Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
Myself and my family are very concerned about this proposal. We dont believe that those concerned have explored all aspects of the causes of flooding. Are you seriously going to allow more development in a flood prone valley when the Warragamba river is by no means the sole source of all that flood water?
The amount of development already allowed & built should never have been permitted in the first place.
Better still why not preserve the flood - prone areas just for farming and a source of local market garden produce for Sydney.
Drowning futher areas of the Warragamba catchment valley is political vandalism.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a submission on the EIS on the Warragamba Dam Raising Project.

I have lived in the Blue Mountains for more than 20 years and have a love of its natural environment, with a particular concern for its unique plant communities. In my younger days, I have walked in Kowmung country.

I understand that, if the dam wall is raised, 5,700 hectares of World Heritage listed National Parks, 1,300 hectares of declared Wilderness Areas and 65 kilometres of the Blue Mountains wild rivers will be impacted. Flood waters will be held behind the wall for many weeks inundating the shores, killing the vegetation and leaving, when the water subsides, degraded silted areas ready for weed infestation.


This threat to the biodiversity and ecological integrity of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is completely unacceptable. We have International obligations to protect the area under the World Heritage Convention and run the risk of its being de-listed. Up to 76 threatened flora species and 16 threatened fauna species will be affected. One of the outstanding values for which World Heritage was declared was the area’s eucalypt diversity and yet this project intends to inundate areas of critically endangered eucalypt communities - Grassy Box Woodland and Camden White Gum Forest. There have been no field surveys after the disastrous 2019-2020 fires. Instead the EIS relies on desk-top analysis of pre-fire information, so we don’t know how these communities are faring.

The area is one of cultural significance to both indigenous and non-indigenous people.
Before the flooding of the Burragorang Valley for the dam in 1960, it was the home of the Gundungurra people. There are archaeological sites and places of great cultural value to descendants such as creation waterholes and ceremony grounds. I understand that only 27% of the area to be impacted has been surveyed, so the extent of possible future damage to indigenous cultural heritage sites is as yet unknown.

For the non-indigenous, the area has been loved by generations of walkers and contains some of the state’s and nation’s best-loved bushwalking destinations - the Kowmung River, the Kedumba Valley and Wild Dog Mountains.

I strongly oppose the raising of the dam wall and ask the Government to look to alternative measures for reducing the flood risk in Western Sydney - lowering of the dam’s full storage level, upgrading of evacuation roads, improved flood forecasting and above all, sensible planning of the use made of the floodplain. No more residential developments that put more people in harm’s way.

I accept the Department’s submissions disclaimer and declaration.

I have not made a reportable political donation in the past two years.

To whom it may concern,
I strongly object to the raising of the dam for residential purposes. The conservation and management of our wildlife needs to be considered and respected.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the proposed Warragamba Dam-Raising Project, for the following reasons:
• The National Parks and Wildlife Service said it failed to address impacts on species and ecological communities affected by last year’s bushfires.
• Heritage NSW said the EIS failed to properly consider cultural heritage values or adequately consult Traditional Owners.
• The Commonwealth Environment Department said the evaluation failed to consider impacts on iconic species like the platypus, and told the NSW Government to redo the entire heritage assessment.
• This is a time when more attention needs to be paid to the environmental impacts of development and to the voices of the Indigenous owners (e.g., is it wise to have a Pilbara-like situation in NSW?) It is so unfortunate that governments at all levels within in Australia continue to ignore scientific evidence that disagrees with their development proposals. It is embarrassing to us voters that so many of our politicians are so out of touch with and show disregard to the environmentally-protective practices already implemented by most of the world's developed nations.
• We are Queenslanders. My husband and I have taken our children across Australia, to show them the various ecosystems and to teach them to respect Indigenous values about looking after Country. As one of our many trips to NSW, we took our children to this region some years ago, so that they could witness and appreciate the unique animals and plants of this region for themselves. Surely there is another solution to this issue that will not result in the destruction of this area, eliminating the possibility of future generations from marveling too at this bucolic and unique ecosystems?

To whom it may concern,
I wish to express my concern at the impact the proposed raising of the dam wall will have on the indigenous and natural heritage of the region.
The propsal will endanger 5,700 hectares of UNESCO World Heritage-listed national park. Furthermore, it will flood and destroy 1,541 cultural sites of the Gundungarra people in the Burragorang valley, some dating back thousands of years. These sites are of great significance, and their loss will leave a permanent scar on our heritage.

To whom it may concern,
Warragamba dam wall does not need to be raised in my opinion. Government should not be building on a flood plan, there is too much urban sprawl and not enough planned land management and no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.

Please dont approve this increase in wall height

To whom it may concern,
With reference to a need to provide more water to residents of the Sydey area, why not take actions to reduce their water needs such as compostable toilets. I understand that 80% of a resident's water use is flushed! Flooding this world heritage area is simply more white fella asymetric vandalism of a previously balanced environment.
If you build on a floodplain then it is obviously plain to the least cognitive person that you will experience a flood. How about having all at risk houses upgraded and stumped?

To whom it may concern,
I object to the raising of the dam wall for the purpose of allowing the purchasers of very fertile floodplain/farmland to be able to make massive profits onsellingl land, if the land is zoned for housing once the dam wall height is increased at the taxpayers expense. If all the developers hoping for this wind fall paid 100% of the research costs, !00% of the deveopment/building costs, 100% of the costs of discussing and if agreeable, 100% of any financial or other types of compensation of the traditional owners; then the taxpayers of NSW and their elected representatives will be in a position to make a free and fair decision about the permemant destruction of the World Heritage and cultural sites. Before any work begins the potential devlopers should also ensure that there is insurance in place to rectify any and all damage.

To whom it may concern,
The purpose of this submission is to place on record my opposition to NSW Government plans to raise the height of the Warragamba Dam Wall and create innundation of a significant portion of the World Heritage listed Greater Blue Mountains National Park.
I'm a resident of the Blue Mountains with intergenerational links to the area and I am appalled by the NSW Government's plans for Warragamba Dam.
Facts:
The proposal does not provide proper long term economic and cultural modelling on the impact of the development on Western Sydney and the Greater Blue Mountains regions.
Population projections are not explained.
Flood mitigation measures not properly modelled.
Approval of the project would completely undermine existing protections for National Parks in general and in particular, the unique flora, fauna and cultural sites within the Greater Blue Mountains National Park.
I oppose the dam because I do not support the destruction of an existing protected conservation area having World Heritage significance. It is an act of absolute ignorance.

As Australia is one of the worst offenders when it comes to extinction rates, I oppose the Warragamba Dam Raising. No amount of 'documentation' can adequately protect and support the current environment and fauna and flora that will be either lost of displaced with the Warragamba Dam Raising project. Future generations will research and find which governments proactively protected the natural habitat of all the amazing diverse creatures of this country.

To whom it may concern,
I am deeply concerned by the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Warragamba Dam, its systematic failures, its consistency with what appears to be an eternal of encroachment on world heritage areas. Alternatives are obvious and begging for genuine consideration.

To whom it may concern,
please stop raising the dam wall. It is inappropriate to flood huge areas of world heritage bush land so houses can be built on a floodplain!

To whom it may concern,
I've been bushwalking in the Blue Mountains since I was a child. I've swum in the Kowmung River and consider it one of the most beautiful places I've ever been. It would be a tragedy to ruin it so I'm very much opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam.
It sounds like there are some big doubts about the validity of the Environment Impact Statement. The firm who produced it have a patchy history and there has been no assessment since the bushfires of 2019/20. At the very least could we revisit the EIS please?

To whom it may concern,
In my declining years, it has become increasingly clear to me that my generation has let coming generations of Australians down.
I have been aware of the growing crisis of accumulating atmospheric CO2 since 1974 when I began to describe the urgency of the matter to the media.
I spent 4 years in a State Parliament making speeches about the alarming rate of animal extinctions, and I have been an office-holder and/or committee member of multiple NFP's and environmental organisations continuously since 1973, and I feel deflated and defeated by my failure to effect any significant change in the attitudes of other Australians - to the extent that we still degrade ecosystems at increasing rate, we allow vast numbers of species of animals and plants to go extinct without protest, and we steadfastly refuse to acknowledge either the wisdom or the cultural identities or the natural 'rights' of indigenous communities who are forced to live among us.
The proposal to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam is a case to point, and as we stagger to formalise some form of accord in Glasgow to moderate the level of atmospheric degradation, however limited that moderation may be, I despair that all of the well-founded objections regarding additional exposure to environmantal degradation, risk to human lives and property, and the accelerated extinction of iconic species such as the Regent Honeyeater and a number of unique species of vegetation will also be in vain.

To whom it may concern,
I wish to submit that the extension of Warragamba Dam should not proceed. It would be environmentally disastrous and clearly devastate First Nations' peoples cultural heritage sites. The EIS completed by the NSW Government has been widely criticised for its inadequacies.
I am not convinced by the evidence presented that the higher dam wall will stop the risks of flooding in the western Sydney region.
There are alternative ways of improving water security that would not cost our dwindling natural ecosystems. There are greater benefits for families in building new suburbs in other, more environmentally sustainable, regions.

To whom it may concern,
Raising the Warragamba dam wall and consequent damage to natural and cultural values would be a clear breach of Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention.

To whom it may concern,
The Blue Mountains is more than just a national park for me, it's where I gained my immense love and deep connection to nature. Walking with my family through tracks and exploring the seemingly endless expanses of bushland was at the centre of my childhood. We would do a lot of bird watching during these times, listening for the distant shrills of honey eaters and grey strike thrushes, caws of magpies and butcher birds and the squawks of gang gang cockatoos. I am grateful to have had this opportunity to experience all of this, but I don't want to be counted as fortunate to have had these experiences. The raising of the dam will will take what is a free and wonderful experience away, forever.
Dams do not conserve water. If water was meant to stagnate in one place, settle into a open plain, it would. Raising this dam wall will only exacerbate evaporation, leading to more water loss not only for the stored water, but lead to less water being released down stream. It is counter productive to raise a dam wall only to see more water loss, more land destroyed due to flooding, all so more people can build and live in what is already an over crowded city.
The inundation of streams and rivers would see a severe decline in platypus and native fish species. These animals require flowing rivers and billabong, not dams, to breed and thrive as the flowing water carries food and nutrients. Raising this dam wall will ruin yet another sanctuary for our beloved wildlife.
I am opposed to the raising of the dam wall. For the sake of greed and lack of understanding, this government will continue to reap and plunder our world heritage sites for its own profit. I hope, for the sake of our planet, that we can start taking small steps to realise the importance of our natural environment and begin to make better decisions with everything in mind, not just humans.

I am so saddened by this short sighted permanent devastation of Sydney's precious bushland. Whatever happened to the Kurnell desalination plant and other more eco friendly options???

To whom it may concern,
I most strenuously oppose and object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall in the most strident terms possible, for reasons that are almost too numerous to list!
In short the proposal is utterly idiotic…
Not only will it not achieve its stated aims, it will do untold and irreversible environmental damage to almost 6,000 hectares of irreplaceable National Park, inundate 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, destroy aboriginal heritage and sacred sites, run contrary to the wishes of bulk of the residents of the affected floodplain area and the traditional owners, the Gundungurra community, increase the strain on the already leaking dam wall, may well prove to be structurally impossible to construct safely and totally ignores the fact that in 2000 the impacted area was placed on UNESCO’s World Heritage list in recognition of its Outstanding Universal Value.
Need I say more?
I shouldn’t have to, but “as there are none so deaf as those who will not hear”, I’ll spell it out for you…
The engineering firm (SMEC Engineering) who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project (presumably because they could be relied on to produce a favourable document), have an established history of abusing Indigenous rights, and they were recently barred from the World Bank. Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
Severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. To produce an EIS without considering the impact of future and more frequent bushfires due to global warming is criminally negligent. Can you justify why no post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken?
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. This is inexcusable and should negate the validity of the document on these grounds alone.
Obviously any objective assessment of the integrity of the environmental assessment would inevitably reach the conclusion that the EIS and the proposal itself is fundamentally flawed, and therefore cannot and should not 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, as mentioned above, 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 the consequent damage to natural and cultural values would be a clear breach of these undertakings and of Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention. It should render the NSW Government and the proponents liable to be prosecuted for criminal negligence.
An estimated 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers would be inundated by the Dam project including the Kowmung River – declared a ‘Wild River’ and which was afforded protection for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act of 1974.
Obviously this means nothing to the Philistines who are behind this project!
Diverse and unique eucalyptus species recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing such as the Camden White Gum will disappear.
A number of threatened Ecological Communities, notably Grassy Box Woodland which is the habitat for both endangered and critically endangered species including the Regent Honeyeater and Sydney’s last Emu population, will be flooded.
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.
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.
The range of 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.
The only group of people who benefit from this proposal (apart from the politicians who have presumably been suitable remunerated), are the developers, who aren’t in the least concerned that the homes they plan to build will be flooded and that the owners of these properties will be unable to obtain flood insurance.
This absurd and ill-conceived proposal should not proceed, but I suspect that it has already been approved behind closed doors and that this is simply a box ticking exercise...
Shame on you all!!!

Save what we have left today