Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
Changing Australian water ways have Damaged Australia's land ,Raising the level will cause far more problems than perceived

I strongly object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall because it will flood a significant area of the Blue Mountains National Park and the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. My family have bushwalked in the Blue Mountains especially the Kowmung and Burragorang River valleys. Jean and Tom Moppett did extensive walks throughout the Blue Mountains in the 1930s and I remember looking up at the white marks across the slopes of the Burragong Valley while swimming in the river. These indicated the future water level of the reservoir when Warragamba Dam was built. The reservoir provides the best drinking water in the world and is of great value to Sydney but making it bigger by raising the dam wall for flood mitigation or future additional drinking water would destroy too much of Blue Mountains National Park. Flood mitigation The Environmental Impact Statement does not adequately consider alternatives to mitigating flooding in the Durrubin, Nepean – Hawkesbury valley. During flood events water comes from the Nepean, Erskine Creek, the Grose, the Colo Rivers and South Creek. It then backs up where the Nepean-Hawkesbury goes into the narrow gorge. Flood plains are essential to river systems enabling them to slow the flow during floods and should be retained in their natural form. The floodplain was also a source of rich soil for growing fresh food for Sydney. It should not be covered in houses. Further development for housing on the flood plain will put more people and their property at risk. The EIS does not consider alternatives to the economics of the cost of raising the dam wall compared with other measures to protect people who currently live on the floodplain. Better road access to enable safe evacuation combined with buy-back of some of the most flood prone properties, plus valuing the natural features of the floodplain. Consultation with traditional owners I understand that the Gundungurra Traditional owners have not been properly consulted regarding the impact on their cultural sites. The EIS does not effectively evaluate the full range of cultural sites and objects which are precious to these First Nation people. I find this objectionable and must be addressed before further consideration of the proposal continues. Biodiversity loss The Blue Mountains Area was awarded World Heritage Status because of its biodiversity especially of eucalypt species. Camden white gum Eucalyptus benthamii is one of the species with a restricted distribution which will be impacted by the raising of the dam wall. It is an important food sources for the critically endangered regent honeyeater which occurs in an area which will be flooded. Raising the dam wall will damage over 5,000 hectares of dedicated national park estate. This belongs to the people of Australia and the World. The EIS fails to fully consider the impact of periodic submersion of 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers. Periodic submersion of the lower valleys of these rivers will result in a large area of dead and dying vegetation which can be expected to cause eutrophication of the reservoir reducing the water quality. Soil will be exposed to erosion and will be colonised by weeds from wind-blown seed. The EIS should be withdrawn. National Parks estate and World Heritage Areas must be respected and cared for into the future. Other solutions to flood mitigation can be found.

To whom it may concern,
I have lived in the Blue Mountains for over 30 years. The environment and heritage and indigenous history are the reason I live here.
I object to indignenous areas being inundated and destroyed. And there has not been proper consultation
I object to areas of wilderness, such as the Kowmung river being destroyed, including threatened ecological communities.
Spend the money to encourage people to live in the Central West and stop development on the flood plains of Sydney - our food bowl.
AS 45% of floodwaters come from other sources than Warragamba catchment, the raising of the Wall will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury.

To Whom it May Concern

Submission – Warragamba Dam Raising Project – SSI-8441

I am writing to vehemently object to the raising of Warragamba Dam, to avoid the environmental damage to a World Heritage area which is likely to flow from such a project. Significant environmental assets - precious flora and fauna - would be routinely flooded by this proposed floodplain management project. The environmental impacts are too great.

We have been degrading our natural vegetation resources and biodiversity for over two hundred years. Problems such as soil erosion and mass extinctions are evidence of this. But the current government in NSW has outdone its predecessors in this department. I’ve never seen such an onslaught against the environment in my lifetime. This government looks at a patch of remnant vegetation as a total waste of space that needs to be immediately concreted over. The madness needs to stop.

Urban development is forecast to double the population in the Hawkesbury-Nepean valley over the next 30 years. This proposal is clearly designed to facilitate new housing on the floodplain. But raising the dam cannot solve the whole flood problem because several tributaries enter the river below it. Flooding might be less frequent and somewhat less severe, but it cannot come close to eliminating the flood problem. There are other ways and the government needs to investigate those alternatives. Encouraging development on the floodplain by raising the dam means that whatever benefit is gained by reducing the level of a flood peak is offset by the significant increase in life and property put at risk. It also ignores the environmental costs. And that is before the prospect of climate change exacerbates the problem of flooding.

This government is now being widely seen as reckless and irresponsible, subservient to its corporate overlords and acting in its own and its donors’ interests and not in the public interest. This proposal is another example of that.

Department of Planning, Industry & Environment Albert Martin
P O box 279
Wahroonga NSW 2076
Warragamba Dam Raising [email protected] Phone: 0409010937
Application No: SS1-8441


I object to the proposed raising of Warragamba Dam

This proposal is wrong in every facet of it.

The deceit surrounding it is astonishing. Its whole concept is a lie.

It will not stop flooding on the lower Hawkesbury - Nepean river plains, because the other rivers downstream from the dam remain unrestrained.

These plains have flooded forever and this has been known as far back as European settlement and records began to be kept.

Government agencies have allowed human development in these flood prone areas knowing the consequences. People who have chosen to live in these areas, also know they flood and the consequences. Insurance companies also know it and are astutely threatening they will probably discontinue writing insurance. Refer to the Brisbane River plains as an example, for a relief effort.

Blind Freddie can see the mistakes of the past and of the future residential development on these areas.

NO further DEVELOPMENT in THESE AREAS.

At a minimum build some evacuation infrastructure to help present residents, and encourage and help them move out of danger.

Scientific evidence shows that 6000 hectares of pristine World Heritage listed native land will be destroyed by this proposal. Even Water NSW knows it and has been exposed for altering the Environmental Reports from experts. A practice of some of our leading politicians of present time. They cannot accept the truth and have to lie instead. It is nonsense to suggest that the enormous amount of money to raise and alter the dam will be used to hold back a huge volume of water for a few weeks and then slowly released. The Government and Water NSW want the water for future population growth and both are too cowardly to say so. They ignore the alternatives of RECYCLED water and desalination. We must stop wasting the fresh water we presently have and recycle it like most of the rest of the world. When we are in a severe drought which it is forecast we will experience more often and more severely, having the biggest dam in the world won’t help because it is empty with our present attitude. Recycle what we have and desalinate.

Think! Other big cities like Newcastle and Wollongong and regions will not benefit from this profligate proposal. Build desalination plants for them.

The environmental effects of this proposal are enormous as well and cannot be ignored. We shall not list them as we are sure you know them in detail. The destruction of Indigenous heritage is well known and also ignored.

We implore the Government to abandon this proposal as it will not work and alternatives will.

I declare that I have not made any political donations in the previous two years.

Yours sincerely,
Albert Martin

Objection to Warragamba Dam Raising Project – SSI-8441

I urge the NSW Government to reject the SSI -8441


1. The NSW Government’s plan to raise the Warragamba Dam wall by 17 metres to reduce the risk of flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley would deliver a poor outcome for the natural heritage of the Blue Mountains World Heritage site.

2. Flood waters captured during high rainfall events will temporarily inundate around 5,000 hectares of the Burragorang Valley and have significant impacts on a declared World Heritage Property, a National Heritage place and listed threatened species and communities.

3. The inclusion of the Greater Blue Mountains on the World Heritage List in 2000 is an acknowledgment of the area’s significant natural and cultural values and outstanding biodiversity. Flooding parts of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area for at least two weeks at a time will have significant detrimental impacts on the 80 known species of threatened flora and fauna at and upstream of the Dam, including two critically endangered ecological communities - the White Box-Yellow Box-Blakely’s Red Gum Grassy Woodland and Derived Native Grassland, and the Shale Sandstone Transition Forest of the Sydney Basin Bioregion. Inundation by flood waters will impact the endangered Macquarie perch and the critically endangered regent honeyeaters, a species on the brink of extinction.

To whom it may concern,
I write as a Blue Mountains resident, gravely concerned about the threat to World Heritage status of our National Park, and especially to the detrimental impact raising the dam wall will have on threatened species living in this ecosystem.
The area that is set to be flooded if the wall is raised, is of extremely high ecological value.
The catastrophic bushfires of 2019-2020 have already caused astronomical species loss.
This needs to be taken into account and precious areas like the one that would be negatively impacted by the dam wall being raised, need protection - not to face further devastation.
Koalas (amongst other species) are in serious decline, and NSW gov document leaked to SMH 18.3.2020 revealed that only 3 hours and 40 minutes was spent looking for koalas over an impact area the size of 10,600 football fields (5,700 hectares).
The document also showed just 15 hours was spent looking for greater gliders over the same 5,700 hectare area.
This is unacceptable.
Furthermore, raising the wall will not stop floods from happening for the Penrith Plains area, and we must look at more sensible alternatives to protect both those areas and our World Heritage National Park.
I share these words from ANU Professor Jamie Pittcock:
"These houses will be flooded anyway. They simply cannot be protected even with a higher Warragamba Dam wall.
That's because as much as 45% of the flooding in the valley comes from rivers that are not controlled by Warragamba Dam.
The Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley is one of the most flood prone places in Australia. And that's why we need some serious long term strategies to manage that. We can have thriving communities, healthy industries like farming, and good nature conservation that don't require destroying a national park world heritage area"
Professor Jamie Pittcock, Fenner School of Environment and Society, ANU.
Please *do not* raise the dam wall.

Please see the attached

Please see attachment.

To whom it may concern,
Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission regarding the proposal to raise the dam wall at Warragamba.
I write in objection to this proposal for the following reasons:
I am a bushwalker who has walked in the areas over the past 30 years which would be inundated, and my personal experience of these wilderness areas has enabled me to form the opinion that it is not in the best interests of any of the relevant stakeholders to proceed with this proposal (indigenous peoples, residents in surrounding areas, bushwalkers, floodplain dwellers, flora and fauna, future generations, and our city and society in general.
Stripping away of the 7 layers of protection that these areas currently are afforded - this seems non-sensical and an affront to the environment.
The damage to the cultural values and natural values would breach Australia's obligations under the World Heritage Convention.
I cannot imagine why the government would want to inundate and damage 65km of wilderness rivers, (including the Kowmung a declared 'wild river'), 5,700 hectares of national park, 1,300 hectares of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, 1,500 indigenous cultural heritage sites (which have not been correctly assessed), and habitat for critically endangered species (3.5 hrs looking for Koalas and 1 day for Platypus is clearly inadequate and no surveys post-recent bushfires have occurred).
Inadequate consideration of the impact area indicates a lack of transparency or robust assessment and consideration of the scientific and engineering evidence about the effectiveness of the process and the firm which undertook it (a bad track record internationally in connection with environmental projects).
No modelling of the flood and economic benefits of raising the wall but a clear detriment to all the values noted above if it were raised and the inevitable inundation occurs so far into the pristine wilderness as to be heartbreaking.
No guarantee the floodplain dwellers would not be flooded with so much water coming through creeks and streams below the dam that they would still be in danger. No more building on floodplains - buy the current houses back.
Consideration to alternatives to raising the wall have not been properly examined.

Yours sincerely,

I understand the raising of the Warragamba dam wall is intended to lower the threat of severe flooding to new subdivisions planned for the floodplain near Penrith and Windsor. Doing this will not guarantee flood-free floodplains because there are very large catchments below Warragamba, including Glenbrook and Grose Valleys that will spill massive floods into the system regardless. The waters back up for large distance owing to numerous circumstances. Housing projects in this vicinity are inadvisable. They will not be saved from flood by raising the dam wall. Therefore there is no good reason to lift the dam wall.

But also, national parks throughout NSW are being alienated and / or corrupted by uses that go beyond their old management plans and lessen the protections they afforded. New uses for national parks include tourist development, privatisation, rewilding projects, over-burning for supposed fire protection, aerial poison baiting programs, all manner of money-making schemes.

This is especially so for the Blue Mountains National Park and associated parks and reserves. It was solemnly proclaimed for all time and then additionally recognised as worthy of World Heritage status. No greater stamp of approval could come from the world community. But the new dam will drown vastly great areas of natural treasures and sacred places. For example, large downstream areas of the Kowmung River, generally regarded as the holy of holy natural areas of NSW, are likely to be drowned.
I have seen other drowned river systems. It is little short of tragic to walk down the Brogo River gorge system in the wilderness area of Wadbilliga National Park, as beautiful and remarkable a natural area as you’ll find anywhere, where evolution has proceeded to produce numerous new species of endemic plant, drowned by the backwaters of the Brogo Dam. The hideous, still, dark waters have turned all about the lower reaches into dead wastelands. The natural systems stretching far upstream are disrupted. Species gone. The heartlands of snakes and frogs now dead. Is this what will happen to the Kowmung?

Even randomly periodical flooding by still water makes a difference for flora and fauna, especially the species that are threatened or endangered.
And what of the all too numerous Aboriginal places along the shores of the catchments, the shaped and carved trees, the stone arrangements, the ways people walked and where they stopped over? Losing even more Aboriginal sites diminishes the heritage we pass on to future generations, the book of Country, and weakens the heart of the nation.

When I was a kid in Sydney I learned the tricks about going bushwalking. It’s one of the great things to do when you’re feeling oppressed or down or you need a change of scene for the sake of your mental health or simply ready for the exuberance of visiting wild country. It seems nature is invaluable in reviving your spirits, renewing your approach to life. It’s all the more essential in the new city, the ever-growing metropolis that devours green space as quickly as you can find it and in no time they’re over-run with weeds and rubbish. Parks and urban green spaces are an important element in the healthy urban psyche but they’re no substitute for wild nature and a national park.
As I’ve grown older that sense of the importance of nature has grown as the problems of modern civilisation compound. Growing population. Climate change. The pledged need for reafforestation. Pestilence. And our green places recede before the tide of new housing.

To sum up, I am against raising the wall of the dam for very many reasons. I believe it would be a disastrous undertaking and trust the proposal will be shelved and never again contemplated.

To whom it may concern,
I strongly object to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall for the following reasons:
1. Studies have shown that it will not help mitigate flooding on flood plains due to significant flows from the Colo and other tributaries, hence it will not mitigate flooding.
2. It will cause significant damage to the Blue Mountains WHA and put the WH status at risk.
3. It will cause damage to Australian heritage sites.
4. It will encourage further development on the flood plains putting more people in danger.
5. Further development is also an absolute folly considering our overpopulated and depeted planet, the overpopulation of Sydney basin and the almost certain likelihood of resource scarcity leading to de-growth in the near future.
There is no sensible, just reason to raise the dam wall. I urge the NSW government to reconsider the raising of the dam wall for the above reasons. It is important that a longer term planning window is adopted as failure to do so will significantly impact people in the near future.

To whom it may concern,
Housing etc should not be constructed on flood plains. We already have a big damn. Spend the money on flood plain projects including buy up of vulnerable property. And on water waste mitigation in Sydney. Work with the rivers and land - not against them. A bigger damn will inundate even more pristine and irreplaceable Koori sites and ecology upstream. For example, the regent honeyeater needs all the protection of it's remaining habitat that we can provide. A bigger damn will still overflow and it won't stop flooding altogether. It also won't stop the flood water out of the rivers etc below the damn. The Hawkesbury flood plain is perfect recreation, wetland, farm and fruit/vegetable growing land in Sydney's back yard- keep it that way,

To whom it may concern,
I am very concerned about raising the dam wall, especially now with Warragamba Dam overflowing and flooding. Raising the dam wall will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley downstream, it will increase flooding, destroying environment, wildlife, housing, people, waterways, cultural sites on a much larger scale.
SMEC Engineering who undertook environmental and cultural assessments has a history abusing indigenous rights. Only 27% of impact area assessed for aboriginal cultural heritage. No reports on threatened species.
Integrity of environmentally assessment fundamentally flawed. Minister for Planning cannot make a decision without an honest report.
The Gundungurra Community members have not been included in honest consultation about raising the dam wall. The Aboriginal and assessment report has been criticised by Australian Department if Environment and International Council on monument sites. Gundungurra Community know the impact by raising the dam wall will destroy cultural heritage sites and have a deadly impact on our vulnerable wildlife.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the raising of Warragamba Dam and the consequential destruction of critically valuable habitat in the Blue Mountains area.
There are several significant impacts and catastrophic outcomes, which all demand equal attention. Yet, here, I would just like to touch on one, the critically endangered status of the regent honeyeater, to ask you to consider the significance of how the development of the Warragamba dam will increase the likelihood of extinction for this endemic bird.
The regent honeyeater has a nomadic pattern of flight across only a handful of regions in NSW, responding to temporal shifts in blossoming eucalytps, mistletoe, weather, and water, all situated together.
With the majority of available habitat destroyed through land clearing, the remaining fragments are critical for offering the resources for regents honeyeaters, only available for variably across seasons. These fragments are at risk from bushfires, heatwaves, and floods such as is being proposed through the Warragamba Dam project.
The Burrawong valley has been identified as a key site by conservationists for the regent honeyeater species, with repeated sightings in recent years. The resources that this area offers for regents is essential to sustain current critically endangered populations and to ensure a chance of success through captive-breeding and release programs led by Birdlife Australia and Taronga Zoo.
The immense effort, over decades, to prevent the extinction of one of Australia's charismatic and unique endemic birds, would be devastatingly undermined by the destruction of Blue Mountains Heritage Area through the Warragamba Dam project.
Please listen to all the people who know and care for this place, who have the knowledge and the expertise to think through these problems, in ways that protect the Blue Mountains World Heritage area. Please recognise the significance of this proposal and oppose the project for the people who care for the place.

To whom it may concern,
The so called World Heritage area in and around the Blue Mountains that will be impacted by the higher Warragamba dam wall, must be held precious and staunchly protected. Is there NO integrity, respect or common sense in the government?
Do the governing bodies in NSW stand for nothing?
It is way past the time when governments in Australia should have the future of Australia carefully and intelligently planned for in every respect, NOT just to keep the economy healthy.
The vision and planning for NSW should be looking 100 years ahead, not just until the next election.
Do SOMETHING that you wont regret on your death beds because you were too greedy, gutless and amoral to do the right thing.
Stop pandering to property developers and protect the land. Have some respect for nature, for the indigenous and for yourselves.
We all know the dam raising will not help with a big flood. We also know that it will destroy precious World Heritage area. It will only serve property developers and greedy politicians in lying to home buyers about the safe big dam.
Do the right thing for once.

To whom it may concern,
As a citizen of the Blue Mountains LGA, I urgently request that the plan to raise the Warragamba Dam wall be dropped permanently.
It is too problematic a plan to reasonably proceed and does not account for certain crucial factors.
1. Raising the Warragamba Dam wall would not stop the most extreme floods, as stated by the former Emergency Services Minister Bob Debus.
Leaked charts to the Sydney Morning Herald have shown that it would only have a moderate effect.
The Insurance Council of Australia has even withdrawn their support for the Warragamba Dam wall raising. That should raise red flags for everyone.
The NSW Government has itself stated that it plans to allow developers to place and additional 134,000 people on the floodplain once the dam wall is raised - doubling the existing floodplain population.
It would be dangerous to allow further development on one of Australia's most flood prone areas.
It would be unacceptable to prioritise developers over environmental and human safety.
2. It will cause great devastation to a richly biodiverse area (something the Blue Mountains can ill afford at any point but especially given the widescale loss of wildlife in the 2019-20 bushfires).
The area is home to 48 threatened plant and animal species.
3. It will destroy indigenous heritage. The disregard shown to highly valuable Indigenous cultural sites is completely abhorrent.
Over 1,200 Gundungurra rock art sites, occupation shelters, archaeological deposits and burial locations would be destroyed from inundation by dam waters, by the Federal Government's own leaked estimates.
It will also jeopardise the UNESCO world heritage listing for the greater Blue Mountains National Park.
To sum up, what little benefit it would have with minimal flood prevention would be engulfed by the detrimental impacts of species loss and danger to humans with increased development on flood plains.

To whom it may concern,
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY
• 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.


WORLD HERITAGE & 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 HAVENOT GIVEN FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED CONSENT FOR THE DAM 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.
ALTERNATIVES TO RAISING THE 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 have bushwalked in the Blue Mountains on numerous occasions since the 1980s and have resided in the Blue Mountains in the past. I am personally aware of and have experienced the unique qualities of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, parts of which will be irrevocably damaged by the dam wall raising proposal. I am opposed to raising the Warragamba Dam wall.
I am opposed for the following reasons:
The Blue Mountains World Heritage area is inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage list in recognition of its Outstanding Universal Value for the whole of mankind. Raising the dam wall will damage natural and cultural values and would be in contravention of Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention.
It is estimated that 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, and 5,700 hectares of National Park, 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.
• A number of Threatened Ecological Communities, notably Grassy Box Woodland.
• Habitat for endangered and critically endangered species including the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater.
The environmental and cultural assessments undertaken for the project are inadequate and fundamentally flawed:
• 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.
• No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken since the severe fires of the summer of 2019/20, which devastated 81% of the Blue Mountains Heritage Area.
• Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
• MEC Engineering, which carried out the environmental and cultural assessments for the project have an established history abusing Indigenous rights.
The project will result in the destruction of significant cultural heritage:
• 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.
Alternative options to raising the dam wall are not comprehensively assessed in the EIS:
• 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.
• Any assessment of alternatives that is included 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.
This is a flawed project that benefits only property developers, it should not go ahead.

To whom it may concern,
I am opposed to the highering of the dam wall as I believe the danger to the World Heritage Blue Mountains, the loss of Aboriginal sites, threatened species, and flooding of the wild rivers region is too great a price for the possible increase of water to Sydney which could just as easily be serviced by a new Water Desalination Plant and the recycling of water
The plan will not increase the water supply for the thousands of homes to be built in the Campbelltown Macarthur region or the Shoalhaven.
There is no proof that the highering of the dam wall will ensure that flooding will not continue downstream of the Dam and I believe the area is of greater use to the public left as is than if it was flooded and lost forever