sincerely,

Please leave the Warragamba Dam alone and stop raising the level of the Dam.

To whom it may concern,
Please don't raise Warragambs Dam it won't stop downstream flooding, but it will destroy World Heritage and historic aboriginal areas.
We are paying the penalty for poor planning decisions and causing global warming because we have put profit before the planet and people.
This needs to be reversed . People and the Planet should always be the top priorities.
A. P. Shrimpton
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am a local Blue Mountains resident.
The raising of the Warragamba Dam wall flies in the face of all evidence collected to date. It is simply a political decision to assist developers to make more money.
It is not an evidenced-based decision.
As a resident of the Blue Mountains, it would be a tragedy to lose any precious habitat for our native plants and wildlife. Specifically, the habitat of the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater, which I have been involved in protecting for over 10 years. Please dont proceed as the implications for this beautiful bird will mean extinction.
Also, we must listen to the voices of the traditional owners of this land and the effect flooding will have on significant sites for their people.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Dear Premier and Ministers,
It is my opinion that raising the Warragamba dam wall in the hope it will mitigate flooding downstream is misguided.
Recent rain events in various parts of the country have shown that the amount of rain that can be delivered over a short period is increasing rapidly. We have to anticipate that rain events over the nepean river catchment will be sufficient to create major flooding over the areas downstream of the Dam that the raised Warragamba dam wall is intended to prevent.
The Nepean catchment is such a large area there is no way to contain the water that will no doubt in the future deluge that catchment. Flooding downstream of any dam on the warrgamba river is going to become more frequent and more severe. due to water from the Nepean catchment.
Rather than raise the dam wall. the funding should be diverted to build sufficient desalination plants powered by renewable energy which would allow the existing dam to be maintained at a level below the spillway that allows it to absorb the same volume of additional water in a flood event as the raiding of the dam wall would add to capacity.
This will also make Sydney less dependent on rainfall for its drinking water in future droughts.
Further, where possible and practicable, the foundations of existing housing in the floodplain should be raised to a level above anticipated floods. New housing should be constructed on raised piers with the design allowing further raising if required in the future. Alternatively, existing ground floor areas of slab-on-ground buildings shoud be adapted to be able to survive the expected flooding istructurally intact while upper levels remain dry.
Single storey structures may have additional levels added to provide flood safe zones.
It will have to be accepted that it wil not be economic to save or adapt the majority of at risk properties.
The solution to, this will have to be found regardless of the dam wall being raised.
So far, I believe Nature is giving us increasingly less gentle hints as to what is going to come to us in floods and fires.
Wasting money on raising the Dam Wall, while we can do nothing about the flooding that will come from the Nepean catchment will seem naiive and foolish in a future where we will wish we had spent the money on adapting the existing buildings and building new buildings to the height to survive expected floods.
Land on the flood plain is already less valuable and becomong uninsurable. Some well informed people may still wish to build in flood risk areas and be prepared to pay the addional building costs to build to above the flood levels.
Road infrastructure for emergency evacuation of the flood risk population will also need to be improved.
Raising the Dam Wall, seems like a great idea, as if doing one very expensive thing will make climate change flooding go away.
It wont. Its a fools paradise. It wont convince people or win votes. The weather changes and record floodings are on TV for everybody to see. Towns such as Lismore are basically having to be relocated to higher ground.
Changes to the intensity of the weather are accelerating.
We have to make brave decisions. Raising the Dam wall is a misguided solution driven by our desperation to find an easy fix. I believe flooding can not be prevented for the floodplain. We have to accept the fact that we dont really know what is ahead with rainfall intensity and floods I am sure it will be much worse than we think now. we have to prepare for the unknown.
It may be that much of the Nepean and Hawkesbury settlements will have to be abandoned.
The investment on raising the dam would will look very foolish when torrents of flood water start pouring over the raised wall while the downstrean townships are already underwater as will no doubt happen regularly from floodwater from the Nepean Catchment.
Its gonna Flood. Better spend money on the buildings to help them survive if they can.
David Moore
Bachelor of Engineering (Univ Syd)

To whom it may concern,
I live in the Blue Mountains and I am totally opposed to the raising of Warragamba Dam wall. The state government has received submissions about this issue from me in the past, and as I understand it from at least 2,500 community members, stating our concerns about the proposal.
The government proposes to ignore all of these community concerns as well as the paramount concerns of traditional owners about sacred sites that will be flooded and traditional land that will be lost.
The government is also ignoring advice from the UNESCO World Heritage Committee about how the proposal will threaten the world heritage listing of Blue Mountains National Park as well as concerns held by Sydney Water and Health NSW on how the proposed elevated dam wall would effect Sydney's drinking water and advice from a range of independent engineers that the project will not even work to mitigate flooding in the Hawkesbury region.
There are alternative options involving multiple approaches that have been advised as more likely to achieve the desired flood mitigation. Again, all other options have been ignored in favour of this single destructive proposal.
This is an ill-advised project that represents the interests of no one besides developers who stand to make money from selling more land on a flood plain. The state government must publically justify its decision before pushing ahead with this destructive proposal.
Yours sincerely,

Mon 5/12/2022 @ 2:48 PM
To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall, which seems to be an example of the State Government attempting to drive a political wedge into Labor in election season.
The EIS pays undue attention to the questionable downstream benefits of raising the wall, but very little weight to the dire upstream consequences, namely inundation of rare and priceless virgin bush, a wild unregulated river and the many species of flora and fauna (some gravely endangered), that depend on this unique environment.
This is aside from destruction of indigenous cultural sites. But of course it's harder to protect these places than it is to simply stick an Indigenous flag atop the Harbour Bridge.
The Perrotet Government will come out of this on the wrong side of history if it proceeds. It will be remembered as the most environmentally vandalistic government on modern memory.
This will be NSW's Franklin Dam. Or perhaps its Lake Pedder.
Up to you, Premier.
Yours sincerely,

Fri 2/12/2022 @ 10:42 PM
To whom it may concern,
I'll be brief: surely we have progressed as a "civilised society" to a point where we no longer coldly destroy vast swathes of forest and the brilliant array of life it supports and nurtures.
Surely we are better than that. Aren't we?
We will be seen as a brutish pariah nation if we raise the Warragamba Dam wall. Deservedly so.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am astonished that I have to write this email as the evidence against raising the Warragamba Dam is extensive.
There are many alternative cost effective and less damaging ways to minimsie flood risks and it is clear you are not thoroughly assessing the comments and submissions by the community and even Sydney Water and Health regarding water quality.
The proposal will destroy parts of the World Heritage Area which sets a terrible precedent. The outcomes will be disasterous for many endangered species and ecological communities. As a regular walker in the area our group will no longer visit the area which will also have adverse impacts on local businesses.
One would have thought that after the destruction by Rio Tinto of cultural assets (Caves) you would take notice of the Traditional Owners and not destroy the 1541 identified cultural sites.
I hope you will reassess this proposal and involve the community and scientific community in the decision making.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I wish to object to thr proposed raising of the wall of the Warragamba Dam. It will NOT stop flooding on the floodplain below the dam - much of the water that floods that area comes from water courses below the dam. It WILL damage Aboriginal heritage areas. It WILL damage important areas wilderness of significant importance for biodiversity. Building on floodplains must be stopped.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Raising the Warragamba Dam is a lose/ lose plan. The deep flaws in the concept has been comprehensively shown. It destroys world heritage unique habitat which is irreplaceable (not just"plants" Mr Perrotet) and solves nothing. It's stupid politicking and and has no place in rational discussion.
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
Stop this madness.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the Warragamba dam for the following reasons:
• The report has all but dismissed the concerns raised in 2,500 community and government agency submissions to the initial EIS in 2021, and in some cases expert submissions were not even addressed
• The report has announced NSW Government intention's to ignore the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee by changing the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park World Heritage Area.
• The serious concerns held by Sydney Water and Health NSW about the effects the dam project would have on Sydney's drinking water quality have been dismissed in the report.
• The report has again disregarded the concerns of Traditional Owners, not including important information about sacred sites that would be flooded.
• 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.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Raising Warragamba Dam is not going to stop flooding in our regions. Fighting climate change actively and directly may help, we won't know until we really fight climate change head on.
One of the combatants to climate change is maintaining and supporting our natural environment and wildlife, not destroying it with concrete structures.
Please do not raise Warragamba Dam, it will destroy more than it will save.
We must respect our planet and Nature. We are responsible for generations to come and need to stop taking more than we give to our planet.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the Warragamba Dam Raising Project. Our World Heritage and National Parks must not be decimated.
There are alternatives to raising the Warragamba Dam wall which would not impact on the environment and floodplain communities.
Traditional owners must not be ignored. There are cultural heritage sites that would be flooded by the dam proposal.
Since I was a child I have been visiting and holidaying in in this wonderful, wild heritage area. It saddens me that short-sighted decision makers intend to destroy it.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Warragamba Dam was never established to mitigate flooding across the Hawkesbury Nepean floodplain. It's for water supply.
There are two other significant sources of major River water input that both contribute to flooding on the floodplain.
Well before the current dam was built, Governor Phillip strongly advised people in the 1800s not to develop farms and houses on the floodplain, becuase it was 'a floodplain'.
Early European settlers experienced the floodplain functioning as it had been naturally designed and subsequently documented flooding events; as a flooplain.
I support and back up all of the environmental and cultural heritage reasons that support not raising Warragamba Dam.
However in addition to those obvious reasons; is that you will be killing people in the future, and be responsible for that.
The people who purchase downstream on the new available and affordable land, will be people from non-english speaking backgrounds, people that are after the affordable australian dream, and people that are socio-economically disadvantaged...
You know all of this already.
They will die as a result of being allowed to buy and build on a floodplain, with their children and pets and small farm livestock.
As the decision makers of today you will either be retired or dead by the time these results of your decisions come to fruition - so it will be a future problem that you won't be able to be held accoutable for.
Current landholders and old-timers who appreciate they are liviing on a floodplain, have respect for that and manage it accordingly as it has been happening for the last 200years of settlement. Newer people that have bought into the area do not know they live on a floodplain, and future people will have absolutely no idea what a floodplain even is, let alone how to deal with the next flood (on their floodplain). The proposal is criminal.
Once the development envelope is opened up, people will assume they are just buying a piece of cheaper-ish suburbia - with no alert to any risks of living on a floodplain, nor what that means for themselves or their families.
The Insurance Council won't insure, so effectively WTF is the government thinking? 'Critical Infrastructure' - I don't think so.
I cry when I think about what will very predicatly occur should this proposal proceed. It is so very predicatable.
People will die. Lots of people will die. Properies will be lost. Homes and livelihoods will be impacted. Animals and stock will be drowned and lost.
It's criminal for so many reasons.
Once you sign this legislative approval you will either go to hell or have a bitch of karma pecking at you constantly for the remainder of your living days.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I object to The proposal to raise the height for the Warragamba Dam wall.
There are many reasons for my view. One is that it is time to accept that the flooding of the Plains downstream is a natural process that has occurred for millennia. The regular flooding has laid down silt, making the area one of the most productive for food farming. The idea that the wall should be raised to enable more housing is short-sighted and ridiculous.

Upstream of the existing dam wall is the Blue Mountains World Heritage area. Raising the wall will lead to the flooding of a large area of currently protected land.. this is most horrifying as it will leaad to the loss of pristine natural bushland including endangered ecological communities found nowhere else . The deaths of many animals must follow, not only the known iconic species such as koalas and Greater Gliders, platypus and echidna but the less noticed birds, insects and reptiles.
There will be loss of many special places and ways through. The Kowmung River for example will disappear along with the tracks that connect Oberon to Kanangra walls.
Cultural history from both the long term occupation of the land by the Abooriginal people and many remains from the days of tge early white settlement. My ancestors farrmed in the Burragorang Valley and their graves have already been moved once.
Warragamba Dam was not designed of built for flood mitigation. There is substantial evidence that the raising of the wall will have little effect on the downstream flooding, much off which comes from the tributaries below the wall.
Yours sincerely,

As detailed in my formal submission to the 2021 consultation, I remain totally opposed to this proposal. At a direct cost of some $1.6 Billion and similar staggering indirect costs, the project does not stack up economically - particularly as only some 45% of the flooding is attributable to the Warragamba catchment area itself: so recurrent flooding events would still occur - the inevitable outcome of enabling "marginal" building development on a floodplain. Worse, the panacea of dam raising may create an illusion of "flood-proofing" which adds to developmental pressures and worsens rather than resolves the situation. More than offsetting any chimerical benefits, not only is the consequent vast and irreversible environmental destruction in the World Heritage Areas of the Blue Mountains utterly unacceptable in terms of State and Federal Environmental Legislation and of Australia's international responsibilities, and of its disregard for destruction of indigenous cultural sites and failure to engage with or obtain approval from Traditional Owners , but both Sydney Water and Health NSW have published dire prognostications of the negative impacts on Sydney's potable water supply, and implications for public health and well-being. From no perspective does this project stack up; and self-evidently must be put on hold and exhaustively reconsidered from the ground up with input from all affected areas of expertise.

To whom it may concern
There is no benefit in raising the Warragamba Dam Wall (WDW)
Flooding of the Nepean/Hawkesbury river system existed long before the construction of the WDW, and it is naive to think raising the WDW will stop flooding.
The Dam will still fill and overflow from major rain events as it always has, no matter what height the wall is raised.
My question is, what happens when the emergency storage volume is full?

Raising the WDW also raises the risk level for catastrophic floods downstream.
The NSW Government must stop development approval on known flood plains and better plan NSW's future.

Other reasons for objecting the project
- Aboriginal cultural heritage, which has not been assessed, and goes against a foundational principle of heritage management.
- Flooding of "what's left" of Burragorang valleys historical history. (Joorilands etc)
- Access to fire roads

The project is a waste of taxpayers money and only benefits a small proportion of the NSW population.

rTo whom it may concern,
As a staunch supporter of the Liberal Party I am now of the opinon that this government needs to go.
The dam wall should not be raised. It is against all principles and values of the World Heritage Area and a breach of our agreement with UNESCO.
The liberal party these days seemingly wants to develop without looking at the big picture. These values are not in synque with the values the world is now striving for.
Do not raise the dam wall, instead look to booming areas like Orange. When the rain stops their infrastructure will fall short.

Yours sincerely,