Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I am against raising the dam because of the environmental impact. Build other catchments/tanks that do not cause this much damage to our environment & have less evaporation.

To whom it may concern,
We oppose the Dam raising project. Essentially because of the damage to World Heritage and Cultural sites which would be done if the project goes ahead.
The Gunungurra Tradional owners have not given Free, Prior and Informed Consent to the project.
There are alternatives to assist the flooding downstream that have not been comprehensively assessed in the EIS.

To whom it may concern,
The raising of Warragamba Dam's wall should not go ahead. The findings of the EIS released by the NSW Governement downplay the severity of impacts that would be associated with this proposal. As a community member who uses these spaces, enjoys the natural environment and works for Sydney Water I urge the NSW Gov to reconsider this proposal.
The views of a few property developers downstream should not overweight the views of the community, Indigenous peoples and the environmental value of the Warragamba catchment area.
As impacts from climate change worsen for Greater Sydney, mitigation measures will become literally life saving. Spending millions on raising the dam wall could be better spend on flood mitigation measures downstream of the dam, and from other tributries that enter the Hawkesbury-Nepean River.
Please consider doing appropriate consultation with the local community and the Indigenous community before putting the wants of developers over the wants of current and future community members.

To whom it may concern,
For so many reasons, raising the Warragamba Dam wall is not in our best interests. It will not achieve the aim and will cause a severe threat to the surrounding areas and wildlife. Please reconsider.

To whom it may concern,
I am a student of conservation biology, environmental educator and a mother of three. We have travelled into the Blue Mountains national park and savour the wilderness area, and am thankful that this area was protected as wildlerness.
I am writing to oppose the dam wall being raised, as this will lead to catastrophic and irreversible damage of ecosystems and Aboriginal sites.
Urban fragmentation and loss of habitat is the number one most threatening process impacting on our species and threatens many with extinction.
I am opposed to the urban development on the floodplains. Under climate warming it is predicted that flooding events will be more extreme and frequent. It is risky to have any more housing development in the floodplains. We are also losing threatened ecological communities in the floodplains of Western Sydney due to urban development and clearing. We need to apply the precautionary principle and ensure that we are not causing irreversible damage to these threatened ecological communities. The last remnants are irreplaceable, with their loss we will have local species extinctions.
I am concerned that there Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was produced by SMEC Engineering a firm who have a history of failing Indigneous rights, and who are barred from the world bank. How can they assess Aboriginal cultural heritage and our wilderness with such a poor track record.

The EIS has not considered the impact of the black summer 2019/2020 fires which burnt out 82% of the Blue Mountains World Heritage forests, what remains, are we destroying intact forest that is a wildlife refuge.
Less that a third of the area that will be impacted was assessed for Aboriginal heritage - and were Aboriginal communities and elders well represented? Were academic cultural historians well represented on the EIS survey?
The EIS does not meet requirements for threatened species surveys. They are incomplete and lack expert support.
There is no modelling of the flood.
The EIS is flawed in many ways.
The Blue Mountains World Heritage area is listed as a global heritage site for Outstanding Universal value. Flooding the area by raising the Warragamba dam wall will permanently damage the ecology and the cultural sites. This goes in the face of UNESCO listing. Our last wild river in the Sydney area, Kowmung River which is pristine, would be damaged and inundated permanently.
The project would threaten and risk the extinction of eucalptus species, such as Camden White Gum, and Threatened Ecological Communities such as Grassy Box Woodland and habitat for Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney's remaining emu populations.
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.
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.

To whom it may concern,
I am very concerned at the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall.
Raising the dam would destroy large areas of the Blue Mountains National Park. During high rainfall events, many areas would be inundated. These include the Cox River, an area I am particulraly fond of visiting. The inundated areas have many rae and threatened plant and animal speices incuding a near-extinct honey-eater. This would have a higely detrimental effect on the World Heritage value of the naitonal park.
Raising the wall will also have impacts on species and ecological communities affected by last year’s bushfires.
I understand the EIS did not adequately consult Traditional Owners, which is unnacceptable.
I also understand the Commonwealth Environment Department said the evaluation failed to consider impacts on iconic species like the platypus.
It would be better just not to build on the floodplains, whatever pressure developers may bring to bear. This is a real significant threat to Australia’s World Heritage and should not go ahead, especially as alternatives exist.

To whom it may concern,
I am extremely concerned, on the basis of good, solid scientific evidence, that any dam raising at Warragamba will have enormous environmental impact.
In this climate crisis era and rapid erosion of the UNbuilt environment, any extra impact eg flooding, destruction of wildlife habitat, cannot be countenanced.
My family have walked in the Blue Moutains and surrounds since the 1930s; we do not wish to see the rich natural heritage of this area destroyed. Studies show that no matter how high the dam wall is built, a large percentage of flood water comes from other sources beside upstream from Warragamba dam.
Other options to wall raising must be considered!

To whom it may concern,
I strongly believe raising the wall of Warragamba dam is a wrong move. Water is an essential resource that can be harvested and stored in many ways. Measures to reduce use and conserve/prevent waste/stop leaks need to be our focus.

To whom it may concern,
We are at a critical time in history when we can no longer make environmental sacrifices. Climate change and diminishing biodiversity is jepardise not only our natural systems, but futtre generations of Australians. The perceived benefits to housing, and those who profit from land development, can no longer be justified to destroy valuable wild areas and indigenous cultural sites. Homes should never have been built on a flood and new homes are a further abrogation of responsibility for people and planet. The current EIS is the subject of considerable criticism and seems to be designed to support a previously made decision. My grandchildren deserve better from their Government. This EIS needs to be rejected, this proposal ought not to proceed, and the EIS process for future projects must be independent and at alarms length to Government and developer interests.

To whom it may concern,

I am an avid bushwalker and I adore travelling this beautiful country to witness all of the glorious Flora and Fauna Australia has to offer. When I heard about proposals to raise the Warragamba Dam wall I was concerened. I have always wanted to visit the Blue Mountains, it's high on my list of places to explore. The last thing I want after the devestation of bush fires is for there to be further damage before I can make it there.

I worry because the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has multiple systematic failures:
• 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.
• Only27% 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.
• Theintegrity of the environmental assessment is fundamentally flawed, and cannot be accepted as a basis for further decision-making by the Minister for Planning.
Gundungurra Traditional Owners have not given free, prior and informed consent:
• Over1541 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.
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.
There are alternatives.
• 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.

To whom it may concern,
The dam wall should not be raised because:
• The National Parks and Wildlife Service said it failed to address impacts on species and ecological communities affected by last year’s bushfires. We are already facing mass extinctions and raising the wall will accelerate them. If ecosystems collapse, so do we.
• Heritage NSW said the EIS failed to properly consider cultural heritage values or adequately consult Traditional Owners. This is scandalous, and damaging to Australia's international reputation, especially after the destruction of the Juukan Gorge site.
• 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. If these species go, so does tourism: the state's economy is damaged by damage to the environment
Instead, alternatives should be actively explored and genuine consultation with Traditional Owners should take place.
And the experts should be listened to: their advice must be sought and then followed.

To the NSW government

Re Warragamba Dam wall raising
Protect the environment and stop damming water to allow for more development.
Redo the EES with correct information, and re- plan your proposal. Protect existing houses from flooding by emergency evaculation when required and stop building on flood prone land, or land that has now become flood prone.
Recognise climate change and the need to change or trajectory, don't just continue to make the same mistakes of the past.

To whom it may concern,
This plan to raise the dam wall by 17m is far too risky and certainly not worth loosing world heritage areas and first nation sacred sites
The NSW goverments own National parks & Wildlife Service also comes out against this propoasal along with the Heritage NSW and the Commonwealth environmental department
Lets look at the alternatives or at least reducing the height raised, so it protects our natural environment and rivers

To whom it may concern,
This is an absolute disgrace. Destruction of aboriginal heritage for monetary gain.
Current investigations into NSW state Govt corruption is hard enough to swallow.
This sort of state vandalism will also add another smear on the history of the NSW Liberal Party.
We implore you to stop this devastation.

To whom it may concern,
I am appalled that the NSW government is prepared to destroy so much Aboriginal heritage and such a large area of World Heritage bushland purely for the benefit of property developers. The irony is that the Warragamba Dam does not control the Nepean River and in the recent big flood the largest portion of the water came down the Nepean Valley and Grose River Valley.
It is criminal to put more and more people's lives in danger by continuing to build houses in the flood plain. This is some of the most fertile country we have and should be used for agricultural purposes or to preserve native species habitat.

To whom it may concern,
I am strongly opposed to the extension of the warragamba dam wall.
This measure would destroy significant aboriginal cultural sites, destroy river integrity downstream, leading to environmental degradation of the river system, and cause irreparable damage.
The reasons for heightening the dam wall does not justify this damage.
I urge you to reconsider.

To whom it may concern,
As a professional, qualified heritage consultant I am appalled at the poor quality of this so-called EIS. It does not address many areas of concern and seems to be written to justify a decision which has already been made. Please go back and do the job properly. Then, you might find that there is absolutely no justification for raising the dam wall and destroying so much heritage and our natural environment.

To whom it may concern,
I really hope that the Warragamba Dam wall is not raised.
It will be a huge expense, and will not protect houses in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley as half of the flood water comes from waters that are not controlled by the Dam.
But even more important, I am concerned that the traditional owners have not agreed, and that there will be a huge loss of cultural sites.
If the dam wall is raised, more than 1,000 sites of immense cultural and historical significance in the beautiful Burragorang Valley — irreplaceable Indigenous cave art galleries and occupation and burial sites — will be drowned under metres of muddy water.
Upstream inundation would also destroy the mighty Kowmung River, 6,000 hectares of the World Heritage-listed Blue Mountains National Park, and further endanger already threatened species like the regent honeyeater and the Camden white gum.

The NSW Government recently released an environmental impact statement was heavily condemned by several agencies:
• 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.
Please do not raise the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
The raising of the Warragamba Dam walls at the expense of National Park areas and World heritage sites is the most short-sighted, uninspired and outright vandalistic plan that has yet been proposed. The government is meant to protect both National Parks as well as world heritage and cultural sites and once again plans to run roughshod over the few sites that need to be respected and safeguarded (and the government is meant to protect on our behalf).
So, indeed, we need water. First, dams are the least efficient way to store water because of the very high evaporative rate. Second, the Warragamba Dam can still flood post raising because of the way additional water feeds into the dam.
It is now time, if the present government lacks the will (or the knowledge), to look back at countries with low rainfall in antiquity- visit Petra with its vast underground water storage areas or Istanbul or the significant underground water storage areas that King Solomon built. The water stays fresh and clear, evaporation rate is extremely low and countries with much lower rainfall have more water than Sydney! The raising of the dam is not just ridiculous but perhaps the greatest folly ever planned by a NSW government!
The government will be the laughing stock of the world and shocked at the vandalism when all it needed to do is plan cleaver underground pipe systems that go into underground storage.
Of course, this is more expensive at the moment but very much cheaper in the long run and serves the community much better.
There are many other ways that strategically would benefit us in water storage/availability and the government may want to pursue alternatives not with people who might most benefit from from the wall raising project.
As I read it, raising of the Warragamba Dam, once again, shows that the government has no regard whatever for Aboriginal values and sacred sites, is ready to destroy a significant part (some 5700 hectares) of a protected National Park and a major tourist attraction. This is shameful and not the way to go, is unbelievably destructive, unimaginative to the extreme, will ultimately not serve Sydney and will lose my respect for the decision makers completely and that of many others, if this act of folly is to proceed.

To whom it may concern,
I'm writing to urge against raising the wall of the Warragamba Dam by 17 metres so that low-lying floodplains in Western Sydney may be built on.
If the dam wall is raised:
1. More than 1,000 sites of huge cultural and historical significance in the wonderful Burragorang Valley will be lost.
2. Upstream inundation will destroy the mighty Kowmung River and 6,000 hectares of the World Heritage-listed Blue Mountains National Park - and will furher endanger already threatened species like the Regent Honeyeater and the Camden White Gum.
3. The EIS fails to address impacts on species and ecologies communities affected by last year's bushfires, and iconic species like the platypus have been ignored.
With respect, this is the most significant threat to our World Heritage in decades. Please, please, re-do the entire heritage assessment. Australians, present and future, will be profoundly grateful.