Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I am a Sydney mother and grandmother who loves our Blue Mountains and has delighted in showing and sharing them with my children and grandchildren, other family and friends. I am shocked that the NSW Government is even considering raising the walls of Warragamba Dam. This is a world heritage site as well as a recognised Aboriginal cultural site but the traditional owners have not given independent, informed consent to the proposed raising of the dam.

To whom it may concern,
It really should be clear. We cannot continue to build in places where nature makes it clear we shouldn't.
I am a proud Australian who loves recommending areas of beauty to overseas and local visitors.
Anyone with any wisdom about the environment would know that there are far too many problems with the proposed raising of the dam wall - the fact that the company who did the assessments has been barred by the world bank is only the start.
Please start taking our environment seriously - do not allow this to go ahead.Regards,

To whom it may concern,
Please reconsider the proposal to raise the Warrangamba dam wall.
My interests are those of a visitor to the Blue Mountains, and of an Australian citizen who must be critical of an incomplete and misleading EIS.
Flood plain flooding might be reduced marginally, but combined approach of multiple options has been recommended as the most cost-effective means of flood risk mitigation.
I am concerned that flood compensation paid to property owners by the Commonwealth comes partly from my taxes. Building on flood plains has long been stupid, and remains so.
Alternative options were not comprehensively assessed in the EIS, which cannot be used to approve anything until it it is heavily amended.
A good way to ensure extinction of threatened species is to base approvals on a flawed EIS.
If there are any economic benefits to be had from raising the dam wall, the modelling to back them is not provided. This would seem to be a very basic requirement of the process.
So many expert groups with skin in the game oppose this quite poor proposal that surely it will be reconsidered.

To whom it may concern,
I am most concerned about the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. This will very adversely affect the Blue Mountains World Heritage area and will be a breach of Australia's undertakings to the World Heritage Convention. Unique plant and bird populations will be further endangered as a result. Parts of the beautiful Kowmung River will be indundated.
This is apalling.
Please do not go ahead with this plan.

To whom it may concern,
To allow Warragamba Dam to be raised 17 metres for the sake of further development is criminal for the well being of the current environment surrounding the Dam.
People must learn to use water more sustainably and to stop building and expanding dams that only destroy sensitive and rare ecosystems, and do nothing to teach people to use water sustainably. Tanks on houses and recycled used water is certainly a good start to this process.
Australia is the driest continent on the planet and to use our scarce resource in this way is more or less the same as denying climate change

To whom it may concern,
As an avid lover of the outdoors I am appalled by the proposed Warragamba Dam wall raising. The resulting landscape change and habitat destruction that the raising would create are simply not worth it - we should not damage the environment for the sake of building housing in a flood plain. As Australians we should be proud of our natural lanscapes and animals and should be doing everything in our power to protect them.

To whom it may concern,
Raising the walls of Warragamba dam would be an environmental disaster.
Raising the walls means more than 1000 highly significant sites, Indigenous cave art and burial sites and sites of cultural and historical value will be a mud plain. This must not happen.
Wild rivers and bushwalking areas will be flooded.
This also must not happen.
When will you realise that nature, history and culture is vital, and that destroying these areas will be economically disastrous in the long run?
Please, do not raise the dam walls.

To whom it may concern,
I do not agree or want the Warragamba dam wall to be raised. The Cox's reiver Kowmung and Wollondilly will be adverseley affected including wildlife.
Cultural sights and walks will be affected.
It will not stop flooding because once the dam wall is breachedMORE housing developments will be affected

To whom it may concern,
The idea of raising the Warringah Dam Wall would once again destroy some of the cultural Herritage of we Australians should guard with all our might. The flood plain should never have been opened up to development. With all the talk of increasing our population by another 2 million it would appear that no thought has been given to the need to feed this population.
Developers have been allowed free reign in too many areas where the land has been cleared and inappropiate building has taken place. The need to raise the wall would be another example of bad development.

To whom it may concern,
You cannot be serious about raising the dam wall at Warragamba. Given the serious Concerns raised by state agencies and national parks and conservation groups, not to mention the destruction of indigenous cultural heritage, it is unconscionable that this project could go ahead.

To whom it may concern,
I am shocked that despite the guidance of the Federal Environment Department, the National Parks and wildlife service and Heritage NSW, the NSW government is pushing ahead with raising the walls of the Warragamba dam.
Rather than damage yet more of the natural environment in NSW in order to accommodate the growing infrastructure needs of the city of Sydney, doesn't it make more sense to mandate that future homes become self-sufficient or at least partly self-sufficient in water supply. After all, that is what those of us who live off the grid, waterwise , in much of regional NsW need to do

leave the dam alone - the environment needs protected from politicians.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to oppose the proposal to raise the dam wall, in particular because I am a bushwalker and am familiar with the beauty of the lower Kowmung River which will be flooded if the project goes ahead. In addition the flooding will have a significant negative impact overall on the World Heritage Blue Mountains National Park and Kanangra Boyd National Park and the fauna which they contain.
Further I am aware of significant deficiencies in the environmantal impact study undertaken by SMEC which indicate to me that the environmental concerns are largely being ignored.
In addition, I do not believe that the postulated benefits of raising the dam wall will be acheived and that the stated flood abatement benefits are in part illusory.
Even further if, God forbid, there were to be a dam failure, an even bigger dam would cause an even greater catastrophe and greater loss of life and such a possibility cannot be totally excluded.
For the above reasons, I am strongly opposed to the project.

To whom it may concern,
I have lived in the Hawkesbury for forty years and have experienced several floods. While my home has not been flooded I have been cut off due to flooded roads and bridges. However, I do not support the plan to raise Warragamba Dam wall.
Warragamba Dam cannot be a water storage dam and be used to reduce flooding. Alternative cheaper methods of increasing Sydney's water supply should be used such as another desalination plant and water recycling. I drink recycled water as does everyone who consumes water from the Hawkesbury -Nepean River.
Warragamba Dam can then be operated at a much lower level to mitagate flooding. The World Heritage National Park must not be used to store further water. Too much habitat and fauna have already been damaged by fire and should not be inundated.
Raising the dam wall would put three threated species at risk of extinction. The offsets in the EIS are insufficient to preserve the World Hertiage Blue Mountains National Park and these threatened species.
Real flood strategies are need in the Hawkesbury that take into account flooding from The Grose and Colo Rivers as well as South Creek. At risk properties which should not have built should be brought back and the flood plain left as rural and natural landscapes.

To whom it may concern,
I have been resident in the Blue Mountains for the past 1O years and am very well acquainted with the Burragorang Valley.
The area to be inundated by the proposed increased height of the Warragamba Dam wall has been recognised as part of a National Park and a World Heritage area.
That this is to be discounted in favour of flood plain development typifies the short sighted greed of those behind the proposal, and they fully deserve the the domestic and international scorn that such a project attracts.

To whom it may concern,
The proposed raising of the Waragamba Dam wall is dumb, an incomplete solution, and will cause even more damage to Blue Mountains habitats.
NO! NO ! NO ! No bloody way ! I live in Queensland but this is my country too, my world heritage area.

To whom it may concern,
I am a resident of the Blue Mountains and explore and bushwalk every chance I can get. Raising the dam will only benefit the developers and justify more clearing and over devleoping.
Raising the dam will not prevent floods. It will only add to the list of environmental abominations the NSW Government has approved and aid in futher destruction to Aboriginal Heritage areas.
For these reasons I oppose the dam.

To whom it may concern,
For anyone like myself who has spent time exploring the great Kowmung and its surrounds it is unfathomable that this unique area and it's flora and fauna would be put at risk without clear evidence that species, cultural sites and flora can be protected. Considering the current situation with climate change I find it incomprehensible we continue to manipulate the environment for short term, if any, gains. There appears to be little real evidence of the benefits of the project and plenty of well informed groups proving a lack of benefit and a much greater negative impact than the public is lead to believe. There will be no chance to reverse the impacts of even short term flooding into these sensitive areas. Let's not forget the loss of Lake Pedder
When also are we going to respect aboriginal culture and listen to their concerns. They have a deep understanding of this land.
I oppose any increase in the height of the dam wall and sincerely hope the powers to be look at the irreversible consequences of changes to nature,made in the past, under the pretence of development and well being of society.

To whom it may concern,
I was born and raised in the Blue Mountains and have lived here for most of my life. I have been on countless bushwalks and mountain bike rides through the beautiful bushland over almost four decades, and formed a profound appreciation for and connection to this place that continues to deepen. The Blue Mountains, including the National Park and World Heritage Area, will always be my heart’s home and the foundation of my world.
There are several pertinent facts that the Minister must consider carefully when deciding whether or not to approve the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall:
• The proposal is to raise the wall by 17 metres, yet in the EIS, only 7.5 metres of this increase is considered an “impact area” for assessment.
• Only 27% of this impact area was assessed for Aboriginal cultural heritage, and with grossly inadequate thoroughness, as the author of that assessment spent just one day in the field.
• The proposal would inundate and destroy 5,700 hectares of National Parks and 1,300 hectares of World Heritage Area, drowning important habitat for threatened and endangered species and destroying at least 1,500 Indigenous cultural heritage sites.
• The assessment failed to take account of the devastating impacts of the 2019/20 bushfires on these species, since no post-fire wildlife surveys were conducted.
The EIS process and document is clearly extremely inadequate and flawed, the extent and severity of potential impacts vastly underestimated, and the proposal an obvious violation of Australia’s international obligations to protect this World Heritage Area. Against these grave costs and consequences, the EIS does not present any modelling of claimed flood mitigation and economic benefits, while alternatives have not been sufficiently considered.
For all of these reasons, I strongly oppose the proposal to raise the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
Having read the recent EIS submitted by the NSW Government and Sydney Water, it is beggars belief that no consideration is being given to the impacts to world heritage now and future and not just the impacts to flora, fauna and cultural sites, but to the Blue Mountains Townships whose residents often rely on our Unesco listing for Tourism based business.
We all saw quite vividly the recent attempts to declare the GBR in danger that might impact its own listing, and saw the national concern for Queensland tourism business, but no such concern seems to be given for the Warragamba project.
Our World Heritage is already at risk from the Western Sydney Airport development, without international visibility of flight paths and publically visible Environmental Impact Statements on a 24 hour airport on the doorstep of the World Heritage Area. Flooding parts of that area in the name of downstream flood mitigation would be a nail in the coffin, and even if you were to disagree with that assessment, you can't exclude that prospect being realised.
After Fires, Pandemic, and of course the flooding rains, Blue Mountains communities are still reeling economically from the devstation to our local businesses, and continuing with this project could see that continue. Stores have closed never to reopen, our visitaion is not likley to recover to pre bushfire levels in the next decade, and yet neither the EIS nor the NSW Government seem to be concerned about the economic impacts to mountains residents, only to the developers who want to build mega estates on the flood plains.
If flood mitigation is really the reasoning behind this, rather than reduced insurance for mass developments, the funds associated with the project would be wiser put to flood defences, levies, trench building and river drain improvements downstream, and the developers who want to build in these high risk areas should be paying for those defenses. Not the NSW Taxpayer, and certainly not at the risk of our World Heriatge listing and all the economic woes that will come with it.
Please, we all implore you to reconsider this proposal, and seek downstream alternatives to flood mitigation and defense, and leave our world heritage