McPhillamys Gold Project

To The Minister for Planning.
McPhillamy's Gold Mine Project
Application number SSD – 9505
I am writing to you to strongly OBJECT to the McPhillamy gold mine.
My Family Farm is adjacent to the project. The property was built by my Grandfather and is currently owned by my elderly mother. The Back corner of our property will be within 500 meters of the proposed Tailings dam, and our house within approximately 2 kilometres.
We strongly object the development of the mine in this location as it will have major impacts on our family property due to Dust,Noise and Water. As a direct Neighbor to the Mine project we are very concerned for our future.
1. Water,
We have major concerns for our Underground water. we currently rely on underground water for stock and domestic water. When the mine starts digging down into the underground aquifers they will interrupt the current underground natural water flows and potentially leave us high and dry.
As the property is only 140 acres and is a long skinny block we have limited surface area catchment and rely on the bore heavily for stock water and domestic supply.
2. Dust,
We have major concerns about the dust that will be created from the initial construction through the entire life of the mine. The Roads and Maritime have regularly stated to us that this area is high in natural asbestos. This combined with the other minerals and chemicals in the tailings dam will blow all over this property. and onto our roofs into our drinking water. The mine will adjacent to the pine forest that is our other neighbor. The pine trees will collect the dust and when the wind blows strongly in our direction we will get large quantities of chemicals blowing all over our property.
3. Noise,
The Constant noise from blasting that will be felt considerably when sitting in our house and outside walking around the property will be significant. We breed Cattle Sheep and horses on the property, and have grave fears for livestock production and grain production and our ability to be sustainable.

We have attended the open days and expressed our concerns to the directors and we have been directed to the individual experts in each area and they cannot guarantee that we will not be severely impacted.
The initial meetings that we attended, the proposed mine was anticipated to be greater than the current EIS proposal. We object strongly as the current application if approved will have variation after variation approved over time and the mine will be much larger than is being suggested initially.
As can be seen demonstrated by the Cadia Mine, as each extension and variation that they have applied for has been granted. I believe as Cadia has now been approved to fill the main hole with tailings this will contaminate the underground water that is the headwaters of the belabula river and the water into the Wyangala dam. Not to mention if there is ever a failure of the dam, as has occurred at Cadia and other mines around the world in wet years.
The Environmental Impact Statement is too large for the normal working person to have the time and the experience to comprehend. It Baffles people and confuses us and covers up their real intentions. we rely on you as the minister to protect us as we have done nothing wrong in living in this area. and to have some gold buried deep along side our property we should not have our lives and lively hood destroyed. This mine proposed in this location will be disastrous for the local communities surrounding this area it may provide some jobs, But the impacts are far greater than the benefits to this location.
I therefore implore you to stop this application for the benefit of Blayney, Kings plains, Vittoria and surrounding community. And our future generations.
Regards
Donald Burke

Please see attached

Please see attached

I formally object to the proposed McPhillamy’s gold project – McPhillamys Gold Project SSD 9505.
The proposed project is in very close proximity to the local village of Kings Plains, with most properties in a 1km radius from the boundary and open pit/void. As a resident of the Kings Plains-Walkom Rd area this project proposal has caused a great deal of stress and anxiety over the past two years.
After purchasing an 11 Arce block of land in 2016, my family and I were unaware of the project only a kilometre from our property. It was over 16 months after we had purchased that we knew anything about the proposed project. Our family are currently in a unique situation where we are living in a residential shed dwelling. We had planned on building the shed in the interim before beginning the building of our family home in early 2018. Due to finding out about the project, my family have put our building plans on hold until such a time when we can confidently build our homes, with the expectation of living in the area for a considerable amount of time.
I hold many concerns about the health, wellbeing and lifestyle of my family and the local Kings Plains community if the proposal is to be approved. The most pressing concern I have is the impact of noise on the local area. Kings Plains is currently a very small village. Walkom Road is a quiet rural road with minimal residents and typically the village is very quiet. I hold concerns about the rising noise levels, if the project is approved, with the addition of machinery, blasting and increased traffic on the roadway in such a close proximity to residential areas.
Regis conducted 9 days of noise monitoring in August 2018 on my property. Using only this 9 days of monitoring, Regis are modelling their noise impacts across the 15 year mine life. This is a concerning practice because the seasonal changes in Kings Plains area very different. This data does not account for changes in everyday weather patterns overtime and I feel as though this is a highly in accurate way to model their noise impact on the local area.
In some of their modelling, they are suggesting that some properties will be greatly impacted by noise for a marginal amount of time. This marginal time frame has an extended life of four years. This time frame concerns me greatly because four years is not a marginal amount of time, especially when the proposal is for a 24/7 mine life. They also name properties that will be affected by these impacts, however neighbours within 30 metres of some of these impacted properties are also shown to not have impacts.
As I have stated previously, Kings Plains is a very quiet area. The loudest noise pollution we usually experience is local dogs barking, cows mooing or wind gusts. The data gathered by Regis suggest that the noise average is 35Db during the day, 31Db during the evening and 24Db during the night time. Some of this data is lower that the state accepted residential noise levels however, the residents of the Kings Plains area are not a typical residential area. Regis have suggested that they area within guidelines to increase the state average decibel reading by 5 decibels, in some cases increasing the local decibel reading by up to 11 decibels. These are concerning noise levels for my family due to the fact that we purchased in our area due to the quiet lifestyle.
In the data presented by Regis, they also suggest that after the 8th year, the average noise level in the local Kings Plains area will actually decrease from 35Db in the daytime to 32Db. This is lower than the original pre-mine noise level. This is a confusing statement. How can they project that the average noise level pre-mine, will be lower during the mining life?
I have concerns about the light pollution in the area. The Kings Plains precinct are rural and therefore, there is extremely limited light pollution as is. There is no street lights or lights from any external source. The proposal will cause light impacts on the area, and although there will be an amenity bund and waste rock emplacement between the community and the infrastructure on the mine site, the sky-scape will be illuminated. This will be seen from much further than the Kings Plains village.
The waste rock emplacement on the southern boundary of the mine is another issue that concerns me. As a Walkom road resident, I will have a direct line of sight to the waste rock emplacement. The construction of this will cause a large amount of noise, light and visual impacts for the two years that it is expected to be constructed. This will cause extreme impacts to noise levels due to the dumping of waste rock and will change a valley of rolling hills into a steep rock wall. Regis have suggested that the residents at only 15 residences in the local Walkom Rd area will be affected by the noise level associated with constructing the bund. There are 2 residences in the same area as some of those 15 that have not been identified, even though they are within close walking distance to the affected homes.
The report suggests that there will be numerous noise disturbances that will result in awakenings during the night time periods. This is unacceptable. If the mine wanted to operate, they should ensure that the neighbours are well protected from this noise impact or they should offer to purchase the properties. They have suggested that they are prepared to enter into mitigation agreements with residents under the Voluntary Land Acquisition and Mitigation Policy, however, have taken acquisition of the table.
It has been suggested by Regis that the waste rock emplacement will be of a land and soil capability of class 6 to class 7. These are extensive sloped areas with up to 35% inclines. These types of land forms are highly prone to wind erosion and are of a high salinity. The class type is known for poorly draining soil and has a severe acidification hazard. The NSW government suggests that this land is only suitable of some grazing, however Regis have suggested in their visual assessment that the area will be able to sustain excellent tree growth. I am concerned that the waste rock emplacement will become a barren rock waste dump, visually displeasing and a visual hazard the Mid-Western Highway. How is the rehabilitation supposed to be successful in the drought? How much responsibility will Regis have to ensure that the rehabilitation is effective? What are the consequences if the rehabilitation is not successful?
As an asthmatic, I am concerned that the dust suppression methods of ‘wetting it down’ will be ineffective, especially whilst we are in such a severe drought. I feel that the air quality study has been evaluated at the best possible outcome. I worry that these best case scenarios are inaccurate and will cause a multitude of health impacts on myself, my family and my neighbours.
My final concern I would like to raise is of the intergenerational use of the land, and the water ways. The void is going to be fenced off and left as a huge hole in the ground, a fact that cannot be ignored. Eventually (it is projected for 400 years) this will fill up with water. This is an area of land that could be hazardous for quite some time and cannot be reused for any other purpose. Regis have also stated that the groundwater in the area could be effected for up to 400 years as well. This is a very long time for environmental changes to occur in the area. The Carcoar dam will also be affected by up to 9% less water each year. Carcoar dam is a huge recreational facility in the area. What affect is this project going to have on the local recreation? What will the Carcoar Dam be like in 30 years, after so much water has been diverted into the mine site? Are there going to be further impacts on the water sources further downstream?
In conclusion, I believe that the consequences of the project outweigh the benefits. The issues of immediate noise, sound an air quality for the mine life and the intergenerational consequences of land use, environmental change and water changes are too great to ignore.

I have a rural property which is within 2 km from the mine area, particularly the tailings dam. The property runs sheep and cattle as well as cropping. This property has been in our family for over 100 years and for the past 60 years we have had a bore established to provide for all stock needs. The property is planned and designed to pipe water all around the property. My concern is for any damage or effect to the supply, water levels and contaminations to our bore or any within the local area. My business and valuation would be seriously affected if this were to occur. I had been advised that the water for the mine was to come from a pipeline but understand that the mine could now be accessing water from the bores on their land. This is an even greater concern for our existing bore supply.

The ongoing drought will mean that dust will be a greater problem. I would not think there would be enough water to keep the dust problem at bay. I believe that dust contamination is a real possibility to my house and buildings. The run off from the house is the main source of drinking water and its contamination will place us into a situation of having to buy water at a great cost.

There was a comment in one of the mine's reports about only one koala being found. I believe that the existing mine area habitat would have native animals moving through the area and believe that they come more from Fitzgeralds Mount locality which has more timbered areas and move in and out of the site. I believe it would affect the natural movement from Mid Western Highway to the Mitchell Highway in ways that are yet to be determined. I am concerned that Regis have planned adequate animal coridores so that native animals will be able to move freely from area to area especially with 24hours of noise and dust.

Local native and feral animals have already lost a lot of protective areas due to the pine forest being recently timbered. If the mine is to be working 24hrs a day this could disturb movement of animals no matter how much a coridore is established. Animals and birds need old timber for nesting, protection and blossums. Even though new trees have been planted or are planned they will take a very long time to be effective for animals, birds and bees/native insects.

We live on the Mitchell Highway and since the pines were recently removed we have had a large influx of kangaroos due to this change. This leads me to have concerns in regard to Regis's plans for management of kangaroos (which are protected) and other feral animals (rabbits, foxes, etc). If these animals are not managed on the mine land they will certainly have an affect on neighbouring lands.

While the mine is anticipated to only be in operation for 10 years plus restorative time, I have concerns regarding Regis's plans for the land when it is finished. No matter what the plan and how they believe that can repair it they will not be able to restore the mine site and tailings dam to its original condition. This leave a major scar and potential for longer term contamination and environmental degredation for 10s and 100s of years. I have concerns regarding the additional land outside thse mine but within the mine's ownership and how feral animals, weed eradication, and soil erosion will be maintenance. This includes the management of the land in regards to bush fire prevention measures.

This land is good agricultural land and it would be hoped that at the end of the mine's life it could return to the same but if it is not maintained it would take years for recovery. Rural land that is not maintain properly will deteriorate without continued management and will take a long time for it to recover to be productive again. Past owners who knew their land and how to manage it have been removed so the land history (which takes many years to learn) is being lost.

I would think that the locals can and should expect a good 'neighbour' to manage and maintain their rural land for feral animals, weed management, soil erosion and fire breaks as well as other land management maintenance. Being a considerate rural neighbour is very important.

It was not till last May 2019 that we even heard anything from the mine regarding their proposals and plans. It was only the local groups in the community where we heard about the mine plans.

Please see attached

Please see attached

Please see attached

Please see attached

Please see attached

I object to the whole project as outlined in the attached document.

Please see attached

Please see attached

I object to the Mc Phillamys Gold project for the reasons listed on the attached document. I believe that it will have a extremely detrimental impact on the local environment for many years to come for very little gain to the Blayney Shire in terms of employment or any other benefits.

We are strongly opposed to the development. Please see attachment enclosed.

See attached submission

Please see attach submission to object to this project

I object to this project please find attached my reasons

I strongly believe that the proposed McPhillamy's gold mine operations should not be approved on the basis that it is incompatible with the Kings Plain area, which is prime agricultural land.

The project will cause:
Disruption and/or destruction of a peaceful rural way of life and long established farming businesses in one of NSW prime agricultural areas by a mining operation designed to process 7 million tonnes of rock per annum. Farming productivity is likely to be adversely effected, with resultant financial loss and hardship. This could lead to farmers being forced to leave the primary production sector in a market where property values and saleablity have been destroyed. The risk of locals in this situation suffering physical and mental health medical conditions is very real.

Appropriation for the mine of water resources currently essential for agricultural production.

Contamination of groundwater, streams and Belubula River from toxic chemical such as cyanide and heavy metals used in the extraction and processing operations. This area is part of the larger Lachlan River catchment. These contaminants will be concentrated in the huge tailings dam, causing permanent degradation of the land and water table. Contamination of the State’s limited water resources must never be allowed to occur.

Air pollution from toxic dust being spread by the wind, which will then settle on farming land and buildings contaminating stock feed and farm water storage. There is a potential increased risk of local residents contracting associated medical conditions. The fact that Regis has offered to install roof plumbing to siphon off tainted roof water during rains to stop it entering drinking water tanks highlights their recognition of the risk.

Constant noise pollution in a tranquil rural environment, from the proposed 24/7 extraction and processing operations, including ongoing rock blasting and heavy vehicle traffic. The noise and vibration will negatively impact the quality of life of people and livestock well being in the area. Regis’ offer of mitigating installations such as double glazing and roof insulation demonstrates the detrimental effect locals will be exposed to when outside in the open air.

A constant flow of heavy vehicle traffic on local roads, including trucking ore approximately 30km for processing from the associated site. This is likely to significantly increase the risk of accidents and injury.

The visual destruction of the rural landscape, which has been a major attraction for many people choosing to move to the area.

Development of the proposed mining operation in the Kings Plain simply must not be approved. The regular assurances given by Regis that the project’s risks and detrimental impacts will be mitigated or controlled over the 20 year licence they are seeking are fanciful. Such assurances can never be guaranteed.

As country high schooler that lives with her family on a farm I believe that the McPhillamys Gold mine should not go ahead. All through Summer my family and friends go skiing on Carcoar Dam. This may not be possible if this mine is built. Rivers around our community will dry up and we are already in drought. The mine will be a eyesore to our beautiful countryside.