To whom it may concern,
I would urge the NSW Government not to raise the Warragamba dam wall. Studies have indicated that the raising would have made very little difference to the recent Nepean flood. This smacks of a typical knee jerk NP reaction that building dams solves every water problem.
I have hiked the majestic Kowmung a number of times, and to flood this wonderfully pristine environment would be a travesty. And how would it be possible to contemplate disregarding the wishes of the Gundungurra people and defiling their ancient heritage in the wake of the Junkan Gorge outrage?
Please do not do this.

To whom it may concern,
I live in Wentworth Falls and am a resident of the UN listed Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Its world acclaimed status is derived from both its Aboriginal cultural heritage and its natural heritage. I share with the Gundungurra and Dharug First Nations peoples, who are the Traditional Owners and Custodians of the Blue Mountains, a profound sense of responsibility to protect the area from developments that pose a risk to its world acclaimed status. I note with deep sadness that if the plan to raise the Warragamba Dam wall went ahead, 1,300 hectares of the heritage area would be inundated.
I oppose the raising of the dam wall. This submission highlights the inadequacies of the SMEG Engineering EIS process. Second, this submission highlights the NSW Government’s lack of due diligence and its failure to implement essential investigations that should have been undertaken following the 2019-20 fires. These various deficiencies have been criticised by different authorities.
Hereunder, I set out some of the facts that underline my position of opposition. I believe that these are essential considerations for the Minister in making a decision on the dam wall.
The deficiencies of the EIS processes and NSW Government processes fall under two main areas: Aboriginal Heritage and Natural Heritage.
Aboriginal Heritage
• The Commonwealth Government has estimated that over 1,541 Aboriginal cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the raised dam wall. Aboriginal heritage forms an important contribution to the international recognition of the area. Yet SMEG Engineering, the firm that undertook the cultural heritage and environmental assessments, surveyed only 27% of the impact area for the Aboriginal cultural heritage.
• Even this minimal area was given minimum time. SMEG Engineering showed a brazen disregard for the important task of assessing Aboriginal cultural heritage. The author of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report spent just 1 (one) day in the field.
• This cultural heritage report has been severely criticised by both the Australian Department of the Environment and the UN’s International Council on Monuments and Sites, for its inadequate assessment procedure, and its failure to conduct meaningful consultation with Gundungurra community members.
• The engagement of SMEG Engineering to do the cultural assessment shows a lack of due diligence by the NSW Government. They have a poor record of working with Indigenous peoples, having been banned from working on World Bank projects in India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Natural Heritage
Similar alarming failures in procedure are evident in SMEG’s environmental assessment process. Some of these failures are listed here:
• Considering the disquiet on the part of the public, many scientists and some NSW Government ministers concerning the decline of the vulnerable koala, it would seem apposite to seriously investigate the impacts of the raising of the dam wall on koala populations in the area of impact. Yet the firm spent just 3.5 hrs looking for koalas.
• Similarly, SMEG spent just 1 (one) day assessing the impacts on aquatic life, including the threatened
• The Threatened Species surveys undertaken by SMEG did not match the guideline requirements under the Act. Where surveys were not adequately completed, expert reports were not sought.
Subsequent to the failures of these EIS procedures, the NSW Government has failed to conduct follow-up studies that are essential to the overall assessment of impacts.
• The fires of 2019-20 devastated 81% of the Blue Mountains Heritage Area. Yet the NSW Government has failed to undertake post-fire field surveys to assess the frequencies and distributions of threatened species in the Heritage Area.
• The federal Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment has raised concerns about 25 threatened plant and animal species that will face a risk of inundation if the wall raising goes ahead. In particular the Department singled out the greater glider, at risk of losing 200 hectares of habitat, with the forced displacement of over 230 individual animals. These losses would be magnified due to the fragmentation of the greater glider habitat, causing further population decline (Morton, Adam “Warragamba Dam: would a higher wall have prevented Sydney flooding?”, Guardian, 23/3/21).
• The Department also singled out the critically endangered regent honeyeater, which has populations in the impact area. It raised the risk that, of the total population that currently exists across the entire range of the species, half could be affected (ibid).
• The Department saw these impacts as being additive to the effects of the 2019-20 fires (ibid). The reductions of threatened species populations due to the fires will be exacerbated by the raising of the dam wall. The chances of these populations for post-fire recovery, even to their previous low levels, will be reduced if their habitat areas have been reduced by inundation.
• Consequently, the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment stated that, as a minimum, the NSW Government should map the extent of the fire area, and that it should also conduct detailed field surveys (ibid).
To conclude, the above stated objections show that the processes for assessing the possible impacts of a raised dam wall have been seriously flawed.
The Greater Blue Mountains has been listed by the UN as a heritage area of international significance for both its Aboriginal cultural heritage and its natural heritage. Yet we have little or no knowledge of how either of these factors will be affected by the raising of the dam wall. SMEG Engineering has failed in its duty under the Act to adequately and responsibly conduct essential surveys and other studies. Indeed, some essential tasks have been left alone entirely. The EIS has produced almost no information on the extent of Aboriginal heritage sites in the impact area and the Gundungurra people have not been adequately consulted. Similarly, the EIS has produced almost no information on the distribution and frequency of threatened species in the impact area.
In view of these deficiencies, the EIS can not be accepted by the Minister as a basis for decision making.
In addition, the NSW Government has failed to conduct studies on the status of threatened species following the devastating 2019-20 fires. We now have no knowledge of the present post-fire status of several threatened plants and animals in the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. Therefore we have no knowledge as to how the hoped-for recovery of several threatened species will be affected by inundation of their potential recovery areas.
Taking into consideration these inadequacies in the assessment processes and the resulting deficiencies in knowledge of the impact area, the Minister has, at present, insufficient knowledge upon which to base a decision on the raising of the dam wall.

This is outrageous! What does it take for government to stop raping this country? You will lose my vote if this goes ahead.

I would like to put forward my submission of support for the Dam wall raising project.

The reason for my support is having seen first hand the devastation that a severe flood can cause to so many people and such a huge area of our community.

In the 2021 floods i saw people lose everything they have ever owned and work towards. People lost their homes, businesses and belongings. This is still an ongoing issue today, i also seen huge amounts of damage to the environment through countless wild animals and live stock being killed or misplaced, oils and fuels leaking into our river and erosion that can never be repaired. Hopefully this will never have to happen again

Thank you for taking the time to read my submission

I am writing to make a formal submission to oppose the EIS of the raising of the Warragamba Dam Wall. My concern is based on the following key points.
1. The ineffective flood mitigation that this will provide, coupled with a false sense of security for new residents who build on floodplains.

2. The damage and removal of access to Indigenous cultural sites in proposed new water level.

3. The damage and removed access to native fora and fauna and the natural beauty of the whole area.

4. The short term benefit to some such as developers, land owners, businesses offset by long term burden to many, including tax payers.

5. Lack of critical analysis of alternative solutions such as increased desalinisation.

This proposal needs more careful investigation by fully independent parties with a fair and transparent process allowing reasonable time for responses. Thank you for allowing me to make a submission to oppose the current proposal.

To whom it may concern,
I am a resident of the Blue Mountains and I love the natural beauty of the area. I am a regular bushwalker.
The Gundungurra people have not given their consent for the dam to go ahead.
The dam would imperil a number of their sacred sites.
It would also threaten native species, some of which are in peril of extinction already, having suffered major damage during the fires, and generally being badly affected by climate change.
We should be doing everything we can to help the native fauna and flora, not the opposite.

To whom it may concern,
I have lived in the Blue Mountains for the past 26 years, and before that, I lived in the Hawkesbury.
It is vital that we protect our wilderness and World Heritage status. As an environmental lawyer and former advisor to the Hon. Robert Hill, I worked on the World Heritage nomination for some years, and was so proud of the bipartisan approach to the nomination. Increasing the dam wall, again, has no postive outcomes and will lead to environmental devastation. I have seen many floods in the Hawlesbury over the years, and despite these floods, council and government still allow development on flood plains. Raising the dam wall is not the answer; more sustainable development and better planning is the answer. Allow the flood plains to remain so as to provide fringe urban agriculture for food production.
Please dont destroy our wilderness for the sake of a few houses and poor planning.

The Blue Mountains is a special place. I am one of many residents who live in the Blue Mountains because of its beauty, natural wonders and cultural significance.
Many of us Blue Mountains residents view the entire Greater Blue Mountains Area as our backyard. It is recognised on the World Heritage List for many reasons, including its exceptional ecological diversity and significant numbers of rare and threatened species. As local residents we love being surrounded by nature and enjoying the outdoors in the Greater Blue Mountains Area.
This is a wonderful backyard.
It should remain as it is without the destruction that would be caused by raising Warragamba Dam.
The proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam will cause considerable damage to the environment within the Greater Blue Mountains. Vast areas will be inundated, ecosystems will be destroyed and the habitats of many threatened species will be lost forever.
The regent honeyeater is a critically endangered bird. I have joined with conservationists who have for many years tried to expand the habitat of this bird by tree planting. However, its ongoing survival remains precarious. The Burragorang Valley is an important breeding ground of the regent honeyeater. Raising Warragamba Dam would destroy vital habitat and push this bird species to extinction. Australia’s record of species extinction is deplorable and another species should not be needlessly lost.
Governments have made commitments to protect World Heritage areas not to destroy them. Raising Warragamba Dam would be a failure of the New South Wales and Federal Governments to protect the Greater Blue Mountains Area and its World Heritage status.
The area under threat is part of the traditional land of the Gundungurra people. The Gundungurra object to the Warragamba Dam raising. It would devastate more than 1500 sacred cultural sites. For too long in Australia the views of Aboriginal people have been ignored. As the traditional custodians of the land, the views of the Gundungurra elders should be respected, and the proposal should not proceed.
The current Environmental Impact Statement is flawed. It is based on inadequate field assessment and seeks to downplay the damage caused by the Warragamba Dam raising proposal. The damage to cultural sites of the Gundungurra people has not been fully valued. The Environmental Impact Statement shows limited understanding of the unique environmental, ecological and cultural values of the Greater Blue Mountains area.
Raising Warragamba Dam in unnecessary. It would not completely protect developed areas in the Hawkesbury–Nepean Valley, and other steps need to be taken. Future developments should not be placed in flood zones. Work should be undertaken to begin removing many current buildings under highest threat from floods.
I strongly object to the proposal to raise Warragamba Dam.
I accept the Department’s submissions disclaimer and declaration.
I have not made any reportable political donations in the last two years.

To whom it may concern,
I have lived in the Blue Mountains for the past 26 years, and before that, I lived in the Hawkesbury.
It is vital that we protect our wilderness and World Heritage status. As an environmental lawyer and former advisor to the Hon. Robert Hill, I worked on the World Heritage nomination for some years, and was so proud of the bipartisan approach to the nomination. Increasing the dam wall, again, has no positive outcomes and will lead to environmental devastation. I have seen many floods in the Hawlesbury over the years, and despite these floods, council and government still allow development on flood plains. Raising the dam wall is not the answer; more sustainable development and better planning is the answer. Allow the flood plains to remain so as to provide fringe urban agriculture for food production.
Please dont destroy our wilderness for the sake of a few houses and poor planning.

To whom it may concern,
I am STRONGLY opposed to the raising of the dam wall, as it will result in the permanent ruination of much of the Blue Mountains World Heritage area, that I cherish deeply.
I live near the National Park, and have been bushwalking in this area regularly for over 40 years. The Kowmung Gorge is one of the most beautiful areas that I have ever been to. Its loss would be a loss to the world, and a great tragedy.
Why is there a plan to raise the dam wall when a very large percentage of the Hawkesbury-Nepean catchment is below the dam? It doesn't make any sense.
We often get to witness the spectacle of rapidly rising floodwaters, simply by wandering down to the nearby Glenbrook causeway. Glenbrook Creek's entire landscape has been altered drastically due to flooding events in the past 2 years. None of this water catchment that I can so readily witness in flood will be mitigated by the proposal to raise the dam wall.
I cannot understand why any government would choose to waste public money building something that is going to destroy bushland and indigenous sites for ever, in a project that will not fulfil the alleged reasons for which it is being espoused, and is an irrevocable theft from future generations of Australians.
We live in a dry continent and a world that is experiencing climate change; we MUST find solutions for water supply that are safe, economically viable, environmentally friendly, and innovative; and we must stop simply repeating the old ways of doing things.
Do NOT raise the dam wall.