Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
The Blue Mountains, the Nepean River catchment and the Cumberland Plains contain so much valuable natural and indigenous heritage. They have been under threat since the First Fleet arrived. Raising Warragamba Dam would be the final blow - an unconscionable act.
Where are the post-bushfire surveys of the area? Has the impact on Aboriginal cultural heritage been thoroughly assessed? How many flora and fauna species will move up the endangered scale?
We cannot have our National Parks and our World Heritage Area damaged or lost through inundation. The environmental cost of dam raising is far too high and such loss could never be regained.
The irony is that, firstly, a higher dam will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury/Nepean when so much floodwater enters the system downstream of the dam; and secondly, in our frequent prolonged dry times,water shortages will occur no matter how high the wall is built.
There are alternative options for flood risk mitigation and for a reliable water supply, (not least of which would be education in more modest lifestyle practices).
I absolutely oppose the raising of the dam. The financial cost is unwarranted; advantages are negligible or non-existent, and the environmental and cultural loss would be unforgivable.

To whom it may concern,
This is a submission against.
We must preserve our World Heritage and cultural sites. Raising of the Warragamba Dam Wall will have a devastating impact on the natural environment, loss of cultural significance sites of the traditional owners of the Gundungurra people, loss of habitat for endemic native fauna and putting lives at risk of the communities who live within the floodplain/vicinity if the dam wall were to fail.
I urge the state government to look at alternatives to raising the warragamba dam wall that won’t have the undesirable impact of those outlined in my previous paragraph.

To whom it may concern,
The unique Blue Mountain's wildernes and its Aboriginal heritage are recognised world-wide for their value. Raising the Dam will affect significant asepcts of this value in a way that is not reversible. The proposal will not guarantee flood-protection, and comes with an unacceptable cost to the environment, tourism and recreation. On behalf of myself and my children, and the entire NSW community, I urge the Department to reject this limited, flawed and incompete EIS and require a full cost-benefit, flood and environmental assessment of the proposal and the many possible alternatives, before considering the approval of the proposal.

To whom it may concern,
I strongly object to the proposed rising of the dam walls. I am appalled at the lack of regard as to the impact on the World Heritage status of the Blue Mountains and the disregard of local indigenous sacred sites and land.
Even the insurance peak body, as reported on the SMH, has said it's a foul plan and that money earmarked for the the project should be spent in acquiring properties on the flood plain.
Please stop the overdevelopment on a floodplain and do not build the dam walls higher.

To whom it may concern,
I understand the call for action which has resulted in the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam Wall.
I have read the proposals and disagree with it all.
The main issue is poor planning. We have been aware of the increase in flooding potential since the 80's.
But flood mitigation is essential now, The solution is an integrated engineering one.
1. Acquiring flood prone properties. Keeping people and property out of harms way. Those residences below the 1:50 flood levels will suffice. including removal of the structures. Those areas freed up can be redeveloped as sports fields, treed Reserves, Forestry and Farming areas. As they should be. Redevelopment of the land once cleared of flood prone assets should be at the Local councils expense.~$220M
2. Installing structures, on the wall, which temporarily retain flood flows say for 36-84 hours, say 600mm "Flash boards" or similar, combined with a confined spillway notch will suffice. The natural habitats and vegetation and archeological sites within 600mm of top water level will be able to sustain 84hrs of inundation with out damage. It emulates a natural event. Volume is about 4Gl~$75M.
3. Educate and Pay Rural Landholders in the Catchment to retain higher levels of ground cover in the catchment and install some 2000, 2-6Ml Farm Dams with say half of the capacity being "active"( by use of a "trickle pipe" or similar) Thats about 8-12 Gl. ~$40M
4. Continue Sydney Waters excellent Water Conservation programs. ~$40m
I'm happy to be called to provide more detail. But the time of Big dams is past. The community will not forgive such impactful developments ever again.

To whom it may concern,
I can't believe raising the Warragamba dam wall is still being considered by the NSW government. Time for the NSW government to CONTINUE to think about the effect on the environment, the animals, aboriginal sacred sites. As I have said with many Blackheath residents I give a dam. No dam raise.

To whom it may concern,
I am a resident of Warrimoo, in the lower Blue Mountains.
One of the reasons I live in this part of the world is the natural beauty, on offer and the opportunities to enjoy it by bushwalking and other recreational activities.
I am deeply concerned about the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall.
The Blue Mountains is a World Heritage Area offering the privalage of outstanding natural bueaty to its residents, the good folk of Sydney and tourists. As such it improves the quality of life in health (exercise) and soul (beauty) in addition to being a major jobs and income provider (tourism) to the area. Additionally the threat to habitat is real, as is the impact to First Nations cultural heritage.
Whilst recognising the need to secure water supply to population I am worried about putting so many eggs into this basket. With the new airport located nearby the heightened threat to water supply contamination could have disasterous consequences.
The research into these, and other, impacts has been on the light side, with too little time spent in the field. It feels, to be honest, as though the research has been conducted to support a predetermined answer. A PhD submitted on such a basis would be rejected. So should the raising of the wall.

To whom it may concern,
As a Blue Mountains resident and keen bushwalker, I am concerned about the proposal to raise the level of the Warragamba Dam. It appears that the Environmental Impact Study , done by SMEC Engineering , is an attempt to gloss over many of the risks to the environment of the Blue Mountains. For example, the surveys into threatened species in the area are much less thorough than the guideline requires.
It also would seem that the benefit of raising the dam wall is largely to developers wishing to build on flood-prone areas below the dam.
It would be an unforgiveable act of vandalism to proceed with this project, being aware of the damage it will cause to the World Heritage listed rivers of the Blue Mountains, such as the Cox's River and the Cowmung.

To whom it may concern,
Please do not raise the wall of the dam.
I believe the organisation who performed the EIS did not do it properly, and have a history of ignoring Indigenous sites. Raising the dam wall will not protect downstream residences (who should not have built on floodplain in the first place).
The habitat must be protected for the native birds and animals.
I am disgusted that the Liberal and National party’s would consider damaging a National Park. It would be a clear breach of your governments obligation to protect the environment.

To whom it may concern,
Is nothing sacred any more? Do not raise this dam!
We can not afford to loose the amazing bushland that houses endangered and threatened species.

To whom it may concern,
This is madness pristine areas that your greed wants to destroy are running out!
My farther bush walked this area all his life as I have done with my children but one can only hope grandkids don't miss out.

To whom it may concern,
I stromgly oppose the raising of the warrangamba dam. The consequences of this act of desecration are disasterous in many ways.
flooding of a world heratage site is imoral and inconsistant with Australias obligations under the world heritage convention.
The destruction of 5700 hectares of national park including wild rivers threatened ecosystems and endangered wildlife would continue Australias horrifying record of species extincion.
Australia needs to maintain and enhance its natural assets for the benifit of future generations, tourisim and climate change mitigation.
The raising of the dam wall is a bad idea and should be prevented

Australia is a global leader in species extinctions and this embarrassing record has to stop.

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species.
The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that “cannot be avoided or minimised.”
The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. 
Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.
There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.
Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater, and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.
The destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for Regent Honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole.
The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.
It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for any avoidable loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur.
I strongly oppose the Project’s offset strategy for the Regent Honeyeater.
Offsets are rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss and especially for critical habitat for the survival of a species, in this case breeding habitat for the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater.
There is no evidence that breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters can be successfully offset, and any offsets would be unlikely to provide direct benefits for both the local affected population and the species.

The EIS for this project is manifestly inadequate as it does not assess the full area impacted, only 25% of the 1200 sites of Aboriginal cultural heritage were surveyed, the impact on threatened species has not been fully assessed, the impact on residents of hundreds of trucks rolling through the area every day has not been duly considered, and the loss of tourist amenity that sustains the shire has not been considered. This project threatens a world heritage area that is very important to the people of Sydney, without establishing a vital need for it.
If the government is seriously concerned about the welfare of residents downstream on the flood plain (which should not have been built upon in the first place), it would be far less costly to compensate and move those residents. Proper cost/benefit analysis needs to be done, comparing these options.

The project is ill-conceived and the due process has not been followed in pushing forward with it.

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species.
The Regent Honeyeater was once a numerous and widespread species found in Victoria and New South Wales. Flocks of 500 or more birds were reported in the early 20th century near Melbourne and on the Mornington Peninsula. The Regent Honeyeater is now listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and national level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild.  This loss of the Regent Honeyeater from its former range has been caused by habitat loss and wholesale land clearing.
More habitat was lost due to the 2019/20 bushfires, with modelling by BirdLife Australia estimating that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt. therefore, protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.
There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.
The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters, as proposed under the project, is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, which includes the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.
I strongly oppose the Project’s offset strategy for the Regent Honeyeater. Offsets rarely succeed and are not an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss especially when it is habitat critical for the survival of a species, in this case breeding habitat for the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater.
There is no evidence that breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters can be successfully offset. Any offsets would be unlikely to provide direct benefits for both the local affected population and the species.

I strongly object to the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam due to the unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species.The draft EIS concludes the project poses potentially significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat that cannot be avoided or minimised. There are only 350 individuals of this critically endangered bird, 50% of their breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019-2020 fires so the other 50% must be protected. There is a National Recovery Plan for the Regent Honeyeater, requiring the highest level of protection for the breeding sites. The EIS reports surveyors found twenty one individuals plus nests in the study area. It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for any loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur. I strongly oppose the offset strategy proposed for the Regent Honeyeater. There is no evidence that offsetting breeding habitat will work, as the birds decide where they will breed, not humans.

I am writing a submission as I have a strong interest in wildlife and the protection of our increasingly threatened native species.
I am very concerned about the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam, due to the potential impacts of the project on the Blue Mountains Heritage Area and the habitats of threatened species. I strongly oppose this project.
The draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) notes that the proposal's likely impacts on Regent Honeyeater habitat "cannot be avoided or minimised". The critically endangered Regent Honeyeater has only a few breeding sites remaining, and during assessment of the project 21 of the birds (from an estimated remaining wild population of only 350) were recorded in the impact area, including some with active nests. Up to 50% of these birds' habitat was destroyed during the 2019/20 bushfires (BirdLife Australia), making preservation and protection of remaining breeding habitat an urgent conservation priority.
The NSW goverment has invested significant time and money into recovery plans for various species, including the Regent Honeyeater, so destruction or degradation of the birds' breeding habitat is in direct opposition to that previous direction and spending.
It has been suggested that an offset strategy could be used; such strategies are rarely appropriate for protecting such limited habitats and ecosystems, especially when the habitat is so crucial to the survival of a critically endangered species. There is no evidence that the offset strategy would be effective for Regent Honeyeaters, or that it would provide any direct benefits for the local affected population or the species as a whole.

I have lived very close to Lake Burragorang for most of my life and I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater.

The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild.  Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires.  Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority. There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area. Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”. The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.

I oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species such as, the Regent Honeyeater. The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for this bird species that “cannot be avoided or minimised.” I believe that there is a need to do all that we can to preserve the environment so that these rare birds survive.

The Regent Honeyeater is listed as critically endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. 
BirdLife Australia has suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority. There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.

Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.
The destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for Regent Honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole.
The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater captive breeding and release program.

Thus, it is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for any avoidable loss or degradation of breeding habitat to occur.

I strongly oppose the Project’s offset strategy for the Regent Honeyeater. Offsets are rarely an appropriate response to proposed biodiversity loss and especially for critical habitat for the survival of a species, in this case breeding habitat for the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater. There is no evidence that breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters can be successfully offset and any offsets would be unlikely to provide direct benefits for both the local affected population and the species.

I strongly oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species. I refer in particular to the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater.
The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild. 
Reports by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.
There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.
The raising of the dam wall at Warragamba is an unnecessary destruction of this bird's habitat and it's survival.
Since 1788, modern Australian history is littered with the destruction and extinction of too many native species. It is time to stop this un-necessary destruction.
Let's give nature a chance.
This dam-wall will not only impact on the well-being and breeding of the Regent Honeyeater, but also on the cultural story of the local indigenous people as well, and it is time to hear their stories and listen and act accordingly.
This wall is only being built to protect poor planning and future poor planning to squeeze more people and housing into unsuitable and dangerous locations. This government should be ashamed that it is even thinking to create more development at the continually expense of wildlife. It must stop and this proposal must be stopped.
This dam raising proposal is a con-job, the flooding will continue as rivers like the Nepean, Grose, South Creek etc, in heavy rainfall will not be impacted by this proposal and flooding will continue as occurred in 2021.
Warragamba Dam was not built as flood mitigation resource, it was built to provide drinking water. It is only now being planned as a desperate measure to protect inappropriate development on the known floodplain. and the result of this desperation, is the destruction of the habitat of the Regent Honeyeater and just a reminder that
Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.
Therefore please save this habitat for the future and not the desperation of developers and government to avoid responsibility for past wrongs and obvious future mistakes.
Thank You for the opportunity to comment on this matter.