Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I think it would be much better to stop developing floodplains rather than raising the dam's height.

To whom it may concern,
As a species humans can not keep building on good agricultural land.
As I drive out to Richmond/Blue Mountains to visit my mother and sister, it deeply saddens me as I see what was once the food belt for Sydney, being replaced by unsightly hardstand suburbs and industrial estates.
Not for me that for my children’s children and other future generations, when we no longer have good agricultural land to sustain a going population, they will look back and condemn our short-term cash grabbing shallow thinking generation. We’ll be all dead, but what are we condemning the future Australians too!!
Stop destroying our agricultural land, and change inner-city zoning to allow further infill, high rise.
There has to be a better way!!

To whom it may concern,
This project fails to consider the environmental and heritage impacts. This is an iconic area which needs to be protected for current and future generations.
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.
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.
Additionally, developing on a flood plain is highly risky, especially given the worsening weather associated with climate change. This needs to be considered and alternative options proposed.

To whom it may concern,
As a concerned member of the greater Sydney community, I would like to state my strong opposition to the NSW State Govt plan to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam. The impacts to the World Heritage listed Blue Mountains National Park and the unique flora and fauna (including the Regents Honeyeater and Platypus populations) will be devistating and unrepairable. We have an obligation to nature and future generations to protect this unique wilderness. Think of the natural jewel that we have on Sydney's western doorstep, the potential for tourism and the economic benefits that brings.
Please consider other options including the use of Nepean, Cataract and Cordeaux Dams and the expansion of the desalination plant at Kurnell. Consider the devistation that a raise to Warragamba Dam wall will cause and change this decision before it is too late.

To whom it may concern,
I wish to register my objection to the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam as a flood prevention measure. As someone who has worked in the catchment and bushwalked the area, I do not wish to see it destroyed or degraded by flooding.
Loss of of our natural heritage is a serious ongoing issue and it must be avoided where possible. Whilst raising the dam wall May ameliorate small to medium sized floods it will do little to prevent infrequent large floods like the recent 2021 flood, so hundreds of millions of dollars would have been spent to no avail. I would much prefer to see urban zoning changes and infrastructure modifications to counter the flood risk.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to object to the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam.
To destroy and undermine a world heritage and cultural sites to line the pockets of developers is unconcionable.
There are many alternatives that would protect floodplain communities which have not been comprehensively assessed in the EIS. Most importantly, it appears that on average 45% of floodwaters come from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam Catchment - so no matter how high the wall may be, it will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury Nepean Valley downstream.
This is very poor use of taxpayers money (not yours), and it definitely doesn't even pass the pub test when you see that the EIS has no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam - 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.
Should this project go ahead, it's just another example of lack of concern the the future of our natural assets which will be destroyed forever. I dont want to get insulting, but seriously this would be environmental vandalism as it's worst.

I am for raising the dam wall

Reasons
My company, Primary Harvest employ over 70 people. 66% of our workers live on the over side of the river and they can’t get to work over a 12-metre flood. For bigger floods even more get cut off due to creeks getting flooded.

Twice per week we receive 2 semi-trailer loads of compost valued at $16,000 dollars twice per week. Compost MUST be used to make room for more in the process.
We struggle to get deliveries in floods over 12 metres and can not get them at all at about the 14.5 to 15 metre mark.

A rental house my wife owns floods at about 16 metres. Bligh Park

3 houses we have in a super fund and rent, flood at 17.3 metres. Oakville

We ship about $20,000 dollars’ worth of mushrooms each day to market. Last flood we were cut off completely for 4 days and the had a six-hour drive for 3 days to get mushrooms to market.
We run out of cool room space on the third day of no deliveries and have to start throwing product out.

We struggle to get all the product picked and work 12-hour days trying to save what product we can save.

The last 2 large floods we were cut off completely due to land slips along the Bells liner Road.

Last flood we lost $80,000 dollars and would have lost more without help from others to empty there growing rooms early to take our compost. They took loses to help us.

Crop timing was affected for the following 6 weeks. A one-week flood effected production for 7 weeks.
This was because when other farms helped us and used our compost. After the flood we had 2 weeks of compost to fill in one week.
This meant we again had a struggle to get the whole crop picked due to a spike in production.
If the last flood was bigger, it would have been worse. At 16 metres the compost yard is flooded, and the compost ruined. At least six weeks of production for a dozen mushroom farms.

Mushrooms stored in cool rooms for 3 days or more drop in quality and price.


Not on a personal level. If we get a big flood, people are going to drown. About 2000 homes are affected at 16 metres and a lot more at 17 metres.
Many will be trapped, and they will not be able to leave their house which will get flooded.
The river comes up really quick and it is unpredictable.
During heavy rain and night-time events people will struggle to get out.
Every 500 years we will probably get an 1867 flood at 19.7 metres.
The maximum flood height is about 25 metres. Catastrophic. Devastation will be like an atomic bomb hit Sydney. Water is said to start flowing out the Parramatta River from the Hawkesbury.

Whoever does not support the raising of the dam will one day have the blood of drowned people on their hands. They may not be alive when it happens, but big floods will come again.
Climate change will only make them more common.

The increased time for people to evacuate, the billions of dollars in damages, loses and flood damage saved by raising the dam wall make it a no brainer.

The impact on vegetation like trees in the national park will only be small. Most trees will live through the short dam flood. More vegetation will be lost below the dam from fast flowing high-water levels than from flooding at the dam.

I therefore hope the dam is raised.

To whom it may concern,
I am concerned that the proposal to raise the height of the Warragamba Dam is seriously misguided.
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. As far as I can tell, no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.
Further, the Blue Mountains World Heritage area adjacent to which it is located 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 65km 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.
If National Parks & Wildlife, Heritage NSW and the Commonwealth Department of Environment have all been critical of the plan for ecological, heritage and wildlife sustainability reasons, why is it being considered?

To whom it may concern,
I have yet to visit this area of NSW since the bushfires and pandemic occured, it would be devastating to have this World Heritage listed site tarnished.
I feel that as a habitat for many endangered and critically endangered species of both flora and fauna, the site needs to be preserved and the wild river not be dammed.
I am disturbed that there was inadequate assessment of the cultural heritage located in the projected affected areas, including a lack of meaningful consultation with Gundungurra community members.
I oppose the dam and hope there are much more thorough assessments completed which accurately reflect the serious irreversible impacts.

To whom it may concern,
Raising the Warragamba Dam wall is utter madness. It destroys the rivers, the wildlife, endangered birds and ancient aboriginal sites

To whom it may concern,
I write to express my extreme concern with plans to raise the Warragamba Dam Wall.
The fact that, on occasions, the waters of the dam will back up into the Kowmung and the World Heritage listed area, to change that wild ecosystem for ever, is unecessarily destructive. It is important thay we continue to protect the wilderness country we have left and I am concerned that much of what is planned is less about flood mitigation, and more about further sprawl in Western Sydney. So there is the potential loss of habitat not only upstream from the dam but in development on the floodplain.
I would hope this government would finally realise that building on any floodplain is risky, that the raising of the dam wall would do little to mitigate this risk (giving the impact of other rivers flooding are) and that previous promised offsets for developments have rarely been realised.
Please do not raise the Warragamba Dam wall

To whom it may concern,
the dam wall should NOT be raised causing the decimation of so many animals
Regional areas should be inhabited by the overflow of people

To whom it may concern,
This project has long been mired in controversy with the NSW Government trying to manipulate the EIS process at every turn - from replacing impact assessment ecologists to arbitrarily designating the water height to reduce environmental offsets and downplaying impacts to the World Heritage listed Blue Mountains. It's just a bad project with insurmountable inherent environmental and social barriers. Wean yourself off the money stream from private developers and govern responsibly for people and the environment.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam.
The Kowmung River is a declared wild river and as such should remain as one.
I believe the Environmental Impact Statement has failed on many accounts, including but not limited to, a lack of addressing in full the entire impacted area, nor has it taken in to account the fire damage to the impacted area.
I have grave concerns for endangered and critically endangered wildlife in the impacted area. This too has not been properly considered or addressed.

Also, well over 1000 cultural heritage sites have been identified in the impacted area that would be inundated by the raising of the dam. This is not acceptable!
Other viable options have not fully be investigated and there are many alternatives to raising the dam.

To whom it may concern,
I and my wife have stayed and walked in the Blue Mountains for many years. It is a place we absolutely love and get such a great feeling when we are in the bush.
Please consider the damage to the environment and endangered species when you make your decision.
Consider alternatives as we oppose increasing the dam wall height as we have a limited natural environment that if it is destroyed it is gone forever.

To whom it may concern,
As an engineer with decades of expereince (BE MEngSci FIEAust), I am apalled that this proposal should go ahead in the face of so much contrary evidence.
The argument for this huge financial expenditure is weak especially as other means of managing both flooding and Sydney's water needs are avaiable, effecitve and cheaper.
Do not raise the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
This project will cause huge harm to the environment while not fufilling the purpose it claims. It must be reconsidered and cancelled

To whom it may concern,

Do not raise the dam wall for housing. You will destroy aboriginal artwork and history and also local species and wildlife. Housing should not be destroying the ecosystem and history of an area.

I lived and walked the blue mountains for five years in the eighties. I cannot believe that things like the Kowmung river would knowingly be destroyed. Very sad!

To whom it may concern,
I believe this area is profoundly important for the well being of all Australians, the loss of Flora and Fauna would be irreversible and such a loss is priceless.