Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
The Warrangamba dam should not be increased. Nature and cultural heritage should come first.
This matter is very important.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I hope another 60km of rivers aren't flooded Surely enough is flooded already.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Once again the traditional owners have not been consulted, which will mean major destruction of major World Heritage sites ! Also thousands of opposing petitions have been sidelined fraudulently ! The PIR report is not an alternative & we the people oppose this propostion, until a more practical solution is found !


Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I object to the raising of the Warragamba dam wall as it will not solve the flooding issue and will cause damage to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. It will also cause damage to threatened species and indigenous cultural sites.
I support spending the money on better roads and buy back schemes rather than on raising the dam wall.
For years I have walked and camped in the Blue Mountains area and learnt about this precious environment.
This government professes to want to protect the environment but then does not carry that out by actively allowing destruction of natural areas by government agencies.
Please do not go ahead with this silly idea.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I do not support this destructive dam project.
Previous community concerns have been dismissed. The report justifies the destruction of our World Heritage and this is not on. I am particularly concerned about the Regent Honeyeater which is critically endangered and its breeding ground will be impacted. This cannot be allowed to happen.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I do NOT support the raising of Warragamba Dam wall. It destroys World Heritage and is designed to benefit developers. It is disgraceful that this plan is being considered. I urge you to leave the dam wall at its present height; DO NOT raise the dam wall.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I do NOT support raising Warragamba Dam.
I am appalled by the government's track record of dismissing community concerns, government agency submissions to the initial EIS, serious concerns about water quality raised by Sydney Watern and Health NSW, as well as the government's intention to ignore the advice of the UN World Heritage Committee by changing the boundaires of the BM World Heritage Area.
I am deeply distressed by the ignorance and wilful destruction of precious and unique nature, threatened ecological communities and critically endangered species - all for extremely questionable goals and outcomes that either could be achieved better differently (despite ignoring those alternative options in the EIS) or are based on faulty assumptions, with 45% of floodwaters outside the upstream Warragamba catchment.
The Premier's catch phrase of 'people over plants' summarised this fundamentally flawed and derogative approach to our natural heritage. It is lacking any understanding of the true value of the public assets involved and massively overstating the benefits of an extremely expensive project.
I resent such poor public policy and monetary decisions for which there is no public mandate. I request for the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam to be denied.
Thank you for considering my submission.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of Warragamba's dam walls for the following reasons:-
that it will not do what the government in its haste thinks it will. The dam will have to release water anyway when filling and more water in storage in wet times will make this worse.
that development in the flood plain below should go ahead is just stupid regardless of wall raising. There is little contemplation of the future in this.
there are legitimate environmental concerns for the above catchment that will be inundated and for aboriginal sites involved.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,

I object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall which is being pushed on our State politicians by developers who falsly claim this will make it safer for residents homes located in flood plains downstream under extreme future flood conditions. There simply should be no housing development in these flood prone areas! Raising the dam wall will destroy much natural land in the new dam lakes thus created
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the raising of the Warragamba dam wall on the basis of the damage it will do to natural and indigenous cultural assets in the inundation area. Please prevent this from happening.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I write to express my firm opposition to the proposedx raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.
The proposed increase in the height of the dam will have minimal impact on flood reduction - and in fact will almost certainly result in increased risk, by encouraging further development on flood prone lands.
However the raised dam wall would certainly achieve the destruction of priceless World Heritage wilderness, including periodic inundation of the lower Kowmung River.
This is not only a waste of public funding, it is an apalling misuse of public funds and it must not be allowed to occur.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I have been alerted that the revised EIS, Preferred Infrastructure Report (PIR), in regards to the Warragamba Dam, has all but dismissed the 2,500 submissions opposing the dam project, siding instead with the interests of western Sydney’s floodplain developers to proceed with the project.

Like the original EIS, this new report severely downplays the effects of upstream inundation, which would endanger countless plant and animal species, destroy Sydney’s last wild river - the mighty Kowmung - and risk the Blue Mountains World Heritage Listing itself.
By declaring the project Critical State Significant Infrastructure, and attempting to ensure the dam wall raising is approved, ignores the chorus of community opposition, and ignores the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee to change the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park.
This tax-payer funded scheme will ultimately benefit only the property developers, who stand to profit off the further development of western Sydney floodplain.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
i object to this proposal on the basis:
of the destruction of the endangered ecosystem of the blue mountains unesco world heriatge
of the destruction of cultural heritage
of the corruption and lack of transparency concerning the decision of raising the wall

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I OPPOSE any extension or increase in THE DAM. As a former coordinator of the Coxs River Catchment I have walked the Kowmung River and am aware of the importance of the quality of the pristine waters that flow to supply Sydney's water. All this wilderness would be destroyed for us and future generations - not just humans but the biosphere. This is not just an environmental issue, it is an eco-justice issue - rivers and wild places have rights as well. This is one of the few wild places so close to Sydney. It is also a social justice issue for the traditional owners and custodians of this land, the Gundurrung people who have lived on and protected the lands for millenniums. Finally, raising the wall will not prevent flooding downstream with 45% of floodwaters derived from other rivers. An EIS is required before anything proceeds.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I'm writing to express my strong opposition to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. The proposal shows complete disregard for the ecosystems of the area, and their hardwon world heritage status. It sets a dangerous precedent for developments in protected areas, given that it should be protected at the highest level.
There is no need for the permanent destruction of areas such as this. I grew up in the Blue Mountains, going on fishing trips to the Kowmung River. It deserves to stay wild.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am strongly opposed to the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall.
Rather than write a lengthy submission that will be left unread, I will put my objections into clear and concise dot points.
1. Raising the dam wall will not prevent the flooding of properties along the Hawksbury and connecting rivers.
2. From a risk mitigation perspective, the flood plains should not be built on and the area should be redesigned to help protect existing properties e.g. collection channels to hold and release flood waters.
3. The World Heritage area must not be flooded. I have walked in the Kowmung River area, it clearly has unique flora and fauna that is irreplaceable.
4. The area that will be flooded has special significance to the Traditional Owners and deliberate damage to their heritage cannot be reconciled.
5. Warragamba Dam is designed for water storage and not flood mitigation. Experts agree that dams cannot serve both functions. Political influence will prevent the release of water when necessary and ultimately the dam will fill to the new capacity and even more devastation will occur.
The most effective risk mitigation strategy is elimination of the risk, and the only way to prevent the flooding of homes in the flood plains is to buy back the land and prohibit the development of property in the areas likely to be affected by future floods.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. My reasons for this are as follows:-
Large areas of our National Parks will be inundated by water if this project goes ahead. This will adversely impact the Kowmung wild river and threaten endangered flora and fauna. Once lost this will never be recovered.
45% of floodwaters come from areas outside of the Warragamba Dam catchment. So flooding will still ocurr downstream. There are other alternatives which need to be explored and evaluated.
As a long term Sydney resident and frequent visitor and bushwalker in the Blue Mountains and adjoining areas, I want those areas preserved as they are now for my grandchildren and future generations. This is too important an issue to be driven by the desire for further floodplain development.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I do not believe that raising the Warragamba Dam is a suitable solution to Sydney's flooding problem. I believe it is a decision that brings benefits to some, and none to most. I like the solution of gradually letting the levels go down by releasing water slowly in a safe and measured way. AT LEAST TRY THIS METHOD FIRST and see how successful it is.
The funds that would be used on raising the dam could be better spent on housing flood victims and relocating residents in flood prone areas.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the construction of the heightened dam wall.
Having just completed reading the history of the Nepean and Hawkesbury rivers, written by Professor Grace Karskens, flooding in these river systems is infamous. We know that Governor Macquarie spent an inordinate amount of his time during his time in Sydney trying to convince people to move to higher ground but the reluctance to listen to nature is still alive today in the minds of the developers of the low lying housing estates and the people who purchase these properties.
While there are many things wrong, in my mind, with this proposal, the arrogance I absorb when I read this new Preferred Infrastructure Report is astounding. The brutality of the proposal towards the endangered birds and trees, the loss of aboriginal heritage sites (again) and the destruction of many hectares of both the national park and the World Heritage Area, are to me unbelievable.
The emphasis of the report itself, whch is line with its stated objectives, is about the saving of lives from floods. One of the heralded triumphs is that the dam wall will give people an extra hour to get over the Windsor bridge before it goes under. Surely the evacuation plans should not require the destruction of so much in order to save lives.
But just saving lives is a one dimensional view of this. What value does heritage play in the well being of our lives? How does one weigh up just saving a life to the quality of all our lives in the future. What disappointment will be felt in the future when we realise that we may lose so much by the one-eyed view of developments such as this. This report does nothing to discuss the possibility of equating all of our general well being as opposed to the saving of one life. This may sound callous but there will be a great loss of everything that we cherish and make our world the special place it is for the sake of saving people.
I am also particularly concerned with the aspect of the offsets to the land that will be lost here. The report does not make any attempt to specify which country will be used as offsets to this destruction. There isn't any country which is like this and in which these endangered species will live. There is a reason they are where they are. Just buying 1400 hectares of land somewhere else just doesn't cut it.
I am a bushwalker and have been for nearly sixty years and have spent considerable time in the country to the west of the dam, particularly the Kowmung River country. In July this year, I walked the 14 kilometres from the Megalong Valley to the legally accessible point where the dam water ends to see what was at stake. It is no wonder the World Heritage Committee considers this country to be worthy of saving for the world. But we see this proposal quickly dismisses the value of this area and the immense well being this brings to everyone, not just vistors like myself. For the sake of a population which should never have built on the areas it now occupies, we are prepared to dump it. Yes no one lives there we know but we must preserve areas like this for our future generations and not trash them.
I am very worried about the destruction of the bottom six kilometres of the Kowmung River, one of our few wild rivers left. We don't have very many wild rivers left and the loss of any part of these rivers is disastrous. And its not that the water will be there all the time; when floods occur we will see the river fill (along with the Coxs) and then when the overfill is released, we will be left with a complete eyesore until the next flood arrives. How does any animal living there adjust to this irregular destruction of their habitat?
This report reads like an engineer's report on what they are going to do, not what they could do and it dismisses the very heavy price we have to pay.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam wall, for the following reasons:
- the natural environment, including flora and fauna, will be damaged and some of it lost entirely;
- because of the above, the area's World Heritage status will be compromised;
- the area's traditional owners have expressed serious concerns about the effect it will have on their sacred sites, which will be lost or damaged;
- it is possible that the quality of Sydney's drinking water will be compromised;
- alternatives to the raising of the dam wall may be available, but have not been adequately discussed in the environment impact statement.
I have many friends who live in the Blue Mountains area who may be affected by the damage the dam will cause to the environment, and I enjoy bush walking in the area myself.
Yours sincerely,