My name is Lucille Hoy.
I have lived in Lithgow since 1995.
I am a wildlife rescuer, carer, rehabilitator, holding my licence under WIRES since 2020.
I also worked in a wildlife sanctuary for several years.
There are many issues affecting our wildlife, our environment and the eco systems that support their survival.
But this one at Lake Lyell is close to home and I have been following this since its inception, attending Council Meeting, information meeting and even speaking at a Town Meeting on the subject, the focus of my talk being the survival of the resident platypus population and the protection and conservation of the area surrounding Lake Lyell including Mount Walker.
In all my investigations I found a distinct lack of concern, transparency and honesty displayed by the foreign owned Energy Australia. Their focus being jobs and progress for our region. However, the jobs are minimal and certainly not designed for local residents.
There is a lot wrong with this project but the most glaringly obvious concern, for me, is for the wanton destruction of a completely pristine ecosystem including a mountain, the highest peak in our area and most importantly the area of Lake Lyell where resident platypus forage and feed and not far away, sleep and breed in underground burrows.
12 platypus were trapped and tagged in the exact place Energy Australia have planned to FILL IN and destroy.
Platypus CANNOT survive this.
Energy Australia propose to relocate the platypus.
This is not only impossible it is illegal and will not work. (Relocation of native animals is rarely successful and highly discouraged by WIRES)
The simple fact is they will die.
For a creature that is the only one of its kind in the whole world we are incredibly blessed to have a population thriving here.
As Australians we have a DUTY to protect our precious wildlife and stand with our First Nations People on the preservation of Country.
Sadly, even though Energy Australia bear the word AUSTRALIA in the title, they are not. They are foreign owned (I will say right now I cannot believe how our resources are being sold off to countries who have no respect or interest in conserving our heritage).
Which leads me to the disturbing issues of disrespect for the Aboriginal artifacts found and taken from the area without due consultation.
We are a relatively small regional town, everyone knows everyone or knows someone who does.
Hundreds of people turned up for the Town Meeting, the facility was full of community members concerned about this project going ahead.
Concerned about lost tourism directly related to Lake Lyell.
Concerned about the destruction of a very popular camping and boating facility.
Concerned about the devastation of the landscape including the highest peak in the area. Once you dig a big hole in a mountain it can NEVER be restored. And the sheer size of it, this will not be some quiet thing in the background.
It will not operate without complete disruption of local homes and businesses.
This means local peoples lives, their quality of life and for me the complete and utter loss of pristine habitat for MANY species of wildlife, not just the platypus, there are koala, the endangered Purple Copper wing butterfly that ONLY reside in this area (Lithgow and towards Bathurst) Kangaroo, Wallaby, Wallaroo, Spotted Tail Quoll, Rakali, and every other wildlfe species that still have a pocket of bush, pristine ecosystem to live.
Everywhere I look I see terrible decisions being made in the name of progress.
Just recently a whole avenue of ancient eucalypt trees were cut to the ground at nesting time.
This was near Mudgee and vets and carers were inundated with hundreds of nestlings stripped from their tree hollows and their parents. And now there is nowhere for the birds to breed next year.
Its extrememly depressing to see how our country is desecrating our iconic landscape.
Without an ecosystem Humankind itself cannot survive.
This is actual fact.
At the end of the day OUR survival relies on the survival and protection of all of our native flora and fauna.
Despite Energy Australia promoting the idea that the Community is in favour of this project, it is simply propaganda designed to feather their monetary pockets.
Again, this money does not end up in Australian pockets but overseas.
I feel extremely upset that this manipulation is going unchecked.
As a Local Community member I can say with confidence that this project is NOT supported by the majority by any means.
I do believe pumped hydro might be a good idea but NOT in this area.
Nothing will survive in the Lake with the constant movement of water, the thermal changes, the ground works, the trucks, the machinery and the monetary gain will be negligent.

Finally some things are worth more than money.
Life.
All life, not just human, not just the platypus, every single tiny grub and bug that makes the ecosystem tick.
Is this how we want to be remembered?
Is this what we want to leave our children and grandchildren?
I implore you to consider the unimaginable cost of allowing this project to continue.
And for every submission you receive you may be assured there are 10 or more people who have not been able to make a submission against this for whatever reason.
We DONT want it.
We dont need it.
Not HERE!
Not ever

SAVE LAKE LYELL
SAVE MOUNT WALKER
SAVE OUR WILDLIFE AND OUR ENVIRONMENT
SAVE OUR PLATYPUS
SAVE OUR LIVES
SAVE OUR COUNTRY

Sincerely
Lucille Hoy
Volunteer Wildlife Carer
Lithgow Resident

Lake Lyell exists due to an invasion of the natural environment in 1982 by then Delta Electricity to supply water for the Wallerawang and Mount Piper Power Stations.
Since that time the magnificent environment of the Cox's River Valley has had time to heal and adjust to the intervention of its natural environment and destruction of natural habitat of the local indigenous flora and fauna. Many species of Australian natural fauna have now come to live along the shores of the lake and a very significant number of people have been able to avail themselves of the amenities that the lake has provided giving rest and relaxation to many and bringing support to the often struggling economy of the surrounding Lithgow region.
In short, both people and the natural environment have been able to find some good in the massive invasion of the natural environment since 1982. Now Energy Australia want to destroy the healing and adjustment that has taken place over the last 44 years and once again bring disaster on the environment of the valley.
Energy Australia have tried to convince the local population of the advantages that would occur due to the destruction of Mount Walker and the drastic changes that will occur to Lake Lyell but we know that there are no positive benefits from this project for the environment of the community of Lithgow, Rydal, Tarana or any others of the region and the negative consequences of to the community will be significant.
The extended closure of Mount Victoria and the deviation of traffic onto local roads through the township of Lithgow has clearly indicated the contempt that is held by successive governments of NSW, large corporations and even the population of Sydney, for the communities of the Central Tabelands and Slopes.
If convenience and convenience of infrastructure were of a high consideration then power generation would be located nearest to the customers that is serves.
Previous generations had power stations on headlands around the harbour of Sydney, close to where it was needed but then city dwellers preferred to move power generation to regional areas so that they didn't have to 'look at it', but it was acceptable to the city dwellers that country people could have the noise, visual disruption and pollution from the generation of electricity.
Fortunately, now much electricity is provided by roof top solar panels.
Once again, power companies and government look to a preferred model of destroying the environment and the quality of life for rural communities.
There is no benefit to the community of Lithgow from this project. The 'spin' and, to some extent, blatant lies put forward by Energy Australia are aimed at trying to convince the local community of some advantage to them from this project when we know that the disadvantages are highly significant to both the community and the natural environment.
Australia is a continent frequently affected by long periods of drought and the water supply from the Coxs River is not great so in periods of drought this massive project will be of little, if any, use and of great detriment, once again, to the local environment.

Opposition to EA Lake Lyell Pumped Hydro EIS
Please accept this submission in opposition of the Lake Lyell Pumped Hydro Project.
I object due to the harm this will cause to the environment, local habitat, businesses in the Lithgow
community, local residents and tourism generated by being able to use the Lake recreationally.
I have resided along Sir Thomas Mitchell Drive and know this Project will have a massive negative
affect to all who still reside in the area.
I note this Project was not nominated in the “top” 1500 sites for a Hydro Scheme when an
assessment survey was completed by ANU to identify potential sites for a Hydro Scheme. It also does
not meet the required “head” height measurement required to make the Project efficient and only
supplies to the electricity grid 0.88% compared to the Snowy Hydro 2.0 (which today in the media
has been reported to have blown out financially to $42Bn when it commenced it was projected to
cost $2Bn).
My detailed concerns are below:
- The negative impact to the local environment, ecosystems and habitats of native animals
during construction and operation are not clearly identified in the EIS, with the EIS admitting
the level of the dam will raise and fall a minimum of approx. 2.5m during operation and will
be pumped even lower (approx. 3.5m or greater) during construction, water bypasses are
also proposed during construction which will negatively affect the local habitat
- My family has Aboriginal heritage and I know this Mountain holds significant cultural
importance to the Aboriginal community. During preparation of the EIS the proponents have
removed at least 1344 artefacts and when contacted for clarification on where these
artefacts will be stored/displayed representatives had no definitive answer to the question
- Having lived in the area I know there will be significant noise during construction as well as
fugitive dust and local road traffic control issues. These issues will have a negative effect in
the immediate area as well as affect nearby residents and their lifestyles. These conditions
will no doubt be ongoing with underground systems requiring ventilation shafts and fans
and will negatively impact local residents continuously.
- Sir Thomas Mitchell Drive road is in a state of disrepair requiring repairs to at least three
landslide affected portions of the road. The EIS has proposed an upgrade but this road
cannot be modified in its current shape without land acquisition from local residents this
point was missed in the EIS
- My family have owned a ski boat and we have spent many hours enjoying the Lake, there
will be major negative implications to tourism in the area if the Lake cannot be used for
recreational activities due to construction and operation of the Project. I have personally
observed and interacted with tourists the Lake attracts and understand if the Lake volume is
minus 2.5m on days of hot weather the tourists will stop coming to the area (due to not
being able access their recreational equipment due to mud flats) - this will also have a huge
detrimental impact on the local economy
- The amount of long term full time jobs is approx. 15-18 with this number of local employees
there is no major benefit to the community or the local economy ( I did not see any
commitment to Apprenticeships detailed in the EIS)

In knowing that this Project is of no major benefit to our Electrical Grid and has severe negative
impacts to health and safety of nearby residents, local businesses and the community, as a whole I
am strongly opposed to the Project.
Thank you for taking the time to read my submission.

Kind Regards

84 Sir Thomas Mitchell Dr South Bowenfels
Re: DP: 751650. Lots: 185,186&188
This constitutes three title objections to the Lake Lyell Hydo project .
Objection to Project

Our land directly sits and lies within the proposed PHES site and the project area making it one of the few most impacted lots within the project . It sits within the highly sensitive zone ( refer page : pg 34 EIS summary )

Correction of Demographic Data

Assessments of social and infrastructural impacts on the actual township population (approximately 11,000 to
12,000).
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) incorrectly identifies the local population center as 21,000 people.
This figure represents the total Local Government Area (LGA) and not the 'City of Lithgow' specifically. Using
the LGA figure misrepresents the absorption capacity of the local urban center and may lead to skewed.

The following provides destructive impacts directly relating to our land .


1. Flooding Inundation and hazard

Our land sits in a catchment area and floodplain at the bottom of a valley system . We are downstream with farmers creek running behind us and middle creek running straight through our land posing direct flood inundation risk and direct fluctuating water levels from upstream to our land as stated in EIS summary. (Pg 53)
Middle creek watercourse will be disturbed via construction.
Diversion of farmers creek arm lower inlet fails to address effects to nearby land properties .
Fluctuating water impacts will be unavoidable during operation which will be ongoing once project is complete
Underground power waterways disturbance directly impacts our land.
The reservoir sits directly above and in line with our land which directly poses risk of flooding in event of dam structure collapsing.
EIS has not completed a flood study impact directly inline with our land .

2. Recognition of Existing Infrastructure

The EIS must explicitly account for the 330kV transmission lines that already run through the property. These
existing lines constitute a significant infrastructure footprint that should be the baseline for any sitecharacterization and subsequent development impact modeling.

3. Construction Access and Logistical Omissions (Farmers Creek)

There is a notable absence of detail regarding construction vehicle access across Farmers Creek to the
proposed dam wall construction site. The existing power line easement and the ridgeline on the eastern side
of the dam wall provide a viable, direct access route.
Utilizing this existing infrastructure and natural
topography would optimize haulage efficiency and minimize unnecessary environmental disturbance. The
EIS fails to clarify why this eastern ridgeline access has not been prioritized.

4. Land Use Zoning Reclassification (RU2 to SP2)

Given the direct connection to and expansion of major energy infrastructure, the current RU2 (Rural
Landscape) zoning is no longer appropriate. The property threshold for rural character has been superseded
by its utility as a primary infrastructure hub. It is requested that the zoning be updated to SP2 (Infrastructure)
to accurately reflect the land's current and future usage.

5. Environmental Amenity and Noise Impacts

The assessment requires further detail on both construction and operational noise. Specific attention must be
paid to how noise travels across the local valley topography.

6. Transmission Connection and environment hazard

The expansion of high-voltagetransmission requires a detailed assessment of 'corona noise' (low-frequency hum) and its cumulative impact
on local residents .
High voltage switch will need to address voltage status of transmission lines and additional anticipated 6 monopole towers will in addition add to further electrical impacts on the immediate area.
Access to ongoing maintenance of transmission lines that are directly on top of our residence and land will require permission and vehicular access within our land .
Radiation impacts from high voltage transmission lines has potential for catastrophic impacts of human health ,fauna and flora species health . Our land becomes unviable for living and useless for stock and agricultural usage as a result .

7. Landscape and visual

Our land is directly impacted by the visual impact rating table 6 EIS summary with visual impact ratings in high for 1-6 viewpoints

8. Social and Economic Impacts

Our land falls within scope for high impacts to the following both during construction and in operation.
Traffic , noise and vibration , air quality , land from fallout and sedimentation soil spoilage and contamination ,subsidence , flooding , hazards and waste .

9. Engagement

Engagement has been inappropriate and failed to address concerns and has failed to address compensation for land value loss and land acquisition.
Failure to compensate parties immediately opting for parties to wait until project completion 5-6 years which inevitably places landowners in extremely vulnerable situation incurring large mortgage, and ongoing costs with the inability to sell, given potential impact on loss in land value based on proposed project. This has already impacted landowners and furthermore continues to be delayed .
Urgent revised engagement needs to be actioned for all immediate properties that fall within the scope of project area. Instead engagement has outlined that we formalise neighbourhood agreement as addressed by their guidelines that irrefutably fail to compensate landowners within a reasonably time frame. Compensation talks have been delayed until 2031 affecting immediate and future life plans. This is inappropriate and discriminatory to landowners who continue to suffer in monetary terms whilst project takes precedence over and above immediate community .

Outcomes

Energy Australia to reassess landowners impacted within PHEPS project and provide positive compensation terms to landowners prior to construction.
Mitigation talks and small compensation efforts are fruitless for those impacted directly and beyond operation .
Energy Australia to review the option to utilise existing power line easement and the ridgeline on the eastern side
of the dam wall. This will provide a viable, direct access route.
Utilizing this existing infrastructure and natural
topography would optimize haulage efficiency and minimise unnecessary environmental disturbance.
Suitable discussions to purchase our land ( land acquisition) would serve as a positive outcome for all parties involved and minimize environmental disturbance for the project .
Energy Australia to investigate provisions for local council to initiate changes to zoning of our land from RU2 to SP2 infrastructure based on inconsistent zoning adjacent to our land .
Energy Australia to apply further impact studies that directly affect our land .

Further information please do not hesitate to contact us via email : [email protected]
and [email protected]

Maria Zacharini & Steven Moore

This project will impact the most popular tourist attraction to the Greater City of Lithgow. Other extremely significant natural landscapes will also be severally altered, such as Mt Walker.
Other forms of Producing Green Energy are available at far less cost, and higher production.
Environmental impacts on Platypus Colonies. Impacts on businesses specifically positioned to take advantage of the beautiful views of the lake.

Due to the incredible NSW agritourism initiative which supports people to diversify their incomes in rural regions and create a rural experience for travelers, I have built and created an accommodation business on beautiful Lake Lyell. With a view to expand the accommodations business to 6 cabins employing local people , currently the few completed projects have the business as one of the top ranked farm stay experiences in all of NSW. My young family and myself will have our primary source of income destroyed by a proposed project that will affect countless other local businesses and the very jewel that our town is known for. A renewable energy by its very essence should be minimizing the catastrophic environmental damage. Blowing up a mountain replacing it with a permanent eyesore of a colossal scale, wiping out precious wildlife and culturally significant site for the local Wiradjuri people, ruining people's livelihoods, permanently destroying the communities local tourism gem...does that sound like something the NSW govt will be proud to leave as a legacy in the name of profit for 2 foreign owned companies for something that is not even a renewable energy by its true definition? ....Or maybe the right thing can be done that is beneficial for all including Energy Australia which given the proven blowout costs of hydro construction and even their partners French Govt owned EDF power solutions have admitted to " lowish return requirements" (translation for the laymen: Not economically viable but irrelevant because tax payers of their govt are footing the bill) of the proposed project.....what's cheaper, faster to build, doesn't destroy the environment or peoples lives, has perpetually increasing energy output potential and DOES produce more energy output than the proposed hydro? Its called a battery. Thank you for your time, I hope you find the courage to do what's right by the people of this country and its communities, Australia.

As a long-term business owner within the Lithgow LGA, I support the proposal to construct the pumped hydro facility at Lake Lyell. The Lithgow CBD is the quietest that I have seen in 40 years, and the construction of the pumped hydro will significantly renew the Lithgow Economy and help us to grow as we move away from coal. It is important that the workers accommodation is constructed with the city of Lithgow and not at Lake Lyell so that local businesses will receive the most benefit from the accommodation facility.

Re: Objection to Lake Lyell Pumped Energy Storage

Thank you for the opportunity to lodge a submission regarding the Lake Lyell Pumped Energy Storage.

As a resident and ratepayer within the Lithgow Local Government Area, I hold the following concerns regarding this project:

1. The close proximity of this power plant to Lithgow and Suburbs, particularly the proximity to its residents. Issues include noise, dust, light pollution, vibration, traffic, hours of operation ….which will have a detrimental impact on the amenity currently available to local residents and visitors as well as the detrimental impact on property values. Most importantly the detrimental long term impact on the mental and physical health of local residents.

2. Detrimental impact on Lithgow City Council’s “7 Valleys” brand which actively promotes the local natural and scenic beauty of Lithgow and its villages, particularly the Valleys which comprises Ridgelines eg Mount Walker. I make particular note of the opportunities that will be available to Lithgow as a result of the opening of the Nancy Bird Walton International Airport just 1 hour and 40 mins (via the Darling Causeway) from Lithgow. As a ratepayer, I have invested in the establishment of this brand.

3. As the Lithgow LGA is not located within one of NSW’s Renewable Energy Zones, there is a lack of framework that regulates the number and scale of Renewable Energy power plants eg solar, wind, batteries and hydro within the Lithgow Local Government Area

4. The lack of Planning Framework at a Local Government level that regulates the number and scale of Renewable Energy power plants in the Lithgow Local Government Area

5. The lack of Planning protection, for example, Ridgeline protection, that would protect the natural and scenic character of Ridgelines, which would include the protection of Mount Walker from development. This Ridgeline protection would apply to the 49% of the Lithgow’s Local Government Area that falls outside of National Parks and Reserves.

6. The scale of destruction of native vegetation to establish this power plant and associated infrastructure

7. The loss of social and recreational amenity at Lake Lyell

8. The considerable Visual Impact to those residents situated on the western side of Mount Walker. Noting that Energy Australia’s EIS does not include pictorial reference/elevations of the development impact on the western face of Mt Walker. Note: During a community meeting hosted by Energy Australia at Rydal, I informed Energy Australia that I have clear line of sight to Mt Walker. After which I did not receive any follow up ie further consultation, despite Energy Australia having my contact details.

9. Objection to impacts of night lighting ie any night lighting.

10. Insufficient benefit to the Lithgow community that would offset the detrimental impact of this project ie
- scale of land damage from the construction of the plant and associated infrastructure
- the damage to the 7 Valleys brand,
- the reputational damage to Lithgow being a lovely place to live and visit
- the continued damage to roads.
- locking Lithgow forever on the “energy generator” treadmill

In closing, I have major concerns regarding the Federal and NSW State Government’s absolute desperation to approve any if not all renewable energy projects to meet a target without allowing local regional communities (that lack comparable capability to international energy companies ie both financial and resources) the time, space and resources to determine what’s best for the future of their local community.

Opposition to EA Lake Lyell Pumped Hydro EIS

My name is Margaret Rubina Smith,
I am 98 years old and live in Andrew Street, Lithgow where I have lived for the past 78 years; I
received correspondence regarding the Lake Lyell EIS in the post. I note that I oppose this Project for
many reasons; firstly my son and his wife are local residents to the proposed Project as is my grand
daughter and her husband (all residing along Sir Thomas Mitchell Drive).
Having lived near this mountain all my life and raising my family in this community I understand devastation
this project will create without any benefit other than the Political “Green” Agenda for our current
Governments.
My concerns are as follows (in no particular order):
- The impact to the local environment, ecosystems and habitats of native animals during
construction and operation are immeasurable, with the EIS admitting the level of the dam
will raise and fall a minimum of approx. 2.5m during operation and will be pumped even
lower during construction and have water bypasses installed which will directly affect the
localised native animals. The EIS does not clearly state the impact of water recirculation used in this way. During operation if the local area is drought affected water cannot be pumped from Thompsons Creek Dam as it will be drought affected as well

- Being a local, living in this area, I know this Mountain holds significant cultural importance to
the Aboriginal community, I cannot understand how this Project has been permitted to
remove artefacts without permission of the entire local aboriginal groups
- During construction there will be significant noise, dust and traffic control issues to the local
residents which cannot be controlled without impact and risk to people’s health and
lifestyles. The negative noise and dust impact to people nearby cannot be over-stated; these
conditions will be ongoing and unsustainable for the local residents. Sir Thomas Mitchell
Drive is not equipped to carry the amount of traffic proposed in the EIS and even with
significant upgrade would still create risk to local residents who use this road as their only
means of access and egress to their properties (will walking and cycling tracks be installed as
this road is frequented by walkers and cyclists?)
- I have grave concerns for the community with the loss of tourism to area if the dam cannot
be used for recreational activities due to construction and operation of the Project (under
the current operation premise the dam will never be at capacity at times of high need;
considering recreation on “hot sunny days” the reservoir will be full and the dam approx.
2.5m lower than normal as the solar and wind generation schemes will be enough to fulfil
power usage needs and therefore the dam will not be usable for recreation therefore
negatively impacting tourism and the local community directly).
o There is no significant benefit to the community even during construction (short
term) due to the lack of local jobs (with companies bringing in outside employee’s
from other areas it is understandable that they will not spend their money in the
local area)

o During operation there is no commitment to employ local people or create a
significant amount of jobs that could possibly benefit the community

Knowing that this Project is of no benefit to the community and places undue stress on locals (with
severe negative impacts to health and safety of nearby residents), I worry that we do not consider
the ongoing mental angst of people immediately affected by the Project (including local businesses
and residents) and the loss of value to assets also affected.
Thank you for taking the time to read my submission and know I totally oppose the Project as there
is no benefit other than the Political “Green” Agenda for our current Governments and there are far
better alternatives with far less negative impact to the community as a whole.

Kind Regards,
Margaret Rubina Smith

Submission to Oppose the Lake Lyell Project, Lithgow, NSW
Endangered Purple Copper Butterfly (Paralucia spinifera)
This submission strongly opposes the proposed Lake Lyell project based on its likely impact on the endangered Purple Copper Butterfly (Paralucia spinifera), a species of critical conservation significance within the Central Tablelands region of New South Wales.
The proposed clearing of over 100 hectares of native bushland represents a direct and irreversible threat to one of Australia’s rarest and most geographically restricted species.
The Purple Copper Butterfly is listed as an endangered species under the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and as vulnerable under the Commonwealth EPBC Act.
Scientific assessments confirm it is one of Australia’s rarest butterfly species and is at risk of extinction without continued protection.
The Purple Copper Butterfly is found only within a narrow range in the Central Tablelands, including Lithgow, Bathurst, Oberon, and Portland.
It exists in small, fragmented populations, typically at elevations above 850–900 metres. This means that any local habitat destruction contributes directly to global extinction risk.
The species depends on a highly specific ecological relationship involving:
The native plant Bursaria spinosa (Blackthorn)
A specific ant species (Anonychomyrma itinerans)
Stable, undisturbed environmental conditions
Disruption to any part of this system can result in complete lifecycle failure, making relocation or offsetting extremely difficult.
Habitat loss and modification are identified as primary threats to the species.
The proposed clearing of more than 100 hectares of intact native bushland would:
Remove critical habitat
Fragment already isolated populations
Disrupting ecological relationships essential for survival
Evidence shows that even temporary disturbances such as bushfires have significantly impacted local populations.
Permanent clearing poses a far greater, irreversible risk, with the potential for local extinction events.
The Lithgow region represents a core habitat for the species globally.
Current NSW Government initiatives are actively investing in the protection and restoration of this species within the same region. Approving large-scale clearing directly contradicts these conservation efforts.
A critical omission in the project justification is the lack of meaningful consideration of alternative sites within the Lithgow Local Government Area that have already been cleared or significantly disturbed.
The Lithgow LGA contains multiple areas of:
Previously cleared agricultural land
Disturbed industrial land
Existing infrastructure corridors
Utilising already cleared or degraded land would:
Avoid destruction of high-value ecological habitat
Reduce impacts on threatened species such as the Purple Copper Butterfly
Align with the mitigation hierarchy principle (avoid, minimise, offset)
The selection of intact native bushland, when cleared alternatives exist, represents a failure to prioritise avoidance of environmental harm.
Planning principles and environmental assessment frameworks in NSW clearly state that impacts on endangered species should be avoided wherever feasible. The availability of cleared land within the LGA demonstrates that avoidance is both practical and achievable.
The Purple Copper Butterfly contributes to ecosystem health through pollination and its role in the food web.
Its decline would have broader ecological consequences beyond the loss of a single species.
Due to the species’ highly specialised requirements:
Habitat cannot be easily recreated
Ecological relationships are difficult to replicate
Existing populations are already fragmented
This makes biodiversity offsets unlikely to adequately compensate for habitat loss.
The Lake Lyell project poses a significant and unacceptable risk to the survival of the Purple Copper Butterfly.
Key reasons the project should not proceed:
Destruction of habitat for an endangered and range-restricted species
Availability of viable alternative sites on already cleared land
Conflict with NSW and Commonwealth conservation objectives
High likelihood of irreversible ecological damage
Any further habitat loss in the Lithgow region increases the risk of extinction for this species.
Approval of this project would knowingly place additional pressure on a species already at risk of extinction, in one of the only locations it exists on Earth. This is inconsistent with the intent and obligations of environmental protection legislation in New South Wales and Australia.
Cultural and First Nations Significance
This submission also raises serious concerns regarding the cultural significance of this land to the Wiradjuri people, the Traditional Custodians of the Lithgow region.
My partner is of Wiradjuri heritage, and this landscape is not simply undeveloped land—it is part of a living cultural landscape with deep spiritual, historical, and ongoing cultural connections.
Across the Central Tablelands, landforms, waterways, and native vegetation hold cultural meaning, including connections to storylines, traditional practices, and ancestral heritage. The continued clearing and disturbance of intact bushland contribute to the erosion of these connections.
The proposed removal of more than 100 hectares of native bushland risks impacting areas of cultural significance, whether formally recorded or not. It is widely acknowledged that many Aboriginal cultural sites are not documented within formal registers, and the absence of listing does not equate to the absence of significance.
There is a broader and ongoing context in which significant portions of Wiradjuri Country have already been altered, cleared, or developed. In this context, the continued loss of remaining intact landscapes represents not only environmental degradation but also cumulative cultural harm.
Respect for Aboriginal cultural heritage requires a precautionary approach—one that avoids harm wherever possible, rather than attempting to mitigate or offset it after the fact. The availability of already cleared land within the Lithgow LGA further reinforces that avoidance is both possible and appropriate.
Approving this project would contribute to the continued loss of culturally significant Country. There is a strong expectation that remaining areas of intact bushland should be preserved, not further diminished.
EnergyAustralia Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) Commitments
EnergyAustralia has publicly committed, through its Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP), to strengthening relationships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, respecting cultural heritage, and embedding these principles into its operations and decision-making.
Within its RAP, EnergyAustralia commits to:
Building respectful relationships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
Increasing understanding, value and recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, histories, knowledge and rights
Ensuring our operations respect cultural heritage and connection to Country
The proposed Lake Lyell project raises serious concerns regarding alignment with these commitments.
Specifically:
Proceeding with large-scale clearing of intact bushland in an area of known cultural significance is inconsistent with a commitment to respecting Country
The potential impact on unrecorded cultural sites conflicts with the principle of cultural protection and precaution
The availability of alternative cleared land suggests that avoidance of harm—central to RAP principles—has not been prioritised
Where EnergyAustralia’s RAP commits to respect, recognition, and meaningful engagement, the current proposal appears to prioritise development outcomes over these stated values.
This inconsistency undermines the intent of the RAP and raises serious concerns about how these commitments are being applied in practice.
The Lake Lyell project poses a significant and unacceptable risk not only to biodiversity but also to cultural heritage.
When considered together, the endangered status of the Purple Copper Butterfly, the availability of alternative cleared land, the cultural significance of this landscape, and inconsistencies with EnergyAustralia’s own RAP commitments, the case against the project is compelling.
Further loss of this Country is neither necessary nor justified.