Warragamba Dam Raising

I live in the catchment area for the dam, I spend time bushwalking in the accessible parts of the catchment and I volunteer with the NSW SES responding to storm and flooding events.
I believe that the loss of natural and cultural heritage following a raising of the dam wall cannot be adequately offset or replaced. My understanding is that the raising of the wall will offer only moderate protection for ongoing developments on the flood plains below.
I therefore object to the dam wall raising as it uses public capital (funds and irreplaceable heritage) to protect private capital in ongoing floodplain development: in those terms it makes no sense.

I am writing this submission to voice my opposition to the proposal of raising the height of Warragamba Dam wall. Based on my own personal experiences of regular bushwalking, birdwatching and participation in native bush restoration projects in the area, this project poses an unacceptable risk to one of our few remaining wilderness areas.
Not only have I experienced the wonder of being in these natural spaces, I have also previously worked in Western Sydney Local Health District as part of the Mental Health Service. The ongoing development in this area is causing significant mental distress with unfettered development leading to tthe creation of significant pockets of disadvantage. This disadvantage leads to issues in accessing suitable services, and the poor design of these areas exacerbate mental distress when environmental concerns are ignored. I have seen the challenges this creates when trying to support people in the community, and this project will only increase these problems while an already wealthy few will profit. This is unconsciounable, unless profit is all that forms your conscience.
I have regularly visited the Blue Mountains since the devastating bushfires of 2019/20, COVID restrictions permitting. I have seen how areas are struggling to recover, and many native species, both flora and fauna, won't be coming back. The Mountain Ash is one example that is lost to the landscape due to the fires and ongoing climate change. The recent IUCN report highlights a significant increase in the number of species that are threatened with extinction, such as the iconic Bogong moth, the population numbers having dropped by an estimated 99.5% in the space of a few short years. Wilderness areas around Warragamba Dam provide one of their remaining safe havens. Raising the Dam wall unnecesarily to add to the pressure towards extinction.
Australia already has an uneviable record when it comes to protecting our threatened species. The threatened species surveys conducted as part of this project are significantly less than what the current minimum guidelines require. Field surveys and expert submissions were not obtained in a frightening number of occasions. It is also noted that no field surveys have been undertaken since these bushfires, which suggests that the whole report would need to be redone, and to at least meet the minimum requirements. These ommissions make me wonder at the validity of the whole environmental assessments by SMEC Engineering, a firm with a questionable record on Indigenous issues.
On these grounds of an inadequate environmental assessment, the risk to threatened species, and the ongoing risk to people living in Western Sydney from unfettered development that such a project would allow, I forcefully oppose this project. For the harms that it will cause far outweigh any possible benefit.
Many thanks for taking the time to read this submission.

OBJECTION TO PROJECT NUMBER SSI-8441
I wish to register my objections to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall and have not made any political donations in the last two years
My husband and I moved to the Blue Mountains area over 18 years ago and enjoy the amazingly beautiful environment we live in. We are now retired and appreciate bushwalking , the wonderful vistas and the wildlife even more.
It would be criminal to destroy habitats for critically endangered species such as the Regent Honeyeater, koalas and Sydney’s last emu population as well as 1500 indigenous cultural heritage sites. Hasn’t Australia be condemned enough times for destroying its sacred heritage sites!

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the proposal to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam for flood mitigation.
I have long lived in the Blue Mountains, working for protection of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heriage Area and bushwalking in the area. I know well some of the rivers to be impacted by stored floodwaters, such as the Coxs and Kowmung, and how these rivers are the heart and lifeblood of the southern Blue Mountains wilderness.
My objection to the proposal is based on a number of grounds:
1. impact on critical natural values including national parks, the World Heritage Area, declared wilderness, native and threatened species and wild catchments;
2. the appalling precedent it would create for damaging these established values;
3. support for Aboriginal groups who are set to suffer yet more disrespect and destruction of their heritage, at a time Australian governments are reviewing the disgraceful record of destruction and considering stronger potections;
4. the many shortcomings of the EIS which fails to properly assess and consider these impacts;
5. the existence of viable alternatives for flood protection, compared with the only partial protection provided by floodwater retention in Lake Burragorang.
Fundamentally, the level of impacts proposed is outrageous and unnecessary, especially at this point in history when the protection of our natural areas and Indigenous heritage is more critical than ever, and we need to learn to live within natural constraints rather than destroying more and more as the first response.
To whom it may concern,
I have worked and walked in the Greater Blue Mountains for 40 years and I'm personally familiar with the environment of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area including the region surrounding Lake Burragorang. As a former national park officer and current environmental consultant, nature photographer and bushwalker I am also well informed on the environmental issues and values of this area.
I oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall for flood mitigation on two principal grounds:
1. Impacts on the upstream environment. Temporary inundation of natural areas (inc. GBMWHA, declared wilderness, a wild river, national parks and state conservation areas) will have significant impacts on vegetation, fauna, Aboriginal heritage and natural values. The methodology used by the EIS to assess these impacts is flawed in many respects. By using unproven methodology it fails to adequately establish the extent and duration of inundation, and hence the quantum of impact on protected lands. By applying flawed logic, it misrepresents the value of declared wilderness and the Kowmung declared wild river. It uses inadequate survey for Aboriginal heritage, flora, fauna and threatened species but will impact these severely. It does not include detailed maps to adequately show the relationship between current FSL, future proposed levels, protected areas and wilderness. It falls short of several other requirements of the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements and the principles of management for Australian world heritage properties and national heritage places. It fails to adequately address the concerns of Aboriginal Traditional Owners.
2. The proposal is a poor response to downstream floodplain risks. The proposal only addresses a proportion of the catchment, and the EIS fails to adequately consider alternatives or to justify the proposed solution on practical or economic grounds.
3. The proposal represents a futher dispossession of the Gundungurra people from their Burragorang homeland, with damage to large number of cultural sites and disrespect to their views.
In summary, the EIS fails to adequately address many aspects of the proposal and the alternatives. It does not provide an acceptable basis for a decision on the proposal.

To whom it may concern,
I am strongly opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam for the following reasons:
• The Blue Mountains World Heritage Area is an internationally recognised. Treasure. It is a place that I have enjoyed many times over my life. In particular, a place I visited regularly when I lived in Sydney, for what we called “spiritual revival” from the city life.
• The damage to natural and cultural values caused by raising the wall of the dam would be a clear breach Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention.
• 1,300 hectares within the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, would be inundated by the Dam project. This would severely impact on rivers, trees, vegetation and wildlife habitat, which would all be at risk – much of this recognised as having outstanding value in World Heritage Listings.
• The lack of proper environmental assessments and modelling by SMEC Engineering is in keeping with their bad reputation for abusing indigenous rights. They have been barred from the World Bank.
• The lack of proper assessment of more suitable options for flood risk mitigations.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall.

1. The main stated purpose is flood mitigation, however the proposal does not address ALL THE POSSIBLE SOURCES OF FLOODING IN THE AREA and as such is a subminimal plan.
2. The real issue is allowing development on floodplains which should never have been allowed. The problem of flooding MUST BE ADDRESSED IN A DIFFERENT WAY. This way is short sighted and ineffective.
3. The are devastating environmental issues and problems that would result from the proposal were it to go ahead. This issues and problems out weigh ANY possible gains, which are not conceded.

To whom it may concern,
I am fearful at the lack of governance by the NSW Government over many years with respect to flood plain land use planning.
The logic provided to justify the raising of the dam wall is predicated on the continual failure to govern appropriate land use of the flood plain. There is no evidence this ongoing failure to govern land use will not go on and on, such that when the dam wall is raised, the next edition of flood risk maps will show much larger areas within the current flood plain no longer subject to 1 in 100 year flooding and therefore allowing ongoing totally inappropriate land use.
I am fearful at the lack of governance by the NSW government that has been displayed in the production of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. The process for producing this EIS has been proven to be severely tainted with wholesale downgrading or just plain disregard of upstream impacts when evaluating “costs”.
I was sickened by the disaster at Juukan Gorge, a disaster that would not have occurred with proper governance. Can you let a failure of governance produce yet another devastation of world heritage class assets?

Dear Sir/Madam,

I object to the proposed raising of Warragamba Dam.

I do so for the following reason:

1. The World Heritage listing of the Blue Mountains National Parks is recognition of the area’s extraordinary biodiversity and ecological integrity.
2. The actual extent and severity of the impacts on areas declared under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 and that are World Heritage listed are unacceptable and would amount to ecological vandalism. Approximately, 5,700 ha of NPWS’ reserves, 1,300 ha of World Heritage Area and 65 km of wild rivers would be irreparably impacted.
3. The ecological surveys supporting the EIS are inadequate and the extent and severity of the impacts on the environment are underestimated. This is partly because the EIS misrepresents the spatial and temporal extent of the inundation that would occur. Further, no additional ecological surveys were done after the devasting 2019-2020 fires and the survey methodology for threatened species and threatened ecological communities does not meet applicable requirements.
4. It is likely that NSW’ most threatened bird, the Regent Honeyeater, would go extinct if the proposal were to proceed due to destruction of its habitat.
5. Due to the problems with the assessment of the ecological impacts, any calculation of biodiversity offset for the proposal based on information in the EIS would be flawed. In fact, there is no calculation of the biodiversity offset.
6. Surveys for cultural heritage are inadequate being conducted in approximately 25% of the area to be impacted. Those surveys, which have conducted, have identified that more than 1500 Aboriginal cultural heritage sites that would be destroyed. The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report has been criticised by both the Australian Department of Environment and the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), including, for lack of proper consultation with the traditional owners.
7. The EIS overinflates the reduction in flooding of downstream areas that raising the dam wall would deliver. Raising the dam wall would not eliminate significant risk of flooding of downstream flood prone areas. Almost 50% of floodwaters that flood the floodplain do not come from upstream of Warragamba Dam. Accordingly, significantly increasing development on the floodplain would potentially increase the number of people and amount of property at risk of harm during floods.
8. Flooding from Wivenhoe Dam and the Ross River Dam highlight that using a dam for both water storage and flood mitigation can go disastrously wrong.
9. The EIS does not present alternatives to raising the dam wall.
10. I have bushwalked in this area and I am appalled that future generations may not be able to do so.

To whom it may concern,
I write with great concern about the proposal to raise the height of Warragamba Dam.
I've hiked for years in the Kowmung area and it has a character and biodiversity not found elsewhere in the blue mountains. There is no faking it elsewhere- it will be gone for good.
While it is a "quick fix" to increasing water supply and flood risk, both of these problems can be dealt with in other ways. We already have an underutilised desalination plant. And we could be reclaiming grey water for more efficient reuse.
As for flood risk, 45% of floodwaters are derived from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment., so a higher dam will not prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley downstream.
Rezoning of the valley downstream for housing should not be a reason to destroy the unique natural resource. Sydney is sprawling enough- it needs to go higher not wider.

To whom it may concern,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall.
I am a conservationist and bushwalker who has visited the wilderness of the southern Blue Mountains including the Kowmung River and would like to do so again.
Consequently I am totally opposed to any proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall as it would allow much of this precious area to be occasionally flooded and permanently degraded.
The proposal ignores the fact that these areas already have multiple layers of legal protection including national park, wilderness, special catchment and national and world heritage status. I understand that 65 kms of wild rivers and 5,700 hectares of national park including 1,300 hectares of world heritage area are directly threatened by the project.
Allowing this proposal would make a mockery of these laws and regulations and set a disastrous precedent for the future of other areas that are supposedly protected by these provisions. In addition it would represent a clear breach of Australia's obligations to protect natural and cultural values under the World Heritage Convention.
I am very concerned about the potential adverse impacts of the project on up to 48 threatened flora and fauna species living upstream of the dam including the endangered Kowmung Hakea and Regent Honeyeater and the vulnerable Camden White Gum. Not to mention the threat it poses to Threatened Ecological Communities such as Grassy Box Woodland.
Of course it is vital to have measures in place to prevent the loss of life and property when the Hawkesbury Nepean system floods. However raising the dam wall is a poor solution to this problem.
A combination of alternative flood mitigation measures would be equally effective without the disastrous environmental impacts of the current proposal.
These include lowering the full water storage level of the dam, constructing levees and evacuation roads and relocating residents most at risk.
If carefully planned, these alternatives could be achieved without the expenses of construction and biodiversity offsets pertaining to the current project.
If this project is completed it is likely to instill a false sense of security in current and potential residents of the areas downstream of the dam. It will not prevent future flooding of the Hawkesbury Nepean valley as an average of 45% of floodwaters come from areas outside of the Warragamba Dam catchment anyway.
Given Sydney's population growth there is a real risk that the proposal will put even more people in danger if Infrastructure NSW has its way and allows 134,000 more people to move into the floodplain.
NSW should not continue to have planning regulations that allow people to be housed in flood prone areas below the 1:500 year limit. This is the real problem that needs to be addressed.
I hope that you will give my submission favourable consideration.

To whom it may concern,
I don't want to see bush heritage decimated for a land-grab. There are too many reasons for saving this river, and not inundating precious emu habitat and land with clear aboriginal significance. The trees and shrubs will die, or be damaged beyond repair. Invasive weeds could proliferate. Itsy not a sound option to protect the wilderness, and fauna.

To whom it may concern,
I have a number of reason for objecting to the raising of the dam wall.
These range from my concerns about the loss of the flood plain, (once the flood-zoning changes result in new developments there), to the threat to the critically endangered Regents Honeyeater and other species, the preservation of Aboriginal Cultural sites and consultation with their custodians, the EIS that was undertaken, and to the lack of consideration of other options.
I now live in the Blue Mountains, but I lived in the Western Suburbs and attended Hawkesbury Agricultural college and UWS, so have a strong connection, not only to the mountains, but also to the floodplains, and realise how important it is that they remain free from development. We have very little left of food producing areas in Sydney now, and the floodplains, with their periodic wetting and draining are one of the few fertile areas where this can occur. They also provide a large area where excess water can drain. Once they are covered with asphalt and concrete, there will be nowhere for water to go, and, during this extremely wet Spring and Summer, we can see the disasters that arise when storm water systems cannot cope with excessive rainfall, let alone massive floods.
Raising the dam wall will not address the problem of flooding from waterways downstream from the dam.The Hawkesbury has two main sources, the huge catchment of rivers that flow into Warragamba Dam that has its own flood plain from Emu Plains to Castlereagh. Then the Hawkesbury starting at Yarramundi when water sourced from the Grose Valley catchment in the Blue Mountains joins the Nepean. There is a flood plain around Richmond and Windsor through to Cattai but then more rivers join in and the valley narrows again with steep sandstone gorges and many twists and turns. Raising the dam level does not deal with the flood waters coming from the major rivers further downstream such as the Grose, Macdonald and Colo. In short, on average, 45% of floodwaters are derived from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment, so,no matter how high the dam wall is constructed, it will not be able to prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley downstream.
I am also deeply concerned about the environmental and cultural assessments for the project and that they were undertaken by SMEC.
The World Bank announced in 2017, that it had debarred SMEC International, after investigation found evidence of inappropriate payments made in relation to World Bank-financed projects and misrepresentations to meet bidding requirements for projects in Sri Lanka and India. Hardly a ringing endorsement for the NSW Government to employ them..
More specific to their EIS ... No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.
They cconducted no post 2019/20 bushfire field studies, even though 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area was devastated; and they assessed only 27% of the impact area for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
Their threatened species surveys have not adequately met the requirements, set out in survey guidelines, and expert reports were not obtained.
Raising the Warragamba Dam wall by 14 metres would drown old-growth forests in the Burragorang Valley, located 60km west of Sydney's CBD. Even flooding from a 1 in 50 year flood will extend 5 km into the Kedumba Valley and cause the death of 40% of the critically endangered Camden White Gum Forest. This species is listed as vulnerable under the Threatened Species Conservation Act. Regent Honeyeaters, Critically Endangered, both nest and feed in the old-growth forests of the Burragorang, with only 400 birds left in the wild.Leading ecologists have said flooding the Burragorang Valley will be tantamount to signing off on the bird’s extinction.
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.

These are just a few of my own concerns, but Im sure there are many more that I've not covered. The dam wall will be expensive, in monetary terms, devastatingly costly to the natural and cultural heritage and wildlife of the Blue Mountains National Park, and will not mitigate agains the inundation of the Hawkesbury Nepean Valley in times of flooding from the waterways downstream from it. Opening up these areas to settlement, thus decreasing the open ground areas for absorption, will further contribute to the flood problems, and lead to massive evacuations of the possible future residents.
Please don't raise the Dam Wall.

To whom it may concern,
I am strongly against the raising of the Warragamba dam wall as it will permanently damage a beautiful pristine area of wilderness in our World heritage listed Blue mountains National Park.
The flooded areas will eventually end up covered in silt killing all native flora and fauna in the area leaving it looking like a moonscape, Not how a World heritage area should look.
There are many viable alternatives to raising the dam wall and I believe all other options should be looked at, especially since 45% of flood waters entering the Nepean valley flood plain do not even come from the water ways behind the dam wall.
The areas that will be permanently destroyed contains many irreplaceable Indigenous sites, extremely rare and endangered plants and animals, the fact that raising the dam wall is even in the cards is beyond me when looking at all the facts, it's discaceful that it is even being considered! I am sure it is mainly to help out the developers put more dodgy project homes on the flood plain.
Please take the time to consider all other options as once The Blue mountains wilderness has been destroyed it will never be the same for our future generations to enjoy.

To whom it may concern,
I strongly disagree with the idea to raise the Dam. It will have just a small effect in protecting houses and destroy a huge area of endangered wild life. As a migrant, I admire the beauty of the wildlife and nature. It is something you won't see in another country. Uniqueness is worth protecting. There are options that haven't been looked at yet. Please don't flood this area.

Dear Warragamba Assessment Team,
Submission – Warragamba Dam Raising Project – SSI-8441 –
My submission is attached as a Word doc.
I have lived all of my 84 years next to the Nepean - seen the floods and the droughts, and Sydney arriving just across the Nepean River, if some one mentions building a dam to store more drinking water, a National Park is declared, or a threatened species is found.
WE DO NEED TO STORE MORE WATER!!!
I can remember the Dam being finished and it filled quickly, it then turned dry and the pipeline to Sydney was old and small and Sydney was still short of water!!!!