Warragamba Dam Raising

I do not support the raising of the dam wall and flooding more natural wilderness.

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. Threatened species surveys are substantially less than guideline requirements. Where field surveys were not adequately completed, expert reports were not obtained. 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,
Please do not raise the dam wall. We need to stop ruining wilderness all in the name of population growth and development. Please don't ignore the alarms that have been raised by experts.

To whom it may concern,
I live in Blackheath, which is within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. I have previously walked in the Kedumba Valley and Mount Solitary area, where just ONE inundation would totally destroy all plant life under that inundation.
Over 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, 5,700 hectares of national parks, and 1,300 hectares of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area would be inundated by the project.
The Kowmung River, a declared "wild river", would be inundated by the project.
If the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam proceeds, many more Gundungurra sacred sites will be destroyed. I understand that only one day was allowed for assessment of at least 1,500 Aboriginal cultural heritage sites, and that only 27 percent of the area was assessed.
Gundungurra traditional owners have not given free, prior, and informed consent for the dam proposal to proceed.
Habitat for the critically-endangered Regent honey eater, koala colonies, and Sydney’s last emu population would be drowned by a raised dam wall. Only 3.5 hours was spent looking for koalas, and only one day was spent assessing impacts on aquatic life, including the threatened platypus.
No post-bushfire field surveys have been done for threatened species since the severe bushfires of 2019/2020 devastated 81 percent of the Greater Blue Mountains Heritage Area.
Finally, I understand that a large amount of potential flooding for the Hawkesbury-Nepean floodplain comes from rivers other than from Warragamba Dam. Many alternatives to raising the dam wall exist, including building flood evacuation roads, lowering the full supply level of the present dam, and reducing floodplain development.

To whom it may concern,
Please don't raise the Warragamba Dam. You have destroyed much of natural Australia already from ignoring koalas, to letting brumbies run free and developing the Alps. Please stop destroying our heritage.

To whom it may concern,
The Warragamba Dam must not be raised and there are alternatives that I will mention futher in this email.
Firstly, if the dam wall is raised World Heritage and cultural sites would be under attack. 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.
There are systematic failures of the EIS.
• 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 Gundungurra Traditional owners have not 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 the althernatives to raising 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,
In an era where more and more dams are being dismantled because we've finally realised they're destroying the rivers and the rest of the environment around them, are we proposing for a dam rise? What kind of insanity is this? Stop with the bandaids and quick 'solutions' and start putting effort into the root causes of the issues. We already know who are draining rivers upstream - farmers (mostly for crops going to animal agriculture). We already know the biggest contributor behind climate change - Animal agriculture (deforestation and emissions from animals they breed). Direct efforts into overhauling the farming industry.

To whom it may concern,
I have travelled the world several times and the most heart warming site on my returns home is the blue haze from the eucalypt forests of our world heritage listed blue mountains national park.
You don't have to live there or even be from NSW to love and care about this special place.
We have damaged our natural environments enough to have learnt it is not going to help our economies, security or health into the future. You lead now but your legacy lasts. Make it a positive one for future generations.
Please consider the ways these funds could be better spent to reduce further environmental damage.

To whom it may concern,
Our World Heritage National Parks are too precious to destroy. Threatened species, Aboriginal heritage, & pristine rivers are all increasingly rare.
The dam project is also terribly expensive & won't prevent downstream flooding, because flood waters arrive from tributaries below the wall. Other safety measures for residents below the dam wall are much more cost effective & less destructive.

To whom it may concern,
I enjoy bush walking in Wilderness areas and would like to preserve as many wild places as possible, especially close to urban areas.
There needs to be forward planning which takes into account community needs, house design, transport and flood plains when new suburbs are established. If new suburbs are only allowed on high ground then there should be no need to raise the Warraganmba Dam and so wreck havoc on the ancient landscape, flora and fauna.
Please preserve these valleys for future generations by not raising the Warragamba Dam Wall.

To whom it may concern,
Please reconsider destroying these sacred spaces that cannot be replaced.
We have lost so much of our indigenous and natural heritage. Once it is gone we can't get back it. There is so much more for us to learn. COVID has shown how important it is for us to have green spaces, how important it is for our health. I want my children and grandchildren to be able to explore, connect and learn from these sacred spaces.

To whom it may concern,
My partner and I were born and raised in the Blue Mountains, and bought our house in Hazelbrook in August 2020. We have both travelled the world, but chose to settle and make a life here. We are members of our local RFS brigades and are professional scientists working in the environmental sector.
You do not need to be a scientist to undertstand the devastating environmental impacts of raising the Warragamba Dam wall. The opposition to this proposal has been massive, but yet again we see the cost of development trumping the cost for the environment.
The Blue Mountains has already been significantly impacted by the 2019/2020 bushfires, which saw 81% of our Heritage Areas degraded. The upstream flooding that raising the dam would generate will add significantly to the environmental stressors that our local environmental receivers are currently experiencing. Within Chapter 28: Cumulative impacts and interactions - Figure 28-1. Extent of 2019/2020 bushfires shows that the proposed area is surrounded by areas impacted by fire, however the environmental cumulative impacts of this event have barely been considered under section 28.4.10. Bushfires seen in 2019/2020 have the ability to cause massive soil erosion, major siltation of streams, nutrient losses and long-term impacts on catchments. Instead, the EIS states that it is "expected that there would be no material cumulative effect on hydrology".
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.
Additionally, 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. Continuing to ignore Aboriginal Australian voices in blatant opposition to this proposal is not only neglectful, but a step backwards in any cultural progress made over the years.
We know that alternatives are available to raising the dam wall, but that these are not seen as financially or politically as attractive. Incorrectly assessing or even disregarding the multiple options that can be utilised in a combined, hollistic approach to flood mangement within the EIS presented is short sighted and opportunistic.

To whom it may concern,
Please do not raise the dam please look at other options.

To whom it may concern,
Please do not raise the dam please look at other options.
Please save the endangered animals that raising the dam will kill. There are other options. Don't raise the dam.

Warragamba Dam Raising

I am deeply troubled by the lack of planning and care shown by both the NSW and Commonwealth Governments when it comes to protecting Australia’s fragile environment and our threatened species.

It was very frustrating to learn that the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam will not only negatively impact the habitat of the Regent Honeyeater, a critically endangered bird, but also damage a large area of the Blue Mountains Heritage Area through inundation. The solution to inundate upstream to solve problems of flooding down stream is ludicrous.

Australia is losing far too many species every year, but this level of extinction does not seem to raise any alarm bells among state or federal governments.

I vehemently oppose the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam because it’s clear that such measures cannot avoid or minimise the negative impact on the Regent Honeyeater’s contemporary breeding habitat.

I would also like the following points to be considered in this submission:

1. Explain why any government would consider it preferable to spend billions of dollars of taxpayer money to raise a dam wall (including offsets) when a much safer and less damaging option would be to use the same funding to buy back homes and properties in flood prone areas.

2. What steps is the NSW government taking to ensure further development is not taking place in flood prone areas?

3. With an estimated 350 individual Regent Honeyeaters only remaining in the wild why hasn’t the NSW government not only ensured that its habitat is protected but also expanded to ensure its survival?

4. Are the decision makers for this proposal fully informed on the importance of these birds as major pollinators and their role in Australia’s fragile ecosystem?

5. Explain why any government would consider it acceptable to risk the environment in the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, home to threatened species to raise the Warragamba Dam - a short-term measure that is unlikely to solve water/flooding issues long-term.

6. Explain why a breeding habitat considered critical under the National Recovery Plan would not be sufficient grounds for rejecting the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam. Placing the critically endangered Regent Honeyeaters’ habitat in jjeopardy works against the National Recovery Plan.

7. Explain why an offset strategy is even being considered for the Regent Honeyeater when such strategies are extremely unlikely to be effective in stemming the loss of biodiversity and the protection required for this critically endangered bird.

8. Explain why the words ‘Critically Endangered’ seem no longer critical under the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam.

9. Explain why the NSW government with easy access to environmental/scientific experts and public servants cannot find a solution that works to protect the environment, that in itself is in the bests interests of the NSW community.

Furthermore, it’s well documented that the 2019/2020 bushfires caused the loss of 1 to 3 billions native animals and that modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in these horrendous bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat should and must be of the highest conservation priority.

Thank you for considering my submission. I hope that we as a human species can use our superior intelligence to preserve our most precious flora and fauna.

Regards
Gayle Savige

Please see attachments

I strongly oppose 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, in particular the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater.

Dear Assessment Team
Please find attached Floodplain Management Australia's submission in support of the Warragamba Dam Raising Project.
Yours faithfully
Glenn Evans
Executive Officer
Floodplain Management Australia

We believe that the whole study area is of highly significant to us Aboriginal people, for tens of thousands of years our people have worked, managed, and occupied the land that we stand on today. We have a spiritual connection to place, land, water ways and the sky. Our creation stories that shaped this land and flow through us till this day and continue to be passed down from generation to generation are written within the land scape around us. Our old people were the first agriculturist, scientist, astronomers, artist, bakers etc. we once lived a life where we survived of mother earth, as she provides us with all the resources we need to survive, and we would in return care for her and mange her the ways we acquired knowledge over tens of thousands of years of practices such as fire knowledge to rejuvenate mother earth.
The study area is highly significant to us as there are hundreds of sites that will be destroyed if this project goes ahead. Such as rock art, grinding grooves, stone tools, scared trees, rock shelters, sacred sites, and most importantly our burials etc. These sites are highly important to us just like the town hall in Parramatta is important many, a two-hundred-year-old building that will not be destroyed, yet our tens of thousands year old sites are under treat to be destroyed if this project goes ahead. This is an example of how wrong this project is, we understand that the dam needs to be raised but we ask for there to be adequate testing and surveying of the whole study area not just a sample. We need to act accordingly to capture what is still out there today and recorded as much as possible if not all for the benefit of our future generation’s knowledge of the area.
There are tangible, intangible, and aesthetic aspects that must be considered with in the study area. There are places that have significant to us for instance the jumping lady which was not a dreaming story but happen and it is areas like this that have great importance to our cultural heritage of the area. There are dreaming stories about the creation of the land that are of great significance to us and by visiting these sites we can once again be connected to the place and have a spiritual awaking or connection to these places. It is important that we as the Aboriginal community have access to these areas to learn and practice our traditional ways of knowledge and rejuvenate areas that have been neglected since Colonisation and due to the disposition of our land. To be able to walk the land of our old people is a way to reconnect, they guide us and teach us along the way. The inundation of the dam will have catastrophic impacts on the study area and will affect many ecosystems the flora and fauna will be majorly affected. Endangered spices plant and animals will be at risk, the homes of animals will be destroyed having dangerous effects on the ecosystem.
We would like to agree to your recommendations but, we do not agree to the project unless all recommendations are meet. We understand that the inundation of the dam is needed along with the raising of the dam but, in saying that there are other ways to protect residents downstream from flooding such as flood mitigation and flood evacuation plans. We believe that the project should be fully assessed when it comes to cultural heritage within the study area. There needs to be more done in the form of testing, and surveying of the whole study area, documenting as much as possible before the dam in inundated, as a last chance to capture our rich cultural heritage before it is lost.