I deeply oppose this project for the following reasons:
The implementation of the Snowy 2.0 project would involve a great deal of disturbance & destruction to this protected area in the form of rock tunnelling, earthworks, vegetation clearance, road expansion, earth dumping, and damage to waterways across more than 10,000ha. The project area described in the EIS is over 250,000ha - 1/3 of the size of Mount Kosciuszko National Park. This area has been protected for a reason - it contains significant and sensitive ecological and geological areas which will be destroyed if this project goes ahead. Furthermore, this much loved national park will be blighted by this project - powerlines, scars on the landscape, traffic travelling in and out of the facility, animal fatalities on the roads.
I am in full agreement that we need to refine and develop the renewable energy sector, but not at the expense of the precious areas of natural wilderness we have left. In fact, the Snowy Hydro 2.0 is actually not a smart investment for the energy needs of this country - it will be a massive green house gas contributor with the pumping of the Hydro system over the next 10 years or so relying on power created by coal fired power stations. Furthermore, the Snowy scheme is not smart economically - the projected 2 billion dollar cost is approaching 10 billion, including transmission.
The EIS contains a startling lack of exploration for other solutions for pumped storage opportunities in NSW. Many other sites have been identified by others and these sites combined would create a higher storage capacity than the one Snowy 2.0 proposes.
Snowy 2.0 requires tunnelling through 27 kms of rock. This will depress the water table in some sections by more than 50 m and have an impact for up to 2 kms either side of the tunnel. This will lead to montane streams and water dependant alpine bogs drying up, further impacting upon vulnerable habitats and native species. It will also lead to a reduction of inflows to Snowy reservoirs and downstream rivers. These river systems are already under threat from feral animals and global heating. Any works that threaten water quality and quantity must be avoided.
Noxious pests and weeds will be spread throughout the Snowy Scheme and downstream, including Redfin Perch (a Class One Noxious Pest) and aquatic weeds. These pests and weeds will be transported from Talbingo Reservoir up to pest-free Tantangara, the Upper Murrumbidgee catchment, and then to Eucumbene and throughout the Snowy Scheme and downstream rivers.
The reasons not to approve this project are many and of vital importance. The time of sacrificing our preserved natural spaces for development of this nature should be long gone. This project should not be approved on the strength of its economic inviability and its massive environmental impacts. There is a social impact here too, on people who like to fish in these waterways and take recreational time in the Park, and there is a more subtle social cost too - if this project is approved a lot of people, such as myself, will lose more hope for the future and Australia's ability to adapt in a rapidly changing world where scientists are warning of catastrophic danger for the human race due to global warming.
The time to act decisively is now - please say no to ill advised projects like these and let's find solutions that do not involve more out of control damage & greenhouse gas generation. The cost is too high.

In principal we do not object to the Snowy 2.0 project how ever we are concerned as users of park that the closure of Tantangara road access to the proposed affected areas will result in an onerous impact to local businesses and recreational users relying on access to areas that are only accessible from this road. These areas are popular with park users and the impact of the closures will no doubt have a negative affect on the local economy which is in need of all the help it can receive.

As a frequent user of the Snowy Mountains National Park and its limited available local camping facilities I would be concerned if work on the project significantly limited access to the Tantangara area. Individuals that I enjoy the park with will want to maintain access to Tantangara Rd, Wares Yards, Currango Homestead and the old camp site.
The Port Philip Fire Trail is not an alternative as it is often closed due to dam levels.

See attached file.

• Please can you maintain access to Tantangara Road, Wares Yards, Currango Homestead & Old Camp site
• Port Phillip Fire Trail isn't an alternative as it is often closed due to dam levels

Please keep access to tantangara rd open. It will be a tragedy to horse riders and fisherman and dramatically impact tourism to a town (Adaminaby) that relies heavily on it. Especially in this drought, the town and farmers are struggling, this will be an extra kick in the gut to local economy.
Port Phillip fire trail is not a suitable option B as it has been closed more often than not in the last 12 years since I’ve worked and lived in Adaminaby due to high water levels in tantangara dam.
Please keep tantangara road open, it is the only access to many horse riding camps, without access, the people who would usually camp over Christmas/New Years/Easter/Australia day etc will be overcrowding into long plain, rocky plain etc which are already spacially restricted and overcrowded, especially during these busy times.

Thankyou

See attachment

The Snowy 2 hydro proposal project area would cover a huge part of the Northern part of Kosciuszko National Park. This is totally unacceptable for a National Park, which exists to preserve the natural environment and provide recreational opportunities such as bushwalking.
You might think that you can pull the wool over the eyes of the public by making it appear to be an environmentally-friendly proposal that helps mitigate global warming. However, the energy to power the proposal is planned to come from COAL-FIRED POWER STATIONS, at least for the first 10 years. This negates any carbon-reducing supposed credits.
The cost of the proposal is extortionate, and is constantly rising. This is at a time when far, far too little money is allocated by the NSW Government or the federal government for conservation purposes, such as proper maintenance of existing National Parks (which are suffering badly from lack of funding), and preservation of endangered species.
I urge the Government to reject this bad proposal.