Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I am against raising the dam wall to satify animal agricuture. Suggesting instead to transition to non animal crops to humans not livestock - requiring much less water and land clearing, as well as reducing harmfull greeenhouse emmissions

To whom it may concern, There is world experience in the tragedy of dam walls that have been risen and then fail with ensuing loss to nature, including water quality, flora , fauna and humans. Please seek alternatives to this proposal which in itself has arisen without permission from traditional owners and is indicative of continued failure of Environment Impact Statements to be thorough. In this era of instability it is unwise and against the science of preserving structural integrity, protecting world heritage and cultural sites. I urge you to look at alternatives to raising Warragamba dam wall please.

To whom it may concern,
I am a keen bushwalker, and am devastated to think of the damage that the proposal will do to the Kowmung river and the world heritage bushland that surrounds it.
Surely we have reached a point in our nation's history when we must take our precious environment seriously, instead of continuing to damage it in the name of a spurious 'progress'.

To whom it may concern,I grew up in rural NSW and grew to pappreciate the beauty of our busn and wildlife.Whenever I either travel through or walk around the Blue mountains I am always amazed.
I have grave concerns fro the proposed Warragamba extension due to th efollowing 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.
There are 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.

I ask that you take the concerns of your constituents and reverse this decsion.

To whom it may concern,
How about consideration to cultural, environmental and recreational reasons for NOT raising the Warragamba Dam wall. Less concern for developers who want to make money out of yet more houses in the flood plain, would be the popular view.
Charging much more for water use would go a long way to converting users to the value of water on this very special continent we call home.

To whom it may concern,
Re: raising the wall of the Warragamba Dam, l would like to strongly protest against such a proposal.
Such a move would not only be an enviromental catastrophe but a blight on the world stage for World Heritage listed National Parks.
Why must the NSW Government always take the easy option and in the process destroy the essence of what make NSW great, falling straight into the hands of Developers greed and demands (which is what the raising of the wall is really about). Makes you wonder how safe are we in the hands of a Government that constantly sells us out. Telling us it's for jobs and growth and a better future - but for who and for what.
Are we not learning anything from the over developed,over polutted, ugly cities already in the world.
New Blue Mountain Tourist Ad - "Come visit the Blue Mountains the ugliest, desolute man destroyed enviroment of a National Park on earth. "

To whom it may concern,
It would be unforgivable to drown a world heritage area ostensibly to save downstream housing developments from flooding. Flood plains are known to be rich agricultural land. Don't build houses on flood plains. Leave them for farming.

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the raising of Warragamba Dam wall and the flooding of this World Heritage Listed and Culturally significant Blue Mountains landscape.
The Governments own EIS has shown that raising the dam wall is both an environmentally and economically unviable proposal.
It appears that it is just an attempt by government and developers to allow for even more inappropriate developments to proceed on the downstream floodplain. Already too many houses have been built on the floodplain and floodprone land. This leads to even greater flooding problems when natural vegetation and drainage areas are removed or disturbed, and replaced by hard surfaces and poorly designed artificial drainage systems.
It is appalling that the government is even considering this proposal, against all scientific advice.

To whom it may concern,
In regards to the Warragamba Dam Raising Project I believe that this would be a catastrophic environmental disaster for fauna and flora in the Blue Mountains region.
If the 2004 BASIX Standard is adhered to Sydney and coastal NSW should have no water shortages in the foreseeable future.
Legislation was introduced in 2004 by the State Government requiring residential development to reduce the consumption of water and energy. The legislation is referred to as Building Sustainability Index (BASIX).
The BASIX requirements apply to all residential dwelling types and are part of the Development Application process in NSW.
In NSW, there are BASIX requirements for water and energy usage and thermal comfort performance that apply to:
• all new residential dwellings
• alterations and additions to dwellings that cost $50,000 or more
• swimming pools of 40,000 litres or more
The Water section of BASIX aims to reduce the potable water consumption of all new residential developments. The BASIX targets are determined from data provided by state and federal energy and water utilities, as well as long-term climate data from the Bureau of Meteorology.
A return to Level Four Water Restrictions across the Greater Sydney region, with some tweaking that allows vegetable gardens and fruit tree watering, would also alleviate the necessity to raise Warragamba Dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
I am a resident from the floodplain in Richmond Lowlands.
I have experienced first hand the volume of water during a flood and the immense impact of water once the dam water is released.
More water in the dam will mean more water volume when released. This will be devaststing for the lowlands and will sterilise the grass as the water will sit around longer. It will wipe out the polo fields and turf farms without doubt. A whole industry will be destroyed.
The river banks will be washed away as the letting out of dam water is violent and more powerful than usual flood water.
The dam must be legislated for flood mitigation not water storage only. Water needs to be released well before a rain event to mitigate flood.

To whom it may concern,
The Blue Mountains National Park is an irreplaceable treasure.
The raising of the Warragamba Dam wall is nothing more than a cynical land grab by developers to increase the density of development in flood prone land downstream from the dam wall.
The project will not stop flooding downstream. In times of full capacity, water will have to be released from the dam regardless of how high the wall is. In the future, if the wall is raised, a greater number of people downstream will be at risk of flood.
Meanwhile, the project would adversely affect extensive areas of the national park and inundate 65 kilometres of classified "Wild Rivers", including the Kowmung.
Other rivers that would be affected are the Cox, Wollondilly, Nattai, Kedumba and Little river, as well as 4,700 hectares of the UNESCO Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
Up to 48 threatened animal and plant species, including the Kowmung Hakea and Camden White Gum.

The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)is intentionally misleading and flawed. The National Parks and Wildlife Service said the EIS failed to consider the impact of the 2019-2020 bushfires on threatened species and didn't consider the Cultural Heritage , there are over 1000 indigenous archeological sites that would be impacted.
Heritage NSW said the Gundungurra Traditional Owners were not properly consulted and have not given free, informed consent for the project to proceed.
The Federal Environmental department told the state government to re-do the entire EIS. Nothing has changed.
This is not the first time the Kowmung River has been threatened. It began in the mid-1800s with the coming of the cedar getters. Followed by the gold prospectors, but the biggest historical threat was the Colong Lime Controversy. As early as 1899, the Colong limestone belt had been notified for preservation of its caves. In1939, mining company applications to exploit the limestone were rejected as "inimical to public interest".
In 1963, a group of bushwalkers stumbled upon an unattended camp where they found many crated specimens of limestone, indicating preliminary prospecting work.
In 1965, the Department of Mines revealed a plan covering 1190 acres in Colong-Middle Kowmung area.
The protest movement sped up.
In 1968, the Colong Committee was formed to carry on a campaign against limestone mining in the Kowmung valley and against the Forestry Commission taking over land over 4000 feet in altitude on and around the Boyd plateau(to increase the size of the Konangaroo State Forest)
Harry Seidler declared he would ban the use of concrete in his buildings if it had been extracted at the price of destroying our natural heritage.
Spike Milligan wrote: "What is the point of creating National Parks, when, as is in the case of Kanangra-Boyd, Government cretins, with one stroke of the pen, can reduce it to a limestone quarry".......and "Australia needs an ombudsman to oversee its bureaucrats".
Sir Garfield Barwick stated that "the NSW Government had a positive obligation to take steps itself to protect the Kanangra-Boyd area in the long-term interests of the public".
The Teacher's Federation called it "the biggest act of vandalism ever seen in NSW".
In October 1969, a petition of 150 Catholic priests was read in parliament "What is happening in the Kanangra-Boyd is a test case for all present and future National Parks in NSW. If large vested mining and timber companies, local or overseas, can gain the mandate of the Government of the day to exploit what is the inherent right of Australian citizens, namely the only remaining National Park wilderness area close to the largest centre of population, and such vested interests can do so in the face of the greatest ever protests from a group such as the Colong Committee, then no area can ever be sacred to the public from the intrusions of vested interests".
Sir Edmund Hillary became a strong supporter of the Colong Committee after he visited Kanangra-Boyd in 1969.
The mining company intended to build a dam on the pristine Kowmung river, being essential for the cement slurry pipeline from Colong to Maldon.
Finally, in 1973, the mining company was granted additional mining leases at Marulan and the Kowmung leases were relinquished.
I wonder how many more times the people will have to fight to save this national treasure.
The Blue Mountain's Heritage listing is becoming ever more precarious. We still don't know how the Badgery's Creek Airport is going to affect it and the raising of the dam wall will only exacerbate the situation.

* The historical information is from the book:
KOWMUNG RIVER Discovery, History & Development.
By Jim Barrett. Published 1993.
Re-published 2009 by Neville Bush Holdings Pty Ltd
PO box 209, Glenbrook NSW 2773

To whom it may concern,
I strongly object to the raising of the wall at Warragamba dam. It will negatively impact the Blue Mountains National Park, inundating large areas and endangering threatened species such as the regent honeyeater, as well as destroying many more sacred aboriginal sites. Raising the dam wall will not stop flooding on the flood plain, other parts of the river system are not under control. This project is a wasteful, environmentally destructive attempt to promote further development on the floodplain.

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the Warragamba Dam Raising Project for the following reasons:
• Having spent 20 years of my life living in the Windsor area, it was well known in the area that the Hawkesbury River is prone to flooding and that was part of life. It is only recently, probably because of prolonged droughts, that people have forgotten that the river floods regularly and that homes should not be built on the floodplain.
• It seems to me that the Dam Raising is only being considered to allow more development on the floodplains. When I visit the area now, I see homes being built in areas that I thought would never be built on due to the flood risk.
• It strikes me that the proposed Dam Raising will only make a small difference to the overall flood risk, perhaps holding back the inevitable floods by a few hours or days when a major flood event occurs. Something that has not occured for decades and will surely shock all those new home owners when it happens.
• The recent minor flood was made out by the government as a one-in-50 event. This was government spin and something that the facts do not support. In earlier days, even as recently as when I was living near Windsor, this would have been considered a minor flood. Raising the dam wall would not have stopped this flood, so how is it going to help when a real major flood occurs.
• The only genuine way to to deal with the flooding issue is to accept that flooding is a normal part of life in the Hawkesbury and to stop building on the flood plain.
• I have spent many years bushwalking in the Blue Mountains and have visited the Kowmung River on a number of occasions. I would hate to lose such a treasured wilderness area. Even temporary flooding would have a serious impact on the native flora and fauna.
• It is clear that the environmental studies undertaken for the dam raising have been inadequate and an example of government "greenwashing". But that is irrelevant, as no amount of studies are going to stop the damage resulting from raising the dam wall.
• How long will it be, with the NSW government's desire for a "Big NSW", before the dam raising transitions from flood-mitigation to a permanent increase in water storage to supply a greater population in Sydney. What will happen to all of those extra people living on the floodplain when this happens?
In closing, I just want to re-iterate that I am opposed to the dam raising project and believe the government should be planning so that everyone can live with the inevitable flooding of the floodplain. Something that has been occuring for millenia and can't be prevented.

To whom it may concern,

I have grave concerns about the raising of the Warragamba dam wall. My submission is that the lack of post-bushfire survey, failure to capture indigenous heritage and clear lack of flood modelling shows a "dont ask, dont tell" mentaility. The EIS is lacking the information required to make a rational decision. The datasets are clearly cherry picked and not representative. I have spent most of my life bushwalking in the Blue Mountains and am well aware of its World Heritage value and intangible worth. To raise the wall is a tragic waste of money and needlessly destructive to an incredible part of Australia that should be preserved and protected for future generations. You would have thought that a National Park should remain just that? Clearly not everyone agrees.

To whom it may concern,
We have hiked in the Blue Mountains for many years, long before it was listed as a World Heritage Area. We have taken many groups to the mountains, including friends from Overseas. All (including our children) have marvelled at the magnificent geological features, grand gum trees and stunning plants with their unusual & unique flowers & floral displays - banksias through to grevilleas & the tiniest of gorgeous orchids!
However it is the birds & animals that many find unforgettable. The colourful parrots & noisy delicate wrens are just amazing. The monotremes - platypus & echidna are just phenomenal!
In the light of the above we must oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam Wall. Why? Because of the following reasons:
1. The EIS has systematic failures & should be discarded. SMEC Engineering did not conduct the surveys of Threatened species to the level required by the guidelines nor did thy obtain reports from experts on the species of concern. No post 2019/20 Bush fire field surveys were undertaken & only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage. The latter is most pertinent as SMEC Engineering have a history of abusing Indigenous Rights to the point where they have been barred by the World Bank.
2. Approximately 65 kilometres of wild rivers & 5,700 hectares of National Park area (1,300 hectares in the World Heritage Area) would be inundated by the Dam project. This amounts to Sydney siders & their visiting relatives & friends (local & Overseas) losing over 15 Lane Cove National Parks worth of Australian Native Parkland & all their native animals & plants. We can not afford to lose any more of our Native Flora & Fauna let alone this huge amount!!! Imagine losing our beautiful platypus - a mascot for the Sydney 2000 Games!
3. The Traditonal Owners, the Gundungurra people have not given free, prior & informed consent to the dam Proposal. We do not want to make the mistakes of the past, even the most recent past (Juuken Gorge fiasco).
Raising the Dam wall is not the solution to protecting the communities on the existing floodplain. The EIS did not even consider the most cost effective solution which uses a combination of multiple options, nor did they take into account that 45% of the foodwaters are derived from areas outside the Warragamba Dam catchment.
Hence raising the Dam Wall is not the solution & will create far reaching & damaging irreversible consequences (including Australia breaching its World Heritage Obligations) for the Sydney Basin, its residents & visitors.

I strongly oppose the raising of the Dam wall . The consequences of doing this are irreversible. Not only to the pristine world heritage listed wilderness that it will affect, but also to the countless number of critically endangered flora and fauna it will impact upon. Consideration of a project such as this, shows a blatant disregard not only for the environment, but also the cultural heritage of the Gundengurra people who have already been disenfranchised, by the original building of the Burragorang Dam. When the first dam was built, the Gundengurra people and their decendants, basically were shut out of their ancestral lands without compensation .

There has to be consideration given to the fact that once flora and fauna become extinct there is no magic wand that can be waved to bring them back. As a nation are we so soulless, that we potentially would eradicate 92 species of precious native floora and fauna at a whim ?

A better idea would be to use the funds set aside to raise the wall, to buy back flood plain affected land, that should never have been built on in the first place. This is extremley relevant because there is irefutable evidence to suggest that raising the dam wall, will not prevent the Nepean flood plan from flooding and this is a basic fact that is lost in this proposal. The flood plain is affected by other tributaries that do not run into the Warragamba catchment area.

To whom it may concern,
I write to oppose the raising of the wall of Warragamba Dam for the following reasons:
1. I have walked in the Kanangra Boyd wilderness area for over 50 years, and have a deep respect for the area. Central to this is the majestic Kowmung River, the last untouched river in the state and currently protected by World Heritage status. Raising the dam wall will flood the Kowmung River and irreversibly destroy a natural resource that bushwalkers have treasured for the last century. This will shatter the legacy of the great Miles Dunphy, who led the campaign to preserve the environment of the Blue Mountains over 80 years ago. We should be preserving precious areas such as this for future generations, not destroying them.
2. After assessing the case for the raising of the dam wall, it is obvious to me that it will not be adequate in its stated aim, to prevent flooding of the riverine plain. The Warragamba River is only half the equation; half of the drainage into the Nepean/Hawasebury comes from other catchments; upper Nepean, Grose, Colo. In the inevitable event of a major rainfall in these catchments, the plain will be flooded, even with a higher Warragamba wall.
3. The solution to this problem is to move people and houses out of the danger zone and stop further development.

To whom it may concern,
As A bushwalker for many years in my youth and then as a adult leader who took many teenagers on walks over numerous weekends I would not like to see the dam wall raised.
I feel that whilst the desalination plant was built and appears to have been a waste of money that if we need to eventually use this it would be a better option.
once upon a time the Snowy Mountains scheme was thought to be pie in the sky, yet we built it and it has served us extremely well.
Here's a thought, why don't we use the Ord River which dumps millions of fresh water into the ocean daily? As a long term project and as a Nation we could irrigate through the centre of Australia, populate inner Australia, bring back agriculture to supply the Nation. Water could be offered to to Farmers at a reduced cost for supply of food and meat to Australia. If they supply overseas markets a higher commercial rate would be charged based on total percentage of sales. Yes, it will take years but what a great way to populate, irrigate, reintroduce agriculture and grow the exports to other countries. We have as a Government (Liberal and Labour) sold out too much of our Outback to overseas interests however its not too late not to reverse those decisions but to ensure that we stall the rot as those countries will see the opportunity to grow their food here to send back to their countries.
Back to the real point here - keep our Heritage areas, don't flood them when there are other albeit longer term opportunities which will have a better impact for the Nation for the future.
Let the future generations enjoy the Blue Mountains for recreation and bushwalking rather than destroying it when we can achieve the same water objectives and improve our Nation considerably and for the long term.

To whom it may concern,
As a retired public servant given the job of acquiring land for planning purposes,one of which was the purchase of private lands from owners in the Nepean flood plain. We told these owners that the land would be used for public open space and woul never be developed. It's obvious that pressure has been brought on politicians by vested interests to have these lands rezoned for private development. That is the only reason raising the dam wall could be justified. Raising the height of the dam wall will not prevent flooding down stream which is a naturally occurring event made more frequent by global warming. It also makes a lie of the original reason the land was acquired by this and previous governments.

To whom it may concern,
I am very concerned about the impact of the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam wall on the Kowmung River and its ecology, and other waterways that will be flooded by higher waters held by the dam if the wall height is raised.
I also believe that the people of Australia will regret the drowning of Aboriginal sites, both sacred and of archaeological interest. The Aboriginal community of the Blue Mountains area will suffer spiritually, emotionally and physically.
In addition, raising the dam wall will not save the plains below from flooding. History shows that the areas surrounding the Nepean and Hawkesbury rivers have received very big floods and they cannot be avoided. Planning for more realistic land use should take place.