Warragamba Dam Raising

As residents of the Blue Mountains with an interest in regeneration, and also being active members of Windsor PaddlesSports Club, we can understand both the impact of inundating the mountains by holding back floodwater, and the impact of flooding rain on the Nepean and Hawkesbury plains.
Neither is a good thing in today’s world, but the latter is a natural occurrence.
The river has flooded for many thousands of years, probably longer, and the result, despite farmlands being destroyed for an occasional season, was wonderfully fertile soils from which Sydney and surrounds could be fed.
The Blue Mountains and World Heritage areas are not areas accustomed to floods. Everything in that environment relies on the ecosystem being maintained. While temporary flood waters will not destroy everything, the ecosystem will be undermined and the diversity irretrievably damaged. Repeated floodings, a real possibility due to climate change, will magnify the destruction.
Aboriginal cultural heritage sites are precious. To consider damaging them for a flood mitigation scheme that has other options is very hard to understand, let alone explain to indigenous people and our own grandchildren.
Town planners have always understood the potential for flooding on the plains and isolation of higher regions, yet houses have been given permission to build there without providing safe infrastructure and exit roads in the event of serious flooding. Government agreement to consider building even more houses in these regions is hard to comprehend.
We shouldn’t forget the February 2020 flood when the Warragamba Dam wall held back all the water flowing into Lake Burragorang and yet the water still rapidly rose in the Hawkesbury and submerged Richmond Bridge and the old Windsor Bridge, and was only a metre or two off submerging the new Windsor Bridge, then under construction, which is only 3 metres higher.
We strongly oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall for a number of reasons:
1. It will not prevent the natural floodplains of the Nepean and Hawkesbury regions being impacted from heavy rainfall in the Grose and Nepean River catchments, as well as from South and Cattai Creeks.
2. It will permanently impact the ecosystem of the Blue Mountains National Park and World Heritage areas, and damage or destroy invaluable Aboriginal sites.
3. The huge amount of money to build the wall could be better spent relocating people in homes susceptible to serious flooding and building safety infrastructure. This will also free up valuable agricultural land in close proximity to Sydney.

Thank you for reading and considering our submission,
Judy & Phil Greenidge

To whom it may concern,

As a NSW resident who spent nearly 30 years living in Western Sydney flood plains near Penrith and substantial time in the Blue Mountains wilderness, I write in firm opposition to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.

Despite no longer living in the region, my heart and mind very much remains with the Blue Mountains. This has particularly been the case over the last 2 years following the devastating and unprecedented damage to World Heritage National Park following the 2019-20 bushfire season. I am filled with dismay, upon the added consideration that some of the most pristine, untouched wilderness that remains may disappear forever if the Warragamba Dam wall is raised. As an avid trail runner and 5 year participant in the Ultra Trail Australia 100, I have experienced the magic of the Blue Mountains well into the valley and below the canopy that few ever get to see. We have had the privilege of the Gundungurra Traditional Owners sharing these special places with us.

Kedumba Valley and surrounds is just one of these very special places - a place that will disappear or become damaged beyond comprehension as part of the water backflows that come from raising the wall. It breaks my heart to consider that places such as this may forever be underwater due to despicable planning decisions fuelled by greed in the same way that the Burragorang Valley that was formed for the existing dam will never again see the light of day.

Despite being an umbrella term used for the National Park, the Blue Mountains is incredibly diverse and not one and the same; especially beneath the canopy that few tourists or government officials will ever visit. What we stand to lose through the potential raising of the dam wall cannot be experienced or replaced elsewhere within the confines of the Blue Mountains National Park, or indeed elsewhere in NSW or Australia. This is even after considering that we have already lost several other special places in the Park that will never again be the same after the devastating bushfires, floods and landslides that followed. In a different valley to that impacted by the dam wall raise, the Blue Gum Forest in the Grose Valley in Blackheath is just one of recently destroyed places of natural significance following the Gospers Mountain bushfire. Not only does this outcome have personal significance to locals or anyone in the bushwalking community, but just this example of irreparable damage is likely already putting the World Heritage Status of the Blue Mountains National Park at risk alongside the estimated 80% of the Park that were fire affected in that horrific season.

More than 12 months post-fire I have re-visited the Blue Gum Forest and it could best be described as an environmental wasteland that fills one with deep grief – despite the well-known Australian platitude that the bush will just ‘bounce back’ after fire or ‘normal’ environmental events, any of us who deeply care about the Blue Mountains and spend significant time in these special places can assure you that this is simply not the case. Similarly, I believe an overarching desktop view has been taken with flippant regard towards the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall by pen pushers in Sydney who have never experienced these special places. I know that raising the Warragamba Dam wall will be equally as disastrous on a personal, environmental (flora and fauna) and cultural grounds as the 2019-2020 bushfire season and its aftermath has been.

It is well known that the initial surveying to document the environmental impact of raising the wall was lacklustre, underwhelming and lacking accuracy. Equally put forth, is that raising the wall will destroy this wilderness and sites of cultural significance for no good reason. Contrary to belief, this will not prevent flooding on the flood plains. They are called ‘flood plains’ for a reason – as humans there is only an extent to which we can control nature with our arrogance. Many of the inflows and tributaries to the Nepean River further downstream of the Warragamba Dam wall are known to contribute to most of the flooding during severe events such as that of early 2021. As such raising the wall is futile, poorly thought out and a weak pork-barrelled political strategy.

As just one voice of many, I urge you to please NOT raise the Warragamba Dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
I am strongly opposed to the proposal to raise Warragamba dam.
The well-publicised and disastrous effects would include destruction of prime national park bushland, with further threats to endangered species, notably the regent honeyeater.
Aboriginal sacred sites would be inundated.
I don't believe that any possible benefit could outweigh the loss of even more habitat.

Why destroy nature when does not make life better? Why destroy World Heritage sites?? It is NOT your land to do whatever you want.

This project must not go ahead the destruction that it would cause is not negotiable

To whom it may concern,
The EIS regarding the dam is a very inferior document.
1. It failed to report on the entirety of the subject area and the risks and impacts which would be triggered by the proposed plan to enlarge the dam.
2. It classified all indigenous cultural heritage items located in the small percentage of the area actually searched as of low significance in a table contained in the report albeit in a tiny paragraph elsewhere admitting the significance to local indigenous people.
3. It failed to comment on the potential negative impact for climate change. Australia has just signed up to a global plan to prevent deforestation to address climate change issues.
This dam plan will destroy massive segments of the World Heritage listed Bushland and so create massive deforestation and hence contribute adversely to speeding up climate change precisely at a time when countries are promoting changes to our standard practices to reduce climate change. This issue simply has not been considered.
4. The plan fails to consider the real possibility of human induced seismic activity in a geologically unstable area where earthquakes frequently occur already albeit usually at a low magnitude.
The NSW Dam Authority [ and other scientific bodies] report that there is a risk of seismic activity triggered by very large bodies of water
This in fact did occur after the current dam was constructed when two significant earthquakes were triggered one at Picton and one at Robertson within 5-10 years of the original construction which is according to reported science the potential risk when constructing very large dams.
Of course, some 60 years ago the development surrounding the area of the dam was far less than today.
Given the area is honeycombed with old mines - the possibility of human induced seismic activity because of increased pressure on the surface of the landscape which would be created by the increase in the dam size, is quite a real threat.
Only recently the effect of a quake in northern Victoria above magnitude 5 was seen to have caused actual building damage as far away as Melbourne and was recorded in NSW and as far away as Qld.
5. The allegation of flood mitigation fails to take account of the fact that many of the rivers which may cause flooding in the area are not and would not be captured by the dam.
It is in any event unwise to build extensively on flood plain land as developers wish to do, putting profit over people and with complete disregard for safeguarding the environment now and into the future.
6. The report also fails to give adequate regard to the impact on wild life especially including endangered bird species whose home is in the areas of the heritage forest which would be flooded or adversely impacted by rising water levels for long periods of time.
7. This plan to destroy much of our world heritage forest is a travesty and will invite catastrophe on many fronts.
It would risk the loss of world heritage status at a time Australia is asked to and will do its bit to improve the planet and prevent destruction of natural habitats unnecessarily which includes making decisions which limit negative climate change impacts. The majority of Australians see the need to balance development against the need for protecting the planet.
The plan to increase the size of the dam will damage this section of the planet for no real overall benefit to the wider community and once destroyed it is destroyed forever.
Destroying a bush heritage would hardly be a good look in the eyes of the world and the proposal really is an indictment on those who want to push through this plan.

To whom it may concern,
No RaIsing of Warragamba Dam 17metres.

Raising the dam will not alleviate flood mitigation.
Houses need to be removed from flood plain area
The main aim of raising the dam is to service Liberal donor developers who want 100,000 new homes on dangerous high flood prone land..that won't be insurance.
NSW can't afford to lose precious wild rivers like Kowmung 5000 hectares to be flooded and unique flora, bird species and hundreds of Gundungura Aboriginal cultural sites..Raising the dam is environmental murder and Aboriginal cultural genocide of sacred land e.g. flooding.
NSW cannot afford 5000 hectares loss of Blue Mountains National Park.
NSW should implement non raising the dam flood mitigation e.g. pre release of flood water in High rain events, building escape routes in flood areas and removing houses in flood plain high risk areas.
I am totally opposed to raising the dam $1.5 billion environmentally destructive project for 100,000 new houses downstream on floodplain.
We cannot afford to lose Regent Honeyeater critically endangered habitat from flooding and Camden Gums in flood area..to be flooded.

To whom it may concern,
The Warragamba Dam should not go ahead.
It should not go ahead for the following reasons:
THE EIS HAS SYSTEMATICALLY FAILED;
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.
THIS IS AN ATTACK ON OUR WORLD HERITAGE AND CULTURAL SITES;
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.
GUNDUNGURRA TRADITIONAL OWNERS HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT FOR THE DAM PROPOSAL TO PROCEED;
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 ALTERNATIVES TO RAISING THE WARRAGAMBA DAM WALL;
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 live in the Wollondilly shire, I'm a science high school teacher and part time driver on the Sydney Light Rail. Once a month a group of us, friends, work colleagues, family go for a hike into the Blue Mountains or the Southern Highlands.
I speak on behalf of all of us when I say we are concerned for the loss of the natural and cultural diversity of our World Heritage Area that the raising of the Warraganba Dam wall will cause.
Every piece of of natural evironment that currently exists in NSW should be treated like gold. Every tree, every blade of grass, every soil organism that is drowned is one less store of carbon this Earth is robbed of. Not to mention losing organisms like the Regent Honeyeater which is already on the brink of extinction.
The cultural heritage of our Gundangurra brothers and sisters should also be treated the same way. Even if sparse throughtout the area it should be treated with the same respect and afforded the same protection as any heritage building, old statue, or artifact of the last 200 years.
The facts are that the extra height is not required for flood mitigation, as the volume of water that is held can be managed to account for the 1 in 100 year flood. The extra capacity that would be lost to account for this could be taken up by building another desalination plant. A much better technological solution creating more jobs in the process than drowning precious natural habitat.
I am fiercely opposed to the raising of the Warrangamba Dam wall and urge you to consider better options that does not destroy whats left of our precious environment for the Earth's sake!

To whom it may concern,
I am strongly against the raising of the Warragamba dam wall. The impact this project would have on the environment is unjustifiable, and no amount of offsetting or mitigating measures will make the impact justifiable.
Please leave the place and the things that live within it alone. This is a clear example of putting short term profit before long term environmental and human health. Until the day where enough submissions that support the project are received that match the number of submissions against it, the project should not be considered or progressed.

To whom it may concern,
We MUST NOT allow the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.

It is devastating to think that we may endanger, or worse, lose more already threatened plant and animal species. Furthermore, we can not allow for the destruction of anymore of our Indigenous archaeological sites. Rivers are important, natural infrastructure - and must be protected from further devastation from the already over developed Sydney basin area.
It is not acceptable that we allow devlopers to ruin anymore of our precious environment - haven't we lost enough already. We need to stop any further urbanisation of Sydney, it has gone too far already. It is clear that the urbanisation of flood plains is no longer acceptable, and must stop.
I have a personal connection to the issue, as I enjoy bushwalking in the Blue Mountains. I strongly oppose the unneccessary, and frankly quite dangerous raising of the Warragamba Dam Wall.

To whom it may concern,
Please do not proceed with the raising of Warragamba dam wall. It will be an ecological disaster that will be on your head for the rest of your life.
Have a listen to some of the last words by the just deceased former South African Prime Minister Frederik Willem de Klerk in tears when he apologised for his terrible mistakes in the promotion of Apartheid policies under his rule. He was ashamed of his short-sighted opinions and policies he expoused when in office.
Don't let Warragamba be your disaster legacy. Think of the environment not the developers of the way off track aim for a hugely overpopulated Sydney basin at the expense of our pristine fringes.
I have heard that the insurance council has advised that it would be cheaper to relocate low-lying residents than to raise the dam wall.
How do we relocate the environment???

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the dam wall. It will impact on the bio diversity, world heritage and cultural site with no benefit to the community as no matter high a wall is built, 45% of flood waters are dervied from areas outside the upstream catchment.
The EIS that has alot of flaws and a range of experts have raised concerns, which I agree with.

We do not want this project to proceed for several reasons. We do not want to lose the large proposed area of world heritage national park to flooding.There is concern about iconic species being affected . Aboriginal heritage is at stake and lastly it will not be safe for housing projects to be built on the floods plains-this would be irresponsible to place people at risk.

I live in the Blue Mountains and am strongly opposed to the proposed raising of the wall at Warragamba Dam for environmental and cultural reasons.

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall for the following reasons:
The devastating impact on the natural environment. More than 80% of the Blue Mountains national parks (Wollemi, Blue Mountains, Kanangra Boyd and more) were burnt in the 2020 bushfires having a huge impact on plant and animal species, many endangered, many that weren't but now will be. It is vital to protect to the greatest extent what is left. The raising of the Dam wall will result in 1000s of hectares of what is left being destroyed. The impact would be devastating and yet another blow on the remaining indigenous plants and animals already so fragile and on the edge.
The impact on Indigenous places and sites and the land that rightfully belongs to those it was stolen from. THeir voice as usual has been ignored.
THe impact on climate change resulting from the loss of yet more forest/woodland/swamps/waterways/ and all the plants and animals that inhabit these areas. The connection between loss of natural areas and climate change is known, real and acknowledged at COP26. Keep what is left - 1000s of hectares of Blue Mountains bushland should not be destroyed.
This big dam infrastructure project is out of date. There are alternatives to this old time way of dealing with potential flooding that should be embraced instead, such as not releasing yet more land for housing in the remaining parts of the floodplain. It appears there was only one option ever on the table rather than exploration of all to arrive at the best and most cost effective and least damaging. Please don't continue down this path.
The remaining undeveloped floodplains of Western Sydney should be used for farming which needs floods and the rich soils that come with them negating the need for a big dam project. Sydney needs a food bowl and why not keep what is left for farming where flooding is not an issue rather than covering the remaining natural areas of Western Sydney with yet more concrete.
Please do not use this EIS process to endorse the raising of the Warragamba Dam and destruction of 1000s of hectares of environmentally valuable land, threatened species, indigenous heritage and lands, and yet more loss of our ever dimishing natural environment.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my opposition to raising the Warragamba Dam wall.
I am deeply concerned with the numerous failures in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Blue Mountains is such a beautiful region of this country and it would be such a shame to see it diminished on the back of a flawed report.
Some of the important areas where the EIS fail are:

• Threatened species surveys do not meet guideline requirements.
• There is no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of raising the dam wall.
• Only a small portion of the area was assessed against Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
• Most importantly, the engineering company that undertook the study has an abhorent history in abusing Indigenous rights. This does not give me much confidence in their respect for the environment either.
The current report must be ignored and alternatives to raising the dam wall should be seriously considered instead.

I am strongly opposed to this project for numerous reasons. It’s an outrageously destructive, poorly planned, inadequately researched and deeply flawed proposal.
I have lived in the blue mountains for over 12 years and love it here. Recent lockdowns due to Covid 19 has only reaffirmed my choice to live here and enjoy access to unspoilt, beautiful landscapes on my doorstep.
All I love about the mountains will be destroyed by this project as a raised dam wall would inundate and destroy the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage area. Damage to the area’s values is in breach of obligations under the World Heritage Convention. Approval of this project would set a dangerous precedent for world heritage and national park protections.
I’m heartbroken that critically endangered species including the regent honeyeater, koala, playtpus and emu would be drowned by a raised dam wall.
I'm furious that just 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal cultural heritage and that the author of the cultural assessment spent just one day in the field. Such a total lack of respect for our traditional owners, their expert knowledge and rights to protect their heritage.
The commonwealth government has estimated at least 1,500 indigenous cultural heritage sites would be inundated by a raised dam wall, this is not only heartbreaking, but totally unacceptable.
I have read reports from specialists who are angry their studies showing serious impacts have been altered and watered down. I'm furious too and would have thought such actions were against the law.
The former NSW SES Dep commissioner and flood expert Chas Keys has said the project is flawed. Along with many other experts who have gone on the record the record saying how flawed this project is. The NSW Government only wants to hear views affirming its plans, so it can build new houses on the floodplain to the benefit of wealthy developers. It’s dangerous, short sighted and immoral.
Many alternatives to raising the dam wall exist including flood evacuation roads, lowering the full supply level of the present dam and reducing floodplain development.
Please do the right thing and abandon this project.

I am deeply opposed to the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam due to the project’s unacceptable potential impacts on the environment including to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area and threatened species. I am also deeply concerned about the impacts of Aboriginal sites and the overlooked alternatives to dam raising. For example, reduced water use and the improved capacity of natural systems to mitigate flooding.

The draft EIS concludes that the project poses potential significant impacts to contemporary breeding habitat for the Regent Honeyeater that “cannot be avoided or minimised.”

The Regent Honeyeater is listed as Critically Endangered at both a state and federal level, with as few as 350 individuals remaining in the wild.  Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority.
There are only a handful of contemporary breeding sites for Regent Honeyeater and during the assessment of the project a total of twenty one (21) Regent Honeyeaters, including active nests, were recorded within the impact area.
Any breeding habitat is considered habitat critical for survival of the species under the National Recovery Plan for Regent Honeyeater and it states “It is essential that the highest level of protection is provided to these areas and that enhancement and protection measures target these productive sites”.

The destruction or degradation of a contemporary breeding site for Regent Honeyeaters would have dire consequences for the species as a whole.
The destruction and degradation of breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters is incongruous with the time and money that the Federal and NSW Governments have invested into the recovery program, including the Regent Honeyeater Captive Breeding and Release program.
It is unacceptable and inconsistent with the National Recovery Plan 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.

To whom it may concern,
I am against the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall for a number of reasons:
- The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), recently released, is a poor attempt to justify destroying the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage area to enable further development of the Sydney floodplains by developers;
- No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising outlined in the EIS;
- No bushfire field surveys have been undertaken, despite the severe fires during the summer of 2019/20, which devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area;
- 65 kilometers of wilderness rivers, including the Kowmung River, and 5,700 hectares of National Parks, would be inundated by the Dam project;
- Habitat would be lost forever for endangered species, including the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney's last Emu poplulation;
- Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites of the Gundunurra Traditional Owners would be inundated by the Dam proposal; They have not given Free, Prior and Informed Consent for the Dam proposal to proceed;
- There are many alternative options to raising the Warragamba Dam wall that would protect existing floodplain communities; Alternative options were not comprehensively assessed in the EIS.
- 45% (average) of floodwaters are derived from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment;