Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I would like to comment on the plan to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam.
I think that this is a politcally-motivated idea, unsupported by science. It the event of a heavy rain event when the new dam is close to full, there will still be flooding downstream. For this, you would be inundating a significant part of a world heritage area, ruining the habitat of endangered wildlife.
Flooding is a natural part of the Nepean Valley. The current restrictions on residential development should be strengthened, not influenced by the demands of developers.
Yours sincerely,
James Moule

To whom it may concern,
I do not believe that raising the existing Waragamba Dam wall is the best option for protecting downstream properties on the flood plain. In a perfect world, those existing at-risk properties would/should never have been cleared or approved for construction there in the first place. There is certainly no justification whatsoever for any proposal to raise the dam wall to attempt to mitigate a likely flood risk for any new housing development on the flood plain. That would be the epitome of stupidity. It may be better to investigate some means of controlling flood waters from the Nepean system (waters not affected by the existing dam anyway), a major risk that will not be addressed even if the dam wall was raised.
Such developments as this poorly concieved dam raising proposal should never have progressed past the initial 'idea' phase in the first place, if for no other reason that the areas affected by enlarging the dam would undoubtedly have on the World Heritage status of that wilderness. World Heritage assets should be forever protected from, and completely immune to, such outlandish development proposals, particularly in a region so important to our Aboriginal traditional owners, who have suffered enough already at 'our' hands.
I and many of my friends regularly walk, canyon, climb, and abseil throughout the Blue Mountains (and Wollemi, and Kanangra-Boyd) National Park. It is a unique and very special place, both for its own sake, and for the recreational opportunities afforded virtually right next to Australia's largest and heaviest populated city. This will become even more important down the years, as Sydney's population continues to grow, by both 'in-country' births, and continuing migration.
Courage takes many forms, and political courage is hugely appreciated, recognised, and rewarded by the electorate. I call on our state politicians and like authorities to have the courage to step away from this ill-concieved "plan" to desecrate and deluge a precious national and international asset.
Yours sincerely,
Blue Phillips

To whom it may concern,

I deeply value the natural environment of the blue mts - and all systems are under pressure due to fires, habitat loss, and climate change.
I study this as a doctor of public health, and I can confirm that unless environmental impacts are studied including recent fire impacts, stress impacts of climate, threatened species studies etc etc, our environment systems will continue to be degraded - possibly with loss of world heritage....
please act for the good of all our environment futures
Yours sincerely,
Mel Crane

To whom it may concern,
I am appalled at the idea of raising the dam wall. We have few remaining areas of wilderness left IN THE WORLD. I do not wish to see Australia contributing more to the destruction of its wilderness and the planet than it is already renowned for. Our record for extinction of animals is one of the highest in the world.
I question why no impact studies have been conducted post the fires and floods of 2019, and the studies that have been done are by a firm with a dodgy reputation.
Flooding of these areas will destroy ecosystems and habitat of our diminishing wildlife, and decrease one of the few places they are free to roam in. The river systems, such as the Kowmung, that supply this dam are one of the few least damaged water ways left in NSW, and are truly remakable and beautiful places. I have spent a lot of time on this river an love its beauty and peace. Its bad enough we will soon have large aircraft flying over us in this area, let alone a regular flood to destroy this beauty. As we have seen after the fires, the flood damage has had extensive impact on the bush.
The flooding will also decrease bushwalking areas, due to the 3km "no go zone" around the Warragamba catchment high water level, further limiting areas of recreation for the many people who enjoy the diverse landscape of this WORLD HERITIGE LISTED AREA. A title we are at risk of losing because of government disrespect.
I also question why we have spent billions of dollars of a desalination plant at Kurnell, that is now being regarded as a white elephant. The only reason to raise the dam wall is so developers can build more houses on a already known flood plain.And then complain about the drama and cost of it being flooded in the next uncontrolled downpour. What about the water that pours down the Gross river and the Colo river and the many side creeks as well?? I believe this contributes to nearly half of the water flow.
Also being ignored is the cultural value of aboriginal site within the area, but hey, lets just blow them up like Rio Tinto did. oh no, sorry, you will flood them instead.
Really, it is time governments of Australia need to be caring for our planet and its species, and developing preservation policies to protect world heritage areas for their children and grandchildren, and the survival of species that are unable to defend themselves.

Yours sincerely,
Ruth East

To whom it may concern,
I would like to object to this proposal for the following reasons:
• The engineering firm (SMEC Engineering) who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project have an established history abusing Indigenous rights, recently being barred from the world bank.
• Severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken.
• Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
• Threatened species surveys are substantially less than guideline requirements. Where field surveys were not adequately completed, expert reports were not obtained.
• No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.
• The integrity of the environmental assessment is fundamentally flawed, and cannot be accepted as a basis for further decision-making by the Minister for Planning.
The Blue Mountains World Heritage area is not just a world class National Park, in 2000 it was inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage list in recognition of its Outstanding Universal Value for the whole of mankind. Raising the Warragamba dam wall and consequent damage to natural and cultural values would be a clear breach of these undertakings and Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention.
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.
Gundungurra Traditional Owners have not given free, prior, and informed consent for the dam proposal to succeed.
• 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.
Alternatives exist to raising the dam wall.
• There are many alternative options to 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.
• Alternative options were not comprehensively assessed in the EIS. 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.
Yours sincerely,
Martin Oliver

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the raising of the dam wall at Warragamba Dam.
Raising the water level, even on occasions, will irreversibly damage the World Heritage values of the Greater Blue Mountains causing loss of habitat and erosion and spread of weeds typical of these dams with fluctuating water levels.
It will not prevent flooding on the Nepean River. While many developers will argue it will allow existing floodplain areas to be developed this is untrue. Developing the floodplain will place more families at risk of flooding in extreme weather events, which are already becoming more common due to climate change.
It will also not significantly improve Sydney's water security.
The values of the Blue Mountains are already being compromised by the Western Sydney airport development and this flooding will further degrade those values.
There are better and cheaper alternatives to this development and they should be implemented.

To whom it may concern,
My family and I believe the raising of the dam is abhorrent. The permanent damage to our natural resources vastly out weighs the poorly conceived benefits of the dam raising being opening more areas for development which will still suffer from flooding risks despite any dam raising. Our goal should be creating resilient sustainable cities, not development that is of high risk, destructive and benefits and profits a wealthy minority. Our remaining natural resources should be preserved not destroyed for unsustainable development.

To whom it may concern, (please note this has been submitted but I'm required to submit again) -

I am very concerned that this project can detrimentally affect the environmental and cultural values of the Blue Mountains National Park and that the Gundungurra Traditional Owners have not given 'free, prior and informed consent' for the dam proposal to proceed or been fully consulted, despite the assessment that over 1500 identified cultural heritage sites could be inundated if this project goes ahead.

The Blue Mountains World Heritage area is recognised as being of outstanding world class importance and is highly appreciated by all who have visited and enjoyed its extraordinary qualities, including me and my family. Why are these values being put at risk and our obligations under the World Heritage Convention potentially breached? Where is our Duty of Care and justification for what is being proposed? The EIS by SMEC Engineering has failed to prove a case to permit the project to proceed. The integrity of the environmental assessment is inadequate and fundamentally flawed.

Threatened Ecological Communities such as Grassy Box Woodland and habitat for endangered and critically endangered species, including the Regent Honeyeater and Sydney's last Emu population, are at risk from flooding. Eucalyptus species diversity, including the Camden White Gum, could be inundated. How can this level of impact and loss possibly be warranted?

I understand there are alternatives to raising the dam wall that would protect communities within the floodplain and that a combined approach of multiple options has been recommended as the most cost-effective means of flood risk mitigation. Why was this not fully assessed and the economic benefits taken into account? No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of raising the Warragamba dam wall are outlined in the EIS.

If, 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 and give security to existing communities and make any plans for further development free from risk.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and I trust all our many concerns regarding this project will be given due consideration.
Brigid Dowsett
Gladesville, 2111

To whom it may concern,
I would just like to put forward my full rejection for this proposal. I find it unbelievably short sighted that in the twenty first century - permanently and irreverisbly damaging a UNESCO world heritage area of pristine wilderness and beauty including areas I regularly visit such as the Kowmung River is even being considered.
As countries around the world are due to gather at COP26 to put forward their proposals to stem climate change which includes extensive "re-wilding" and tree planting, it is unbelivable that something which does the eact opposite is being proposed in NSW.
With 45% of floodwaters being derived from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment the benefits do not stack up - alternatives should be sought - as destroying wilderness will contribute further to the problems which are leading to this application even being considered.

To whom it may concern,
When I moved to the Blue Mountains it had just been made a World Heritage Area.
At the time, we were told this was 'forever'.
UNESCO will remove the World Heritage status if the current proposal goes ahead.
The integrity of the EIS is fundamentally flawed. SMEC has an APPALING reputation for ignoring indigenous heritage issues and has been excluded from the World Bank.
Surely, government must have some eye to the future instead of its own pocket!

To whom it may concern,
I oppose raising the Warragamba Dam wall for the following reasons.
- Damage to both natural and cultural values caused by the project would be a clear breach of Australia's obligations under the World Heritage Convention.
-The Commonwealth Government has estimated at least 1500 Indigenous cultural heritage sites would be inundated by a raised dam wall.
-Habitat for the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater, Koala colonies and Sydney's last Emu population would be drowned by a raised dam wall.
-The Kowmung River a declared 'wild river' would also be inundated by the project. I have bush walked in this area and enjoy spending time in this natural environment and don't want to see it disturbed when there are alternatves to this project such as building flood evacuation roads, lowering the full supply level of the present dam and reducing flood plain development.
I hope you will seriously consider the devastating impacts of this project, look at alternatives and save this valuable wilderness area for future genetations to enjoy and to preserve our national treasures.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the raising of Warragamba Dam for many reasons, but primarily I believe that the process has been flawed. The Environmental Impact Statement has many systematic failures including:
• The engineering firm (SMEC Engineering) who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project have an established history abusing Indigenous rights, recently being barred from the world bank.
• Severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken.
• Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
• Threatened species surveys are substantially less than guideline requirements. Where field surveys were not adequately completed, expert reports were not obtained.
• No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.
• The integrity of the environmental assessment is fundamentally flawed, and cannot be accepted as a basis for further decision-making by the Minister for Planning.
Do not raise the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
The proposed raising of the the height of the Warragamba dam will destroy both natural and Indigenous heritage. The flawed EIS has been prepared by a discredited company, employed by the government to whitewash the project.
The destruction of Aboriginal heritage sites as a consequence of the proposed inundation has been thoroughly documented, as has the destruction of thousands of hectares of pristine wilderness.
My wife of 35 years and I explored the spectacular Kowmung river in the early days of our relationship on a week long bush walk. This is a beautiful experience which will not be available to anyone if the inundation proceeds.
This project is government vandalism and should not be allowed to go ahead.

To whom it may concern,
Dear Planning Officer
I am very concerned about this project for a number of reasons.
1/ I no longer believe the evaluation process has integrity.
2/It will enable further release of Western Sydney flood plain lands for housing . This release will, at some point in the future, endanger tens of thousands of residents. Lands use in this area for housing is not supported by the Insurance Council of Australia
3/The proposal will endanger World Heritage Wilderness in the Blue Mountains national park including poorly documented aboriginal sites. The proposal appears to to be in breach of our international responsibilities in regard to the World Heritage declarations.
4/ I am aware that land developers operating in the floodplains have made substantial donations to the Federal branch of the Liberal party avoiding the legislation banning donations to state political parties.

To whom it may concern,
My family have lived in the Blue Mountains since 1956, I grew up bushwalking throughout the Mountains, and am still (except for current pandemic restrictions) an active walker in them, including the stunningly beautiful, and historically important – to both Gundungurra people & Europeans - wild areas that will be permanently diminished & scarred by raising the dam wall.
The plan to raise the dam is deeply flawed and from the public information available, clearly inappropriate & unnecessary, to the point it’s difficult as a member of the public to see why it is even being pursued – it will be an environmental disaster to a World Heritage Area, and will not achieve the purported flood plain control that is claimed. Essentially we the public are being gaslighted, for some unclear reason. The plain public facts show the systematic failures of the EIS, show that World Heritage and cultural sites are under attack, that the Gundungurra traditional owners have not given free, prior and informed consent for the Dam proposal to proceed, and there are well documented & researched alternative options to raising the Warragamba Dam wall that would protect existing floodplain communities.
I deeply oppose the deeply flawed, and misleading plan of raising of Warragamba Dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
Don't raise the Warragamba Dam wall. Too much Indigenous and environmental heritage wil be lost.
I wrote a biography of Governor John Hunter. Settlers in the 1790s did not take notice of Aborigines who warned them about flooding, to their great loss. There are some place that are just not meant to become residential. It's not worth it.

To whom it may concern,
As a member of bushwalking clubs aand having walked in the Blue Mountains over several years, I do not agree that the Warragamba Dam wall should be heightened. I believe that the Aboriginal sites impacted have not been considered enough, with the mining that has destroyed so many areas in Australia I do not believe we should consider destroying more, either by mining or in this case water.
World Heritatige and cultural areas are going to be under threat for little gain. Floods wil still happen as the Nepean and grose rivers will still rise the Warreagamba Dam is such a minute part of this river system. there aree many alternatives not looked at by the eis .this raising of the wall is not in our interests or sensible.

To whom it may concern, I am writing to you today to plead with you: to please not destroy this most unique , beautiful , precious part of our country. There are other ways to create and store water . Cloud seeding. To create rain when needed.Subsidise rain water tanks to all house holds without applying any monaetary penalties for their use . The alternatives are many.We as a species are at a cross roads right now in this point of time; where all peoples on the planet can start to heal the Earth by controling their mindless competition and greed .These emotions are what push Corporations to implement these enviromental catastrophies . Long term devastation ,for short term profit . Please find other solutions . There are many other roads you can venture along and arrive at an appropriate destination that is beneficial and pleasing to all

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall.
I am concerned that the EIS which will be used as a basis for the decision on whether to proceed with this project is fundamentally flawed. It has failed to meet the guideline requirements with incomplete field surveys, missing expert reports, and inadequate modelling of the flood and economic benefits of a raised dam wall, to name jus a few.
Giving the go ahead to such a project puts the Blue Mountains World Heritage area at risk. Any damage to the natural and cultural values of this area will be irreversible. To quote Joni Mitchell 'they paved paradise to put up a parking lot'. Let's not keep repeating past mistakes, particularly when there are viable alternatives that would protect existing floodplain communities.
I plead with you choose to preserve our natural environment.

To whom it may concern,
As much as I understand the need for more water to accommodate our growing number of people living in Sydney, I truly believe there must be a better way. The Blue Mountains are a treasure for all Australians, new Australians and Indigenous Australians. The walks and camping provide such a unique natural experience for all us, as well as our visitors.

Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal. This is possibly the most heinous of all consequences. The Traditional Owners' connection to the land is so important and one of the last remaining parts of their culture. How can we honestly say that this part of their culture isn’t worth saving? Haven’t they suffered enough? How would you feel if so many parts of your culture were being destroyed?

Please also consider that this is a World Heritage listed area. There is literally nowhere else like this on the planet. My heart breaks for the endangered species that might lose their homes and then their lives if this project goes ahead. How would you feel if that was you and your family?

Please consider hiring a different EIS evaluation company so that you can explore other options and work towards a future with a clear conscience, knowing that you did the right thing.