Warragamba Dam Raising

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall
I am OPPOSEDfor the following reasons-
About half of the floodwaters to the Penrith plain come from rivers outside the Warragamba catchment.
The EIS allows for flooding of 60 km of wilderness rivers and thousands of Aboriginal sites. SMEC spent three hours surveying for Koalas and one day for Platypus. The extent of inundation is seriously understated: Only 1400ha of the 6,000 ha impact area. The rising water would drive threatened species to extinction like the Regent Honeyeater.
The EIS relies on surveys conducted before the Bush Fires 2019-20 which burnt 81% of the Greater Blue Mountains. A new survey is needed.
No experts were engaged to undertake studies of the impact of the dam project on the Outstanding Universal Values established in 2000.
4,000 page EIS issued despite opposition from the Insurance Industry: The Hawkesbury – Nepean flood plain is no place to expand development.
In times of drought Sydney has a Saltwater Treatment Plant at Kurnell.

To whom it may concern,
I strongly oppose to the raising of the Warragamba Dam.
As a Sydney resident I frequently visit the Blue Mountains for bushwalking, enjoying the unique nature and recharge the batteries for another busy city week.
I am deeply concerned about the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam and its impact on the beloved World Heritage Blue Mountains.
The EIS is not robust and can not be relied on, because:
• The engineering firm (SMEC Engineering) who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project have an established history abusing Indigenous rights, recently being barred from the world bank.
• Severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken.
• 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.
I strongly oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam.
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.
These 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.
I appeal to you to do whatever is in your power to stop the raising of the Warragamba Dam.

To whom it may concern,
please don't allow warragamba wall to be raised
so much aboriginal culture will be further damaged
flooding can still occur via the colo and it's tributaries
beautiful wilderness will further be destroyed damaging the world heritage status
several birds will join the extinct species list including the regent honeyeaters also the last remaining kurrajong white gums will be destroyed
what will be left for my great grandchildren to enjoy?

To whom it may concern,
I grew up on market gardens in North Western Sydney. I have first-hand knowledge of the area, its natural water resources, their limitations and flooding. Two of my nephews' houses were flooded during the 2021 floods. Their nearby turf farms, and livelihoods were also badly impacted by the flood.
I have lived on Dharug and Gundungurra Country within The Blue Mountains World Heritage Area for 26 years, and have a deep respect for its ecology and First Nations Custodians. I also have a deep respect for the cultural heritage of First Nations heritage—what remains of it.


I am opposed to the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall because:

1. The Blue Mountains World Heritage area is an internationally renowned National Park. In 2000, it was inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage Register in recognition of its “outstanding universal value for the whole of mankind”. Raising the Dam wall and its consequential damage to natural and cultural values would breach Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention to preserve the universal value of the Park:

• An estimated 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers, and 5,700 hectares of National Parks, 1,300 hectares of which are 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 remaining Emu population.

2. Raising the dam wall will not necessarily prevent future flooding, please see: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/mar/23/warragamba-dam-would-a-higher-wall-have-prevented-sydney-flooding

3. The integrity of this environmental assessment is fundamentally flawed and cannot be accepted as a basis for further decision-making by the Minister for Planning:

• The engineering firm, SMEC Engineering, who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project, have an established history of being barred from the World Bank. Please see: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-29/smec-hit-by-world-bank-ban-over-bribery-allegations/9001772?utm_campaign=abc_news_web&utm_content=link&utm_medium=content_shared&utm_source=abc_news_web

• The catastrophic Black Summer Bushfires of 2019/20 devastated 81% of The Blue Mountains World Heritage Area, and no post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken here;
• Threatened species surveys are substantially less than guideline requirements. Where field surveys were not adequately completed, expert reports were not obtained;
• No modeling of the stated flood, or economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the project’s EIS.
4. The European colonisation of this land has done overwhelming damage to First Nations Peoples and
their heritage. Only 27 % of the dam impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage. It is incumbent on all of us to preserve what remains:
• Over 1,541 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.
5. 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 the 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 the upstream Warragamba Dam catchment. Meaning, that no matter ho high the dam wall is constructed, it will not be able to prevent flooding in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley downstream.
For all of the above reasons, please address all of the EIS shortfalls, and utilise alternatives to raising the Warragamba Dam Wall.

To whom it may concern,
I am very concerned about the Warragamba Dam raising Project. I may live in WA but I have and intend to again visit and bushwalk in the Blue Mts.
I am very concerned that cultural Heritage of the Gundudgurra people has not been recognised or taken into account. I'm told that over 1540 sites of cultural importance would go underneath the water if this dam proposal goes ahead
Please DO NOT allow this dam wall to be raised
I most definitely oppose this project to raise the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
this Wilderness gives me my most satisfying experiences after an extremely stressful week. I enjoy the interactions with the wildlife and the unique flora. Any further loss of this treasured environment will be heading towards a radical tipping point. This should be the last option after Solar powered desalination, filtration plants downstream along the Hawkesbury river and other suitable rivers emptying into the ocean, recycled stormwater and water saving devices.

To whom it may concern,
this Wilderness gives me my most satisfying experiences after an extremely stressful week. I enjoy the interactions with the wildlife and the unique flora. Any further loss of this treasured environment will be heading towards a radical tipping point. This should be the last option after Solar powered desalination, filtration plants downstream along the Hawkesbury river and other suitable rivers emptying into the ocean, recycled stormwater and water saving devices.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the raing of Warragamba dam because it will destroy a significant area of natural environment including world heritage areas and alternatived to raising the dam wall have not been adequately considered.

To whom it may concern,
Recommendations 6-13, (Leg Council 20 June 2019) must be adhered to
EIS 29 Sept 2021 Water NSW 1-4, 1-9 NOT
supported.
An Australian problem is when two Governments of the same tribal parties, are in power, then the Environment is a huge loser. A huge loser. Last year I put in 2 submissions to the EPBC Act. And what did the C'wealth do to that? Even Graeme Samuel's first report was easily dismissed by the relevant minister. She must not be sent overseas in connection with the Warragamba Dam to "do" exactly what happened over the great Barrier Reef.
Planning now and where it puts people/houses/etc is a no-no. That's the massive issue. There are heaps of planning issues; I've been a PIA member for over 30 years, plus being an Inernational member ICOMOS for many decades, so am part of people who put areas up for World Heritage Listing. I know Blackheath well and the upper Blue Mts well. Parts of my childhood were spent up there.
THE DAM WALL MUST NOT BE RAISED.

To whom it may concern,
I wish to register my strong concern and objection to the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam.
The pristine nature of this area will be compromised in many ways, including wildlife, fauna and consequent status as a World Heritage area.
I do not live on the western flood plains but there are strong indications the proposed Dam would not provide the protection required. It is a lazy fix. Unfortunately and disturbingly, it is hard to understand what is true in the impact report which lacks fundamental information and assessment to guide decision making.
As an active RFS member, I am curious what there have been no post-bushfire field surveys undertaken to guide the assessment.
I am opposed to the raising of the Dam.

To whom it may concern,
I write as a landholder/custodian in the Warragamba catchment and with a long family connection with the Taralga community, that absorbed families relocated after the Cox/Wollondilly valleys were flooded in 1956.
As a fourteen-year-old with my aunt and two friends I walked into the Kowmung, now a declared wild river. Later experiences walking the Burragorang, and immersing in the history of European presence, encounters with the Gundungurra and later settlement prior to flooding, reinforce my sense of outrage that the values recognised in the World Heritage listing of parts of the Greater Blue Mountain Park are being swept away on the false pretext of risk mitigation, to allow ill-advised expansion of housing into a flood plain.
Far from being the preserve of a privileged few, the wilderness of the southern Blue Mountains is an accessible source of wonder, hinterland for the population of greater Sydney, a world class attraction for visitors, and of inestimable value in the conservation of biodiversity on the planet. It is not a back lot to be sacrificed for shoring up poor planning decisions.
Land Rights were awarded to the Gundungurra in 1991 over crown land south of Katoomba as far as Goulburn. The call by traditional owners for heritage protection over cultural sites in the area to be flooded by the dam wall proposal should be respected.

To Whom it may concern,
I wish to note that I am totally oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.
I am 75 years old, during my youth I went caving at Colong, such a steep descent, and hours later after the adventure such a climb up. I feel as though it was a great privilage to do this sort of recreation, which will be lost to the future generations if this fantastic wilderness is flooded. My family owned a property on the Southern side of Warragamba, so I have walked in the area and have wonderful memories of the wilderness.
I cannot believe losing such pristine wilderness so close to Sydney could possibly be contemplated, it may stop flooding in the near future but once full, surely flooding would re-occur on someone elses watch. Sounds like a quick fix to my mind, shame on the NSW Government for considering such a damaging scheme for such a small problem, especially if people live on River frontages.
We have done such damage to our country in the short time we have colonised this counrty, I would think it is time we respected the country and those whose country it was before we invaded. The Gundungurra Traditional Owners have not given their consent for this wall raising to proceed, what will be lost of their culture. We white Australians have no understanding of how much damage we have done to the Aboriginal population. This is such an important wilderness because it has been hard to get to, it must be a very important area to the Gundungurra People. Our native threatened flora and fauna species in the area will be pushed further to the limit, especially after the Bushfires.
This area is enviromentally important to Sydney for drinking water, therefore has been kept in a pristine condition and should stay that way, it is World Heritage and culturally important to our history. It would be very easy to destroy the area with no way of returning it to its beauty. I hope this is not a way to increase this area for drinking water to be used to flush Sydney's toilets.

To whom it may concern,
Australia already has the worst record in the world for the loss of native species of flora and fauna. The plan to raise the Warragamba Dam wall will add to this unenviable record. This alone should be sufficient for the NSW Government to make every effort to avoid this catastrophic plan.
As a bushwalker for many years, I have had the wonderful experience of walking along the Kowmung River and exploring the surrounding area. For me, it is not just a place on a map but a rare wilderness that should be preserved for future generations of Australians.
I will not waste time here listing the many scientific reasons for preserving this area as there have been many scientists and other experts, with greater knowledge than mine, who have provided that information already. I ask that the NSW Government build on other recent forward-thinking decisions regarding protection of the environment for the benefit of NSW residents and all Australians. The cheapest and easiest option is often not the best solution. In fact, a combined approach of multiple options has already been recommended as the most cost-effective means of flood risk mitigation. This will be the last opportunity to make the best decision for the future.
The integrity of the environmental assessment is fundamentally flawed and should not be accepted as a basis for further decision-making by the responsible Minister. Why did the EIS not include modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the raising of the dam wall? SMEC Engineering, who undertook the environmental and cultural assessments for the project, have a poor history of abuse of Indigenous rights.
More than 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.
Finally, the Blue Mountains World Heritage area is more than 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. The decision to submerge 65 kilometres of wilderness rivers and 5,700 hectares of National Parks is a responsibility the NSW Government will surely regret.

To whom it may concern,
An EIS can be flawed and come up with inappropriate recommendations. Unless, Climate Change is addressed there needs to a declaration that Sydney is already FULL.
We must learn to live within the limits of our natural resources. By 'stealing' water from other catchments, the problem is not solved. Stop building on the flood catchment areas below, of the Nepean. Use the land for food growing, which would be far more appropriate.
The vegetation of the Sydney Bioregion is of world reknown and potentially has World Heritage status. Do not destroy more of it by raising the dam wall. Value it and don't destroy it.
Listen to and hear the wishes of the Traditional Owners. Explore the feasible options, this has not been done. This issue is part of the response needed to Global Warming.
Do NOT raise the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
I wish to register my disgust, there is no other word for it, at this proposal.
I have been following this matter in the media for a number of years and I am concerned that despite positions taken by scientific bodies, indigenous communities, even elements of the business community, the government chooses to press on with this costly scheme which is deeply flawed.
This past year we had a 1/100 year flood. The number of fatalities although regrettable, was small. The economic damage though significant was contained. If this is the downside of retaining existing dam heights then it is not an unreasonable price to pay.
The fact is, the desire to build new Sydney suburbs on a flood plain needs to recognise that expensive flood mitigation such as this rarely eliminates floods entirely. The engineering works on the Mississippi Basin are testament to that. Over 100 years of river management, by major dam construction, levees, wiers unable to contain floods that it was designed to manage.
The Sydney metro now needs a sustainable population plan that recognises that tollways, and fast rail systems will continue to develop. These will allow Sydney's population to decentralise even further, out of the Cumberland Plain entirely. This will offer affordable housing solutions which have now been taken away from the next generation of householders. The Australian dream of home ownership is now seriously in jeopardy.
The idea that the occasional flooding of the upper catchment behind the raised dam wall has minimal environmental impact is simply ridiculous. These finely tuned natural habitats will be forever damaged. One of the last wild rivers in NSW, the Kowmung will be compromised. Aboriginal indeed Australia's heritage, will be diminiished.
Lastly, creating The Blue Mountains World Heritage area only 21 years ago and now deliberately trashing our responsibilities to that convention, places us in a hypocritical position every time we argue a case for world heritage in international forums.
Water mitigation schemes such as this prevailed in the 20th century. NSW needs to develop fresh thinking.
A foolhardy proposal such as this should be forever removed from the government's agenda.

To all involved in this decision, I write to oppose the plan to raise the height of the Warragamba Dam wall. I have walked in areas of the World Heritage Area that would be affected by the increase in storage and, as a biologist, am aware of the value of the biodiversity in the area. Cultural sites of the Gundungurra Traditional Owners would also be impacted.
A raised wall would not be effective in protecting the floodplain from floods as much of the flood water comes from outside the area of the Dam's catchment.
The present EIS that is being relied on is inadequate and should not be used as a basis for decision on this matter. I urge you to reject the proposal to raise the Dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
I feel deeply distressed by the proposal to raise the dam wall.
Firstly, the EIS has been said to be flawed and insufficient by a number of experts, and has not considered the tremendous loss of our heritage of First Nations artifacts, sacred sites,and culture which is tied to this land.
If this proposal goes ahead, it could well be another Juikan Gorge which has given us a very sad reputation worldwide.
Secondly, as this is a vital part of the World Heritage listed area, we could lose this vital listing which is a drawcard for overseas visitors, and will therefore mean a substantial loss of income for NSW.
Thirdly, once again like Jukan, the treaditional owners of this property have not given consent for this to proceed, and in fact i know many who are grieved deeply at the thought of their homeland being inundated.
i therefore beg you to prevent this proposal from being implemented and, instead, protect our history, World Heritage Lands and all they contain for future generations.
We cannot keep destroying this sacred wilderness for a few developers to make profit, or we will all suffer the consequences.

To whom it may concern,
I feel deeply distressed by the proposal to raise the dam wall.
Firstly, the EIS has been said to be flawed and insufficient by a number of experts, and has not considered the tremendous loss of our heritage of First Nations artifacts, sacred sites,and culture which is tied to this land.
If this proposal goes ahead, it could well be another Juikan Gorge which has given us a very sad reputation worldwide.
Secondly, as this is a vital part of the World Heritage listed area, we could lose this vital listing which is a drawcard for overseas visitors, and will therefore mean a substantial loss of income for NSW.
Thirdly, once again like Jukan, the treaditional owners of this property have not given consent for this to proceed, and in fact i know many who are grieved deeply at the thought of their homeland being inundated.
i therefore beg you to prevent this proposal from being implemented and, instead, protect our history, World Heritage Lands and all they contain for future generations.
We cannot keep destroying this sacred wilderness for a few developers to make profit, or we will all suffer the consequences.

To whom it may concern,
I am writing to oppose to the raising of the Warragamba Dam.

My reasons for this are :
• The area which will be affected is part of the Blue Mountains World Heritage area and has several levels of protection including UNESCO World Heritage listing, National Park and the recognition of the Kowmung as a wild river, amongst other protections afforded to this very beautiful and important area. To me, these protections alone have enough value to not allow the raising of the dam which will severely affect the newly inundated areas. Why a government is even contemplating to ignore all these protections is beyond me and is against the obligations of the government under the World Heritage Convention.
•
• I do not want the government to spend an estimate of $4 billion (including off sets for destroyed habitat) to destroy an invaluable area, which has such great value for native animals, recreation, local jobs, tourism, bushwalking, etc
•
• Biodiversity : the Blue Mountains have a number of flora of Outstanding Value and several species of flora and fauna and habitat for Endangered and Critically Endangered native species such as the Regent Honeyeater and some types of Eucalyptus trees.
•
• The Greater Blue Mountains area has greatly been affected by the 2019/2020 bushfires and putting additional stress on the ecological systems is unacceptable, 71% has been burned.
•
• It is important that we learn from the past and that we value and respect Aboriginal Cultural sites, it is unknown how many sites will be affected. Once the area is flooded, these sites will forever be destroyed and this will be a great loss to for all.
•
• The EIS survey of local species are incomplete and not the entire area that could be affected has been assessed. This is unacceptable.
•
• The EIS does not state the outcome or level of protection for the downstream areas if the dam wall is raised, alternatives have not been fully assessed. How can such a large project be fully understood if these important aspect are not fully investigated
•
• World Heritage Listing
The World Heritage Site has been downgraded last year due to these devastating bushfires.
It is now in the second lowest category, from a site of “good with some concerns” to a site of ‘significant concern’.

If we don’t protect what we still have in the Greater Blue Mountains, we risk our World Heritage Listing which will be a devastating outcome for both nature and our local economy.
I strongly oppose the raising of the dam and I sincerely hope that common sense will prevail!

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the Dam wall.
As a local of the Blue Mountains I am very proud of the beautiful World Heritage area that I live along side. Friends, family and visitors constantly tell me how spectacular this area is.
Tourism is so important to our economy and I am proud that The Blue Mountains feature in so many advertising campaigns. That is why I don't inderstand why we are risking a permanent scar created by flooding then water receding leaving ugly brown banks.
How are we going to sell that to the world?
How are we going to justify this to the world?
Please do not allow this to happen.
There has to be a better way!