Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
Do not raise the wall of the dam, do not ignore the world heritage listing request for short term gains... property developers shouldnt make a profit over preserving the animals and bush that will be killed
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the dam for many reason but most of all because the damage to the environment for little gain, as the solution is a waste of money time and resources and a better plan is available but narrow minded public servants are taking the easy way out.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
Please reconsider raising the dam wall it is not a good solution to flooding. Not building on the flood Plain would be sensible
a place of world heritage should be treasured and preserved

Yours sincerely,

Sat 3/12/2022 @ 2:48 PM
To whom it may concern,
We are appalled by the proposal to flodd World Heritage listed lands by raising the dam wall.
And for what ?
To enable developers to locate more housing development on the Hawkesbury flood plain ?
Don't do it.
Yours sincerely,


Fri 25/11/2022 @ 3:48 PM
Dear Sir/Madam,
We are shocked and dismayed that the published report on this project downplays the destruction of more than 1300 hectares of World Heritage listed national parkland.
Recent floods should make clear that developing housing on flood plains is madness, especially in the face of predicted climate change.
The proposed raising of the dam wall is unacceptable.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
The wall of Warragamba Dam will not stop flooding. Nearly half of the floodwaters come from areas outside of the dam.
A better way to protect homes, farms and businesses downstream of Warragamba Dam from flooding is the regular release of water and to halt future development on the Hawkesbury-Nepean Flood Plain.
Infrastructure like this will not only destroy our priceless indigenous heritage but also destroys World Heritage rivers and habitats.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I wish to register my opposition to the raising of the Warragamba dam wall. This is a political scheme so that the present government looks like it is doing something about a problem. The project will not stop the flooding problem, but is designed to help win an election.
The ignoring of expert advice and the disregard to community feeling and cultural and environmental concerns shows an arogance that is hard to credit.
The dam was not designed to be heightened to this extent. The dam was built for water storage and not flood mitigation. The cost is prohibitive and unjustified as it will not stop the problem but merely delay it's effects.
For once the government should listen to knowlegable experts and not those who are in it for political gain. Have they not learned from their past mistakes wrt trains, ferries, environmental concerns. Must they keep repeating mistakes.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I am writing this submission against the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall which will negatively impact the on many plant and animal species and negatively impact he Kowmung river and the Blue Mountains World Heritage Listing.
The rising of the wall will do nothing provide protection to residents already impacted by flooding and will only encourage more development in an area that is not suitable for development.
I strongly object to my tax contribution being used for this development which should never have been listed as an essential infrastructure project.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose raising the Warragamba dam wall. The act of raising the wall will irretrievably damage the natural environment upstream of the dam. Raising the dam constitutes poor use of taxpayer, it will not prevent flooding and there are viable alternatives to mitigate flood risk. Destroying the natural environment goes against the wishes of the Gundungurra first nation's people and will destroy their cultural sites. This destruction is against the wishes of the many people who enjoy walking in the area to connect with a natural environment near to but so very differnent from our city and towns.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
It saddens me that we continue to misunderstand the significants of our actions for future generations. Whilst understanding the growing pressures humans continuously place on the planet, it is the responsibility of those 'in charge' to Take Charge - for the greater good.
Alternatives should be considered to avoid alterations to the already delicate environment around the Blue Mountains. It must be preserved in all its glory. Yet we continuously commodify nature (cut, chop, burn, sell) instead of understanding the holistic benefits individually and to the planet itself.
I don't require a script in response to this letter. Shame!
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I write to Oppose Raising Warragamba Dam.
• The revised EIS has all but dismissed the concerns raised in 2,500 community and government agency submissions to the initial EIS in 2021, and in some cases expert submissions were not even addressed
• The revised EIS has announced NSW Government intention's to ignore the advice of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee by changing the boundaries of the Blue Mountains National Park World Heritage Area.
• The serious concerns held by Sydney Water and Health NSW about the effects the dam project would have on Sydney's drinking water quality have been dismissed in the revised EIS.

The revised EIS has attempted to downplay the destruction of World Heritage and National Parks. 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:
• The Kowmung River - declared a ‘Wild River’, protected for its pristine condition under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974;
• Unique eucalyptus species diversity recognised as having Outstanding Universal Value under the area’s World Heritage listing such as the Camden White Gum;
• A number of Threatened Ecological Communities, notably Grassy Box Woodland;
• Habitat for endangered and critically endangered species including the Critically Endangered Regent Honeyeater and Sydney’s last Emu population.
• The revised EIS has again disregarded the concerns of Traditional Owners, not including important information about sacred sites that would be flooded.
• Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal.
• 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 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 assessed in the EIS. No 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,

To whom it may concern,
Don't fill the hands of property developers at cost olf public and nature
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.
The report dismisses the concerns of the community, the advice of the UNESCO world heritage committee, and concerns raised by Sydney water and Health NSW.
It seeks to allow the destruction of 65 kilometres of rivers and 5,700 hectares of National Parks by removing them from the National Park.
The concerns of the traditional owners have also been ignored.
Alternatives to raising the wall have not been explored sufficiently. The fact that the majority of floodwater comes from below the dam has also been ignored.
This is a scheme that has been pushed through by the Premier under the guise of protecting the public, but will it? I think not, and many experts agree.
This is a political ploy in the lead-up to a state election to paint the Premier in heroic tones.
But at what cost?
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I write once more to oppose raising the wall of the Warragamba Dam, despite the proposed changes. My reasons, of equal concern are as follows:
Destruction of natural environment.
Destruction of land of cultural significance to First Nations people.
Probability of over-development based on increased water supply.
Please reject the proposal to raise the dam wall, for the well-being of our local environment, local 1st Nations People and the planet.
Yours sincerely,

I am gravely concerned about the impact that the raising of the dam wall will have on the biodiversity of the Nattai, on important indigenous heritage and on the Kowmung River. At a time when there is a well recognised need to protect and preserve our environment and to work toward reconciliation with indigenous people, this flies in the face of such efforts. It indicates that when it is politically popular to speak up about caring for the environment and healing wounds with the Aboriginal people then this is done, but when it is politically popular for this to play second fiddle then politicians have no hesitation in pushing an alternative agenda.
The majority of the water that has been responsible for flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Region comes from below the dam wall, and so the raising of the wall will have little 'real' effect on people. I know that it is important for politicians to be seen to be doing things, but I urge you to consider more appropriate and effective methods such as the changing of planning laws to prevent development on flood plains, relocation of some homes etc.
When the raising of the dam wall is also seen in partnership with the proposed new flight paths over the mountains, it appears that our World Heritage wilderness means little to those who are meant to be the stewards of our state - not only its people, but also it's precious and unique resources.
Regards,

To whom it may concern,
I object to ANY raising of the Dam wall.
The Environmental degradation, tree and Turf loss is UNACCEPTABLE.
The Departmentof Planning fails to meet its obligations to the Public when it uses WATER and an increase in any justification (Wrongly in the Long Term perspective) for more development and Housing in the West f this Sydney and Regional areas involved in this proposal.
The Future water demends will not be met as housing and population increase that is proposed becasue of it does not meet the Future CLIMATE Needs. i.e. to move people into this area and increase the water demand is counter to common sense planning. The end result will be an increased shortage and increased $Costs to the Public.
Deaths and Hardship a definate possibility.
The Species detriment as our Landscape shrinks under the influences of Clearing is UNACCEPTABLE and IRRESPONSIBLE.
Do not raise the wall and look for Better Water Use Solutions that retain rathre than drain our Heritage and Landscapes.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
For many years, the development of Western Sydney has been unsustainable on multiple levels. Now, the impacts of this will be felt even further with th Warragamba Dam Raising Project.
Although I now live further nrth in the state, I am from the Blue Mountains and understand the significance of this majestic landscape, not only to those who live there, but to our international reputation, tourism economy and biodiversity. The interests of a few should no longer continue to dominate the decisions that affect us all.
I ask you to tak serious the submissions made by people from a diverse range of backgrounds.
Yours sincerely,

I accept the Department's submissions disclaimer and declaration
I have not made a reportable political donation in the past two years.
Opposition to raising the dam

To whom it may concern,
Too many flood plains have residental living quarters on them already and all we will have is more people and their homes inundated by the flood waters that will eventually spill over this wall. Use the money to move people now and let the waters flow through levy banks.
Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
The dam wall raising is an outdated response to
flood risk as climate change has already rendered most of the assumptions, such as the 1 in 100 year flood event outdated. Date used in most of the modelling is already several years out of date with current projections being updated in real time as the results of climate change on local eweather patterns becomes more obvious. The most recent data has not been factored into the PIR.
The project will affect the vegetation of a world Heritage area as well as impact aboriginal significant sites and for this reason alone, the project should be abandoned.
The idea that you can appropriate other land of a similar quality to offset the damage caused just means that significant wilderness heritage is being destroyed and overall habitat broken up into ever smaller pieces affecting connections. The current methods of odffsets are already problematic and the submission does nothing to address these concerns.

Yours sincerely,

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall on the following grounds:
* it will destroy a huge amount of World Heritage habitat.
* it will destroy the home of many native species, some of which are already endangered.
* it will destroy over 1500 important cultural heritage sites.
I live in the Blue Mountains, where birdwatching and bushwalking activities are very important to me.
Yours sincerely,