Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
After reading many opinions on the subject of raising the Warragamba Dam wall I have come to the conclusion that it NOT a godd idea. For several reasons:
* A precious section of the Blue Mountains National Park would be destroyed, further threatening the survival of endangered species.
* Aboriginal sacred and artistic sites would be destroyed.
* A substantial amount of the water which floods the parts of Western Sydney which have been inundated on many occasions comes from other sources, and raising the wall of the dam would not fix the problem of water coming from other rivers and creeks which rise when heavy rain falls.
* It would be an inevitable consequenc of raising the dam wall that further development of the floodplain would occur. Then, when rivers and creeks not affected by the raising of the wall inundated the floodplains, damage occur to MORE houses than iscurrently the case.
Other solutions must be looked at more closely.
If the maximum allowable capacity were to be decreased, and desalination and much increased use of water recycling were undertaken to ensure Sydney's water supply, the raising of the wall would not be necessary.
The costings of these solutions must be formulated and comparisons made before the raising of the dam wall can be considered as a good solution.

It is rarely the case that there is only one solution to a problem and it is clear that viable alternatives have not been considered.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I object to the revised Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for raising the Warragamba Dam wall and ask that the NSW government respond to me regarding:
1. Reasons to why they NSW government or those involved in the decision are choosing to ignore the UNESCO World Heritage Committee recommendations and change the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park.
2. What considerations have been taken regarding:
- Unique eucalyptus species diversity recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing such as the Camden White Gum;
- The 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.
Please advise me who stand to profit off the further development of western Sydney floodplain and what funding is being considered for the impact being placed on Sydney’s last wild river - the mighty Kowmung - and what risk evaluation has been considered regarding this world treasure, Blue Mountains World Heritage Listing itself?
Additionally, please explain to me, why 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?
Please explain why 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal have been dismissed regarding our Aboriginal Cultural Heritage?
Please explain:
- why the alternative options to raising the Warragamba Dam wall that would protect existing floodplain communities are not beng considered?
- why a combined approach of multiple options has been ignored when it has in fact been recommended as the most cost-effective means of flood risk mitigation?
- why alternative options were not assessed in the EIS?
- why any alternatives assessments have not been taken into account regarding 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. What is the risk management and eviromental report and who is the arthority and what is their connection to the developer or the independant reporter?
Have you even see this area or any of the areas you are looking at destroying?
kowmung river national heritage - Search Images (bing.com)

I object to the revised Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for raising the Warragamba Dam wall. I ask that the NSW government respond to me regarding their reasons to why they are choosing to ignore the UNESCO World Heritage Committee recommendations and change the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park. what considerations have been taken regarding : 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. Please advise me who stand to profit off the further development of western Sydney floodplain and what funding is being considered for the impact being placed on Sydney’s last wild river - the mighty Kowmung - and risk evaluation has been considered regarding the public treasure, Blue Mountains World Heritage Listing itself? Additional please explain why 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?

To whom it may concern,
Please listen to all the Environmental scientists, and not raise the wall of Warragamba Dam wall.
The flooding will effect so much wilderness and wildlife. Our natural heritage urgently needs attention
Please investigate much more inervative ideas, water tanks for all, under homes, reducing the need for excess water.
Also more sophisticated flood mitigation ideas include more vegetation plantings, more piping away from this dam to other areas.
Hydro electricity for this dam would be great too.
So, no to raising the dam wall, and yrs to saving the wilderness and wildlife that would be flooded.
regards

Grace McGregor
Was a Sydney resisdent.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Leave the dam as it is! Wildlife and habitat matter more.
Yours sincerely,

see attached PDF

Please read the attached document.
Keith Muir

Keith Muir
48 Carlton St
Katoomba NSW 2780
Warragamba Dam Assessment Team
Planning and Assessment
Department of Planning and Environment
Locked Bag 5022
PARRAMATTA NSW 2124
Saturday 3rd December, 2022

To whom it may concern,
Submission as an objection to the Warragamba Dam Wall raising, its Preferred Infrastructure Report and response to submissions by WaterNSW
WaterNSW has failed to establish that the benefits from the proposed dam wall raising outweigh the impacts of the project. The rumour of possible changes to the boundaries of the World Heritage Area, for example, would be a legal niceity and fail to mitigate impacts on the heritage values now in World Heritage property. As you would be aware, the National Heritage Council is considering expansion of the World Heritage property and evaluating additional national heritage values, including cultural values. This assessment process is in tune with recognition of Aboriginal cultural values, and incorporation of that recognition means into decision making.
The Minister’s approval of a raised dam would on the other hand confirm what the former IUCN advisor on new World Heritage Areas, Dr Jim Thorsell claimed at the time of listing on the 29th of November, 2000 - that Australia will not adequately protect and manage this property, and as a result its listing would downgrade the cultural standing of World Heritage properties generally. Australia must not prove Dr Thorsell right.
The Burragorang Valley, its national parks and state conservation areas, is a markedly different landscape with different ecosystems compared to other parts of the World Heritage property. Similarly, the Coxs and Kowmung Rivers of Blue Mountains and Kanangra-Boyd National Park are landscapes characteristic of the hard Lachlan Orogeny rocks, not sandstones (i.e. very different from the Sydney Basin IBRA region). These reserves of the South Eastern Highlands IBRA region also offer visitors a different set of aesthetic experiences from the rest of the World Heritage Area. These areas are not just bits of bushland to be degraded by flood inundation. These areas all have World Heritage equivalent cultural and biodiversity values. The ruination by flood inundation of 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, and 5,700 hectares of National Parks, 1,300 hectares of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is unconscionable.
The well-deserved recognition, greater security, and management to the highest standard is the future World Heritage vision for the southern Blue Mountains.
Ours and future generations will benefit from deeper levels of understanding and involvement in the management that should be brought about by World Heritage listing of the Greater Blue Mountains, and through that active engagement our culture can offer hope for an environmentally sustainable future. WaterNSW’s damaging dam proposal cuts across that vision to provide more risky urban expansion on the floodplain. There is nothing environmentally sustainable about this proposal.
There are alternatives to dam wall raising, including the prevention of floodplain development. Australia can do better. We can respect the culture of Traditional Owners, and not inundate over 1500 identified cultural heritage sites with this proposal. We can keep people safe by building adequate escape routes and assist those who are on the floodplain to relocate or cope with floods. We can protect and enhance the World Heritage properties entrusted to us. We do not need to slide into environmental and cultural degradation.
Raising the dam wall does not stop floods, it creates a false sense of security that will lead to floodplain development, and ultimately more flood damage costs, not less. Urban design with nature means no more urban development on floodplain. This huge engineering solution only yields a perpetuation of the view that we can overcome floods, instead of live with them, and nature. It is a billion dollar false hope that stamps down the World Heritage idea and denies the huge task of climate change adaption that starts with a sense of humility as well as responsibility.
Don’t ruin World Heritage.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this National Heritage assessment process.
Yours faithfully,

Keith Muir

To whom it may concern,
I do not agree with the raising of Warragamba Dam. Raising the dam height will increase the size of the water held in the dam. Increased water surface area will result in increased evaporation, therefore reducing the effectiveness of trying to grow drinking water storage. Furthermore it will have an effect on the micro-climate of the area.
You must consider that this dam is in a World Heritage Listed area, and you have an obligation to honour that Heritage Listing. Drowning this Heritage listed land will only result in loss of habitat for our native flora and fauna.
Sydneys future water supply is secure due to the Desalination plant that has been built but hardly used. We do not need further storage because of this Desalination Plant.
Flood mitigation can be controlled by better management of the dam at its current height - just don't allow it to be 100% full, to enable a buffer in severe climatic events.
Even if you were to raise the dam, the slight increase in height would do little to prevent large (and ever more frequent) flood events.
Councils should not allow development in flood prone areas.
Spending a huge sum of money just to appease a few land holders downstream does not make economic sence.
The funds would be better spent on another desalination plant - if required (unlikely) if more drinking water is required. The flood control gains would be insignificant because the slight increase in wall height would do little to prevent flooding - as the experts have already explained.
I do not want my natural World Heritage Listed environment destroyed, just to line the pockets of developers, especially when there is so little to be gained from such huge expense.
Habitat is important!
This is the age when humans are finally starting to wake up to the fact that they have done a massive amount of damage to this planet, as proven by Climate Change. Projects like this only add to that damage.
I strongly oppose the raising of Warragamba Dam.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am writing this submission to support concerns against raising the Warragamba Dam wall height.
Reasons:
1. Nearly half the water does not eminate upstream of the dam's catchment, hence the raising of the wall height would not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley.
2. Aborignal sacred site would be destroyed.
3. Alternative options weere not assessed in the EiS.
4. Habitats of native fauna and flora would be destroyed.
5. Another World Heritage site would be destroyed.
6. The quality of Sydney's drinking water is likely to be seriously at-risk (as reported by Sydney Water and Health NSW)
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Far better to reduce carbon emissions which will help stabilise the weather fluctuations we are getting. And would this be the last "raising of the dam wall"?. Check in 5 years time!!!!
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am totally opposed to the raising of the Warragamba dam wall height.
Raising the dam will not prevent flooding in the Nepean Valley, 45% of floodwaters come from outside the dam catchment. Camden has been flooded many times this year but is well upstream from the Warragamba River.
It will have enormous impact upon World Heritage listed Blue Mountains National Park.
Impacts will include threats to endangered plants and animals, destruction of First Nation heritage sites.
Alternative flood mitigation options are available and the Government has ignored thousands of concerns raised by the community and government agencies.
All levels of government have to stop building housing in flood prone areas.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose in the strongest terms the raising of the wall of Warragamba Dam. I am very concerned and disappointed that the 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.
The raising of the wall will not mitigate the effects of flooding for buildings on the flood plain. It will have devastating consequences on Indigenous sites.
Political considerations must not be allowed to prevail and the wishes of the people, backed by scientific and Indigenous knowledge must be paramount,
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
As a Civil Engineer, family man and bushwalker I strongly oppose the raising of Warragamba Dam, it's an unnecessary project favouring developers and affecting wildlife, environment and National Park.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the proposal to raise the level of the dam as I believe that so doing will not protect the present residents from potential flooding the next time we get a major rain event. The flood waters don't only come from the Warragamba Dam water but also from other inputs, so that raising the wall would not ultimately prevent flooding at some future event.
When making a decision about the raising of the wall, there are many subsidiary facts that are also necessary to remember.
The second report does not take into consideration many of these facts which were presented in the first report.
The UNESCO advice is apparently being ignored, which is shameful.
The aboriginal traditional owners are once again being isnored, again a shameful state of affairs.
The only reason I can see for raising the wall seems to be to pacify greedy land developers who will 'get rich quick' if such a scheme goes ahead.


Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I object to the raising of the dam wall as it will adversely affect the environment. This will not solve the root cause of the problem, namely that land was released for housing in a flood plain. At the time, the government knew that this was a floodplain and that the houses would be flooded every so often. The land release in the flood plain should never have been done. The most cost effective solution would be to buy out the affected house owners and return the land to either environmental use or to farming.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I wish to lodge my continued oppostion to this poorly planned & totally unecessary project that will forever change the natural wilderness that Sydney has on it's Western boundary.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
We must not go forward with the raising of the dam. This will cause detrimental side effects to the ecosystem.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
This new report on Warragamba dam wall raising doesn't address community concerns. The NSW government is kowtowing to developers in getting this outrageous expenditure of public money over the line. This obviously, is nothing new but the fact the government continues to blatantly put the profits of big business before community and the environment is disturbing.
The current flooding should indicate that housing should not be built on low floodplains regardless of the size of the dam. How many houses need to be ruined and how much water and wetlands need to be polluted before councils and governments will change their policies on floodplain management? The current conditions should point to better building and better housing policies instead of Band-Aid approaches such as spending billions on raising dam walls that will not solve any problems but worsen environmental conditions, harm indigenous sites and help push threatened species over the line to extinction.
Yours sincerely,

Dear Minister,
I strongly oppose raising the Warragamba Dam.
The project is not only unecessary but it will not result in the benefits that are promised. In addition the negative effects of the project are very significant and are in no way justified. Finally this project is not supported by the vast majority of citizens of NSW. I have reason to believe that many voters will vote against the government if this project proceeds.
Report after report has shown that this project will be ineffective in stopping flooding. Not only does nearly half the lower Hawkesbury floodwater bypass the dam, but changes to weather, climate and lengthening flood records are now seriously questioning the mapped flood levels. What are now 1 in 100 year (or more accurately called 1%) flood levels are incorrect and may be redrawn as much higher frequency.
Given the recent floods it is likely that areas which were seen as "safe" are very likely to go under water whether the dam is built or not. The effect of climate change is going to excerbate this outcome. As a result properties in this valley will probably need to be re-purchased by the government in years to come, with this cost outweighing any short term benefits to any parties. Existing and potential homeowners need to be spared the cost and trauma of floods and must not be allowed to occupy the land.
As the dam won't solve any flooding problem it must be asked why the government supports it? The only clear benefits are short term financial goals to some companies and misplaced political assessments.
In the meantime the damage from raising the dam are significant and irreversible. The project looks very like the Tasmanian Government's decision to change park boundaries and flood Lake Pedder 50 years ago. This is 50 year old thinking on a similar project also with no benefit. If this project is approved those who do so will be pariahs in our society. Infamous in history.
The damage is well documented, the project is ineffectual, the benefits are non-existent (except to developers). Residents are being duped.
Stop this project right now. Enough money has been wasted.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Please do not raise the height of the Warragamba Dam Wall. It will destroy too much in the Burragorang Valley and will not stop flooding downstream as a lot of the floodwater comes from Eastern Creek, Grose River and Colo River.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly object to the proposed raising of the Waragambe Dam wall

Yours sincerely,