I would like to make a submission in rejecting the raising of the Warragamba dam wall for the following reasons. Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage. No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS. Severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken. 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. Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal. 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. Alternative options were not comprehensively assessed in the EIS. 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.

Yours sincerely,
Raymond Kennedy

To whom it may concern,
I want to make a submission to the EIS for the proposed Warragamba Dam wall raising. I think that this is an awful idea for a number of reasons, including:
• 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 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:
o The Kowmung River - declared a ‘Wild River’, protected for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974;
o Unique eucalyptus species diversity recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing such as the Camden White Gum;
o A number of Threatened Ecological Communities, notably Grassy Box Woodland;
o Habitat for endangered and critically endangered species including the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney’s last Emu population.
o Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal.
o 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 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.
Yours sincerely,
Jess Turner

I am so tired of developers mighty dollar ensuring that government goes against the wishes of the population. Don’t ruin this area.

Yours sincerely,
Francene Russell

To whom it may concern,
I have lived in the Sydney Basin or the Blue Mountains for most of my life.
Like indigenous people I feel deeply connected to the native landscape that provides reserves of biodiversity, habitat and helps stabilise the climate and provide clean air, water, recreational and wild space for the population of the area.
I care deeply about preserving what are now remnants of indigenous culture, storylines and country.
I care deeply about preserving the species that remain.
I care about seeing a landscape as wild as possible that reminds us of our place in the world and universe.
Houses and people come and go. Richly diverse habitat and species come and then they go forever.
All that protects them is our awareness of how long they took to create, their value in the present and their right to the future. Its easy to destroy ecology but creating is something else.
Without developers, corruption and an economy based on housing that destroys the "green belt" planned previously to environmentally protected Sydney, now seen by developers as "green fields to fill in", would you even think of pushing the world heritage area ecology further to the brink by raising a dam wall above a floodplain? Would you think of lowering everyone's quality of life as a good idea? Would you even think of using prime agricultural land on a floodplain for yet more houses for people you will import and a noisy "Aerotroplolis" ?
Nothing is done to scale incrementally any more to monitor how it is absorped. Every development is all a Global scale slam dunk of a production that suits the corporations and polititians involved. Big money.
You can't just have an airport you have to build a city the size of Adelaide. Really? Who recommended that? What did they get outof it? This grandiose planning has much greater and more sudden impacts on the quality of all life in Sydney and the Blue Mountains. Someone benefits. It certainly isn't Australian first home buyers, indigenous Gundungurra/Dharug or the Regent Honey Eater.
With more people, cement, roads, power consumption and increased needs for water and less runoff to the water table you are further paving what was paradise. Clever? Who's getting rich here?
The Nepean River is not the major contributor to the natural flooding events of the river in the Hawkesbury region. Mind you live on a flood plain expect a flood, just as live in the Blue Mountains expect a fire. It's not nature's fault its poor human planning and greed.
Warragamba Dam raising is an unjustifiable exercise ecologically, economically, for indigenous first nation heritage, the World Heritage Area and for endangered and not yet endangered species.
Stop messing with what is left of any ecological value. We are not God or eons of time.We cannot recreate it. Shane's Park as an ark? Are we there already? Sad and shameful. The last bastion is being planned. Where to from there? Not paradise.
We are close to the edge. 10 seconds to midnight fo rthe habitat we need to survive. If humans are so clever why do they shoot themselves in the feet by destroying the ecology they are biologically dependent on?
Lets take a different turn in the fork in this road, think of long term benefits to all and stop greedy development. Think of another more constructive way to make money.
We want a good quality of life with clean air, clean water, lots of green recreational space, wild space, less crowding, less cabon producing cement and housing, indigenous heritage preserved and every species alive today kept alive for tomorrow and for our children. I'm sure spin doctors will get onto that concept and try and sell development as doing that. Orwellian double speak.
Leave the Warragamba Dam wall as it is and the wild rivers as they are. They have already been degraded. Have the forsight some of those before had. They did not exploit everything. They thought about posterity. Remember that is also government's planning job for the people.
yours sincerely,
Caroline

To whom it may concern, Raising the Warragamba Dam wall will be catastrophic for our Blue Mountains wilderness, an area in which over the years over the years I have spent many enjoyable days in bushwalking. The Warragamba Dam wall raising is an appalling attempt to justify destroying the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area to satisfy Sydney's floodplain developers. Effectively the taxpayer will be subsidising real estate on the floodplain that should never be built. Raising the dam wall also only mitigates potential floods from one area, upstream of the dam, whereas there are other large tributaries downstream of it that will also flood. Raising the dam wall also does not factor in the potential damage that will occur with climate change with one in 100 year floods soon to occur on an annual basis. The flood plain below the dam will not be adequately protected because of the vast catchment area that raising the dam wall will not mitigate. Raising the dam wall will also destroy irreplaceable aboriginal heritage sites. Clearly the only safe & financially sound approach to mitigating risk is to not permit development in the flood plain & save taxpayers' money but not proceeding with the immense cost of this expensive & ultimately futile project.

Yours sincerely,
Allan Seymour

My name is Emily and I currently live in the Sydney region. Whilst I have lived here for years now I've still never made it to the Blue Mountains! I can't wait to go though and it's something I've been looking forward to for a very long time. Sadly, the Warragamba Dam would have distastorous impacts on the wildlife in this area. Modelling by BirdLife Australia suggested that up to 50% of contemporary Regent Honeyeater foraging and breeding habitat was burnt in the 2019/20 bushfires. Protecting remaining unburnt breeding habitat is of the highest conservation priority. It would be devestating if the first time I make it to the Blue Mountains I am unable to truly witness the beauty of the area, and even more upsetting to think about the future generations that will miss out as a result of this project. We must act in respect of our natural wildlife, particular as climate change continues to wreak havoc on our Earth. Please reconsider.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the proposed dam wall raising because the EIS is flawed.
Personal family involvement when Warragamba was built, means I know the sluice gates were omitted from the plan, in error, and there were questions from within the construction authority about the soundness of the geological foundations of the structure. Tamper with the wall and bear the consequences of a potential disaster!

Furthermore, indigenous sacred sites have already been destroyed by the current dam and to contemplate the destruction of any of the remaining sacred sites of the Gundangurra people is entirely unacceptable.

On an environmental level, the Blue Mountain's World Heritage listing is based on the surrounding eucalypt forrests. This international recognition and status cannot be allowed to lapse. The economic benefits of tourism outweigh the stupidity of the wall raising proposal by 1000's to nil.

The flooding, which will certainly not be temporary as the government lackeys claim, of the precious Camden While Gums alone is enough to stop this proposal. The habitat loss for fauna, especially for species which are endangered, is also unacceptable.

The floodplain below the dam wall should remain floodplain. Greedy developers and stupid lobbyists and donors to political parties are not the people thinking citizens want influencing proposed infrastructure projects. The flooding situation is determined as much by local rainfall, storm evens and the height of the tides at the time of a flood as it is by overflow from the Warragamba Dam. If anyone thinks they can successfully stop the downstream flooding below the wall I strongly suggest they take a look at the history of Brisbane flood events. If you want to protect property and people don't built on a floodplain!

This proposal would be laughable if it wasn't so potentially destructive of environment, Heritage and indigenous sacred sites and the economy of the areas around the existing dam. The proposed dam wall raising should not occur.
Yours sincerely,
Robert Campbell

For comments, see attachment.

I have been visiting & bushwalking in the Blue Mountains all my life. Like many Australians, I love getting out into the bush and experiencing the natural beauty of the rivers, plants and birds.
I oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall because it will destroy a lot of wild places such as the Kowmung River, and wild creatures such as the critically endangered Regent Honeyeater. I am a volunteer with National Parks & Wildlife Service, and have engaged in programs to vegetate areas in the Capertee Valley to provide breeding habitat for Regent Honeyeaters. This experience has made me acutely aware of the scarcity of remaining habitat for this critically endangered species. Raising the dam wall would destroy a lot of breeding habitat for this bird which would be very likely to drive it to extinction.
Many sites of great cultural significance to Aboriginal people would also be inundated if this badly– thought-out plan were to go ahead. Australia should value the fact that we have the oldest living culture on earth, and not destroy the links that connect us to that culture.
Raising the dam wall is an idea being driven by land developers who believe that it will increase the usable land in Western Sydney. However, this land will still be prone to flooding from other rivers, making any housing uninsurable.
I therefore oppose the raising of the dam wall on the grounds that it would destroy much that is valuable without providing any benefits.