Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
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.
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.
Over 1500 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.
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.

It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan for the Regent Honeyeater ,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.

Added:
I am a bushwalker, bush regenerator and lover of all things natural. I would like to pass the natural world that I have enjoyed in my lifetime to be passed to future generations. The raising of this dam damages some of the wildest biodiverse places for Sydneysiders to enjoy. The Kowmung for one. Regent honeyeater habit too. The Environmental impact statement did not take into account the damage caused by the 2019/20 fires in the Blue Mountains Heritage area. No survey has been done since these fires and those surveys of threatened species that were done were inadequate measured against the guidelines. Raising the dam wall is no guarantee that floods will be controlled. There has been no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits outlined in the Environmental impact statement. Raising the dam wall does not prevent ingress of water to the flood plain from downstream creeks. Flooding will still occur. Alternative options to raising the Dam have not been assessed in the EIS. There are other options - do not fill the dam so full in the first place and recycle the water we use in Sydney for drinking. Its done in many other parts of the world. We only have one Blue Mountains Heritage area. Lets keep it for our children, and their children to enjoy.

I write in response to the above current government proposal. Such an action flies in the face of the science already presented and responsible environmental management. It appears an extreme and quite unbalanced action, one likely to cause more problems than it solves. Nature is not a toy for humanity to play with. You are being asked to consider most carefully before you commit to such a potentially disastrous action.

Human beings are totally ruining this planet, and this proposed project is yet another nail in the coffin. Aboriginal culture always preserved the country as the first and absolute priority and penalised corruption. White invaders put corruption first and reward it, so the country is totally trashed in the process. This is a World Heritage area you are eyeing off for annihilation. How can you even entertain such permanent devastation?

Raising the Waragamba Dam wall will damage the world heritage Blue Mountains National Park. The State government has a responsibility to protect the world heritage values. There has already been a lot of damage to the park due to bush fires. The area is sensitive & precious & needs your protection

To whom it may concern,
Thank you for hearing my views on this important issue.
I am a life long resident of the Blue Mountains and write in the hope of saving one of Australia’s last wild rivers.
The Kowmung River represents significant heritage value and should be save at all costs.
Raising the dam wall will destroy this area and other significant world heritage areas of the Blue Mountains.
Independant reports show that there are more cost effective flood mitigation measures that do not destroy our environment.
The EIS seems to not reflect the severe damage that will be caused to Inigenous Heritiage. Again, there are alternatives that I urge the NSW Government to consider.
Important bushwalking corridors that’s will be lost are not reflected in the EIS. Can you please advise how these will be protected?
There seems to be systemic failures in the EIS that need to be addressed, with all relevant local councils opposing this project.
Independant reports indicate that this massive destruction is solely to increase development on flood prone lands. Please reconsider this.
I oppose the raising of Warragamba Dam as it will destroy world heritage areas permanently, there are far more suitable flood mitigation alternatives, Indigneous Hertigage must be protected.
Thank you once again.

To whom it may concern,
I wish to oppose further damage to the environment by raising the dam height for the benefit of human beings. It's time to stop population growth and leave what little bit of nature is left. I hate humans and our needy,greedy nature. We just keep taking and destroying nature which does not belong to any of us. Time to stop and think of better ways to deal with the water and the human problem. Flooding is natural, stopping it isn't.

To whom it may concern,
As a child I spent a great deal of time at Warragamba while the wall was being built For years thereafter I constantly heard reference to the water quality and the surrounding catchment. Everyone I knew revered the preservation of the precious resources. As time went on, I became more aware of the precious aboriginal heritage in the area and of stories of dispossession from the flooding of the Burragorang Valley. All told, I value the area and its heritage and can only see the proposal of increasing the height of the wall as devastating.
When I was not at Warragamba as a child, I was in the Carramar area, an area dramatically affected by floods. Even as a child, I was well aware of areas in the Fairfield--Canley Vale==Carramar area and areas between there and Warragamba, the Nepean flood plain, that flooded, of houses that were inundated, or parklands that were only so designated because they were severely flood prone.
Despite this very clear community knowledge, areas across the whole affected zone were later targeted by developers and greed. The governments were complicit. And now we're supposed to sit by and condone 'protective' work on the dam wall! I SCREAM, 'NO!' Hopefully we have matured as a society and now acknowledge the cruel treatment of aboriginal people and the blatant efforts to obliterate their culture. No more can we wipe out traditional lands and heritage-significant landmarks, species, waterways. We owe the aboriginal people, and ourselves in this land that we love, the respect due. It is time we stopped repeating the greed and callousness of the past.
The EIS is a deeply flawed report. From the choice of a firm with an appalling background of abusing Aboriginal land rights (and barred from the world bank as a consequence), to the omission of post-fire studies and the small fraction of the area to be impacted that was studied for Aboriginal Cultural significancr, and the tokenistic nod to threatened species...this whole report smacks of being a cynical exercise towards a predetermined end. Try as I will, I can find nothing that would convince me that the callous disregard for community in raising this wall is warranted.
Greed and disregard have caused the problems that we are told must be addressed. That does NOT justify risking the World Heritage Status of our Blue Mountains National Park area and callously disregarding the remaining culturally precious river, landmarks and flora and fauna of the Gundungurra people.
I have always loved my country...but of late, I feel ashamed. I'm am ashamed that the very proposition of desecrating this area has been deemed worthy of consideration. I strongly ask that the proposal be shelved. No wall-raising now or in the future.

To whom it may concern,
I was born at Windsor NSW in 1945 and witnessed many floods during and after the 1950's major flood events, my father felt there were many reasons the floods were so severe and that once Warragamba Dam was completed the flooding would not cause so much damage to the Nepean/Hawkesbury Region.
The trouble was that the floods still occured and the damage only became worse as subdivisions were permitted in the flood zones in South Windsor and Bligh Park and other areas.
There are many catchments that feed into the river system. The Rivers that ultimatley flow through the Warragamba Gorge and supply Sydney and the Greater Sydney Region, have a vast catchment area starting from the North at Baal Bone Gap the headwaters of the Coxs River System which includes Megalong Creek, Little River, Jenolan River, Cowmung River and many lesser tributaries, these join with the Wolondilly River (with it's catchment starting near Yass,) under Lake Burragorang. This is only a fraction of the Catchment area that feeds into the Nepean/Hawkesbury River System and to even think for a moment that RAISING THE WARRAGAMBA DAM by 14 or even 17 Metres, to coin a phrase, "There Dreaming".
The floods of 1867 left only small areas of Windsor out of water (our house, where I grew up at Church and Argyle Streets South Windsor was only 1/4 of an Inch above the flood level, this came from surveys carried out by the MWSDB). I saw the floods from the 1950's and later reach into Marsden Park, lower ares of Vineyards and close to the Box Hill subdivisions currently under construction and more than half way up Riverstone Railway Station.
It was estimated that it would take two years for the newly completed Warragamba Dam to fill, it only took a few weeks as a major flood event occured.
The Nepean River and tributaries meet the Warragamba River below the dam and flow unimpeaded, and gather flows from Erskine Creek, Grose River where the Nepean becomes the Hawkesbury. By this time the volume of water is huge, flooding the Lowlands along it's path. When the mass of water passes Windsor it effectivly cuts of South Creek, the South Creek Catchment at Windsor is feed by Badgeries Creek and other smaller tributaries from around Rooty Hill. I have seen water's rise at great speed in South Creek inudating the area and submerging the Railway Bridge over South Creek, also the Railway Tressle Bridge between Clarendon and Winsor when Rickaby Creek is cut off by the main river flow, this floods back into Londonderry.
Then the next major problem that occures is the Colo River, it's catchment is one of the worlds largest enclosed Valley's Systems, the Capertee Valley with the Capertee River, and it's tributaries, this in turn flows with great force into the Hawkesbury River at Unavoce,backing it up, creating an even greater rise in River heights upstream.
To expect the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall height to provide a safety buffer from flooding to allow Housing Subdivisions to be built on the flood plains that spread east towards Parramata would be plain negligent, when such large rivers cannot and will never be controlled and as they bypass Warragamba Dam anyone that would purchase a home in these flood areas would need to have a clause in any contract explaing there home may be subject to flooding.
I have lived in the Upper Blue Mountains for over 50 years and have had many bushwalks, led Scout Groups, ran a Environment Tour Business, have been a Guide at Jenolan Caves and have come to love the Greater Blue Mountains Heritage Area during this time, I am a keen Birder and Jooriland, is one of the areas that would be inundated and is one of the very few areas the Highly Endangered Regent Honeyeater breeds in. This cannot be allowed to happen.
The proposal to raise Warragamba Dam Wall will be a travesty, creating more harm than good and will not reduce the flooding downstream, THESE AREAS ARE NOT CALLED FLOOD PLAINS FOR ANY OTHER REASON THAN THEY FLOOD.
The environmental changes that are and will occure more frequently and with increased severity of our weather events, common sense must prevail before increased wealth is even considered.

To whom it may concern,
The Greater Blue Mountains Area is much too significant to drown vast areas of it, particularly based on insufficient justification and analysis.
The Blue Mountains National Park is my favourite playground, and I know that its environmental and cultural significance is only scratching at the surface compared to the areas that have laid protected within Special Areas and hard to reach Wilderness.
We do an incredibly poor job of valuing environment and wilderness. The fact is that it is invaluable, and once gone it is lost and cannot be returned to what it once was. We cannot continue to attribute low values to things because we struggle to put a value on it in the same way that we can put a value on the uplift of property due to the ability to rezone it (or reduce its flood risk).
Development in Western Sydney should be right sized to avoid development in those areas most prone to flood. The dam wall raising only delays major flood. The damage to property will still occur. There are other ways to delay the flood impact, allowing time for evacuation. The storage level in the dam could be lowered just enough to provide an amount of time that would enable communities (not overly densely built ones!) to escape. This would also prevent the disasterous downstream impacts of prolonged periods of high flow that would result from dam releases over the weeks or months following a flood.
The loss of water supply can be compensated through increased recycling and desalination, solutions more in tune with the impacts of climate change that our city faces.
It will be a devastating loss not just to the Greater Sydney community, but also to our country to allow a World Heritage site and legitimate Wilderness to be damaged in such a way for the sake of development.

To whom it may concern,
I am most concerned about the proposed raising of the Warragamba dam wall. I know indigenous peoples in the Blue Mountains who have connections to the area which may be flooded and I am a resident of the Blue Miuntains. I care for this environment by volunteering with Landcare, Ecomonitoring and propagation of local native plants. I also enjoy and value this world heritage bush land. Please do not go ahead with this expensive plan.

To whom it may concern,
This proposed project puts residents at further risk and the EIS has not properly assessed this. The invested interest of developers to have this dam wall raised directly threatens all of us that currently live and those whom may move to the already flood prone area of the Hawkesbury. The raised wall would not solve the flooding from the other four waterways that feed into the Hawkesbury basin and it allows for more water to be held and then released down stream.
Furthermore, there's no proven track record of the current dam operators properly managing the dam in the event of or lead up to a flood. In the most recent flood the dam operators truly let Hawkesbury residents down by not doing controlled releases throughout the year- this was even after many written requests to do so because many of us knew what risk we were in having the dam so full. The amount of water that came out in March devestated our area and could have been mitigated. At the very least we could have had more time to prepare and pack away.
Lastly, this proposed project destroys what bit of nature we should be protecting in the event you hold the dam at it's the proposed capacity. And once it's gone it's gone forever. Where is the value in being a World Heritage listed site? Come on Australia.
My positon is that I 100% oppose this project.
Go back to the drawing board and come up with a plan fit for the 21st century and beyond.

To whom it may concern,
• 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 speciesdiversity 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.
• 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.

I’m concerned about the affects of raising the height of Warragamba Dam. There are many reasons including destroying aboriginal heritage sites and habitat of endangered regent honeyeater. Alternative mitigation of flooding should be sort including building on flood plains.

To whom it may concern,
As a resident of the Blue Mountains, I would like to express my strong objection to the proposal to raise the Warragamba dam wall.
My family has grown up in this area. We enjoy the beauty of this World Heritage National Park on a regular basis, with activities such as bushwalking, rock-climbing, cayoning and camping. As a teacher, I have taken school excursions into the bushland to observe wildlife, and study the local flora and ecosystems, many of which would be put at risk if the area around the dam were to be flooded.
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.
I feel that other options to solve Sydney's water problems need to be explored and assessed. A combination of multiple strategies would be more favourable. If the wall of Warragamba dam is raised, there is no taking it down. The government - you as our representative, cannot reverse this decision.
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.
ALL options need to be thoroughly examined. Look to the future. Don't sacrifice many hectares of our wilderness; countless species of animals and plants (many of which have already been depleted by bushfires); and the precious wild areas in the valleys of our beautiful Blue Mountains.
I implore you to conserve and protect this area.
Do not allow the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
I hereby present this submission in opposition to raising the Warragamba Dam wall.
For the last 68 years since I was a child, I have holidayed in the Blue Mountains and for the last 30 years have visited the Blue Mountains every year and spent a number of days walking in the World Heritage national parks.
The proposal to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam and dramatically increase the area inundated by water storage. It is 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 increase in the dam wall.
In addition, over 1,541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal. No meaningful consultation has been undertaken with Gundungurra community members.
I am vehemently opposed to raising the Warragamba Dam wall and implore the responsible authorities to implement the available, identified alternatives to protect the existing floodplain communities in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley.

To whom it may concern,
I consider the dam wall raising proposal a complete waste of tax payers money.
The benefits would only serve the developers and the downsides will affect the rest of us.
The outcome will not guarantee a flood proof zone.
This proposal is ill conceived and should never have been tabled.
It should not proceed and should not be wasting any more time being discussed.

To whom it may concern,
The Blue Mountains World Heritage area has been fought for, for a reason. Wilderness is increasingly encroached on and eaten into. The balance of human and wild is threatened everywhere, constantly. Leadership in this looks to the future, not just a knee jerk grab in response to growth. Dams are being decommissioned across the world and the evidence is good that the wild rivers do regenerate themselves. Platypus and regent honey water birds are only 2 of the threatened species that find refuge in this area. Constantly fluctuating water levels will kill the riparian zone rendering it a dead zone. This is diabolical for platypus. Do we want them gone too, along with koalas, on our watch? No we do not. It has to stop. And it has to start with leadership that is forward thinking. And balances the need for wild. Please consider this decision with utmost care .

To whom it may concern,
Please if you are interested in stopping global warming why are you continuing to clear bush and destroy rivers to put houses on. Entice people to live in regional areas and fund hospitals ,education in those areas . Decentralise. It should not be growth of a city at all costs to feed hungry develpers . Look at the massive social issues that are created by big city growth ideas.

To whom it may concern,
I have spent my entire adult life hiking, camping and enjoying the blue mountains with my friends and family and regard it as one of the most beautiful spots in Australia.
I vehemetly oppose the Warragamba Dam wall raising for the below 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.
• 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.
And implore N.S.W government to explore the 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.