Warragamba Dam Raising

To whom it may concern,
I oppose the raising of the Warragamaba Dam on many counts, but most particulary on lack of Gundungurra consent and the destruction that would occur to their cultural hertiage, and for the irreversible loss of world heritage ecosystems. The environmental devastation that would occur by raising the dam wall is not justifiable on any count and makes a mockery of the world heritage status we are responsible for upholding for this richly diverse area.
It is not appropriate for development to occur on flood plains which is what raising the wall would enable. Alternatives have not been fully explored and the EIS is flawed in many ways including consideration of where the floodwaters actually enter the catchment.
This is the time to be making decisions that protect the environment, that honour cultural heritage and that don't encourage overdevelopment.
I urge that this project be shelved and more sustainable options be considered.

To whom it may concern,
I wish to oppose the raising of the Warragamba dam wall for the following reasons.
Firstly, I am a longtime resident of the Blue Mountains and I regularly bushwalk in the national parks. I am horrified by the proposal to flood wild rivers and thousands of hectares of national park. the reasoning behind the raising of the dam wall is deeply flawed. 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.
Secondly, I am deeply distressed at the thought of the damage that will be done to cultural sites through the raising of the wall and the ensuing inundation of the area. Over 1541 identified cultural heritage sites would be inundated by the Dam proposal.Furthermore, 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.

Thirdly, the environmental impact statement conducted by SMEC has been critiqued for its significant omissions and errors of process. For example, severe fires during the summer of 2019/20 devastated 81% of Blue Mountains Heritage Area. No post-bushfire field surveys have been undertaken. In addition, 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. Finally, no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS.
It is clear from public outcry and from the assessments of environmental experts, and from the deep objections of the Gundungurra people that this proposal should not go ahead.

To whom it may concern,
We have and continue to lose prime forests and wildlife habitat in Australia. NSW has a huge toll of extinction species and endangered wildlife, more so post fires in 2020. Removing or destroying ancient forests by logging or flooding will decimate the C02 uptake being emitted in Australia, plus pristine bushland inhabited by reduced native birds, and ground dwelling natives. As a resident in an area that has seen locals on tank water only watch the kangaroo river be decimated to virtually nothing when warragamba dam is low, whilst watching Sydneysiders merrily wash cars, waste house water and not be involved in conserving this commodity we are going without. Perhaps tank water needs to be installed and resoviour water not used for Sydney homes. This teaches public to conserve water better and use grey water. We manage in Kangaroo valley to live off our tank water with rare top ups when rainfall is scare for months. Save the forests and help the climate issues and make tank water usage in all homes your target for water saving.

To whom it may concern, I would like to state my opposition to NSW government plans to raise the Warragamba dam wall.

As a frequent bushwalker in the blue mountains and Nattai NP I have benefited from the health and mental benefits of time spent in unspoilt natural environments and want to register my objection to the NSW plans to raise the dam wall. The plans to raise the dam wall will flood the pristine Kowmung River (listed as one of the few remaining ‘Wild Rivers’ by NSW National Park and Wildlife Act 1974) as well as inundate 6,000 hectares of important habitat and environment in the UNESCO Blue Mountains World Heritage area for endangered species like the platypus, Sydney’s last remaining emu population and the regent honeyeater. It will also include submerging and flooding over 1000 indigenous archaeological and cultural heritage sites. ‘There's no point in having world heritage declarations unless you take those declarations, and the responsibilities that flow from them, extremely seriously’.

The stated benefits of raising the dam wall to mitigate impact of future floods is in significant doubt due to the lack of scientific rigour applied in the government’s Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). No modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising are outlined in the EIS! The Federal Environment Dept has called the EIS flawed and told the NSW government to redo the EIS which they have refused to do. The EIS is flawed and misleading.

For the reasons listed above I register my opposition to raising the dam wall.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the proposal.
In outline, my reasons are:
1. Implementation of the proposal will have significant, negative and permanent impacts on upstream ecology and Aboriginal cultural heritage as well as a negative and permanent impact on part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
2. The EIS does not give sufficient weight to the significant adverse effects of the proposal on:
(i) upstream ecological impacts including in relation to specific threatened species
(ii) upstream Aboriginal cultural heritage areas
(iii) the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
3. The EIS does not give adequate consideration to the alterative strategy of permanently lowering the Warragamba Dam FSL by 5 metres coupled with improved prediction of significant rainfall events and better operation and management of the dam (in its current configuration) as a major flood risk mitigation strategy.

To whom it may concern,
Please reconsider this proposal and stop raising the wall of the dam. I live in the Blue Mountains and do some bushwalking. I feel this would be catastrophic for, not just us, but all of the environment in its pathway. I urge you to reconsider.

To whom it may concern,
I completely oppose plans to raise Warragamba Dam. As an electrical apprentice for the Water Board in the 80's I was part of a team that would travel into the Warragamba catchment to do maintenance on telemetry equipment. That area is spectacularly beautiful. The Kowmung river was one place we would work around. It would be an act of environmental bastardry to raise the dam wall and flood this place of international significance.
This dam raising proposal is not about flood mitigation and protecting lives its about development in western Sydney. And let me tell you not many out here want more of that.

To whom it may concern,
As a past resident of the Blue Mountains for 9 years and having been involved with conservation of natural environment and indigneous culture, I strongly stand for leaving the Warrangamba Dam wall as is. No raising to occur.
The follow reasons underpin my position:
• 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.

Please consider the damage to the lands of the Blue Mountains that will suffer irreparable damage if the Warragamba Fan wall us raised

To whom it may concern,
Submission about the proposed raising of the Warragamba Dam wall and the flooding of World Heritage Area – Blue Mountains National Park
Project No: SSI-8441
My name is Dr Jo Tibbitts. I have the privilege of living in Blackheath, NSW, 2785 on the narrow ridge between the Kanimbla and Megalong Valleys to the west and the Grose Valley to the East.
I would like to acknowledge that I live on the traditional lands of the Dharug and Gundungurra people, and pay my respect to Elders past, present and future.
I object completely to any raising of the Warragamba dam wall for the following reasons…
1. The Blue Mountains National Park has 100s of 1000s of Australian Native animals and birds including many on the brink of extinction (Regent honey eater, Koalas and Emus). Flooding of the area upstream of the dam is going to kill many of those animals and birds.
2. The Blue Mountains National Park is an important ‘tree sink’ for Sydney and the surrounding area. One of the conclusions of COP26 were that to combat climate change we need to plant trillions of native trees and replant forests. We should be increasing the pristine forests of the Blue Mountains National Park and definitely not flooding any of the land so that trees die.
3. No further development should be allowed in the Sydney basin. We need to preserve and expand the green belts and especially preserve the koala habitats of south west Sydney to combat the massive air pollution generated in the city and surrounding areas.
4. The Blue Mountains National park is personally very important to me and the other people who live in this beautiful region. The bush in this area has healing powers. You can feel it when in a train climbing from Lapstone to Glenbrook. The energy changes. You relax and think I’m home. Any increase of the dam wall/flooding of the bush is going to adversely affect that energy and our home.
5. Rightly so this area is a world heritage area. Any increase in the dam wall/flooding of the bush is going to breach Australia’s obligation under the World Heritage Convention.
6. Money should be put into cleaning up the rivers in the Blue Mountains National Park not flooding them.
7. When I was first looking for a home to buy, I looked in Agnes Banks. I was told that it was prone to flooding and was encouraged to look elsewhere. No more development in flood plains.
8. The EIS of this project is a joke and needs to be redone by competent independent experts. Many experts have pointed out its many flaws like e.g. the effect of the 2019 fires have not yet been properly investigated so true status of the park and its wildlife is unknown.
9. The traditional owners (Dharug and Gundungurra people) have a continuous and deep connection to their Country and that this is of great cultural significance to Aboriginal people, both locally and in the region. Aboriginal Elders need to have a veto vote on what happens to the Blue Mountains National Park

I have enjoyed the World Heritage Area of the Blue Mountains for over 70 years and am now lucky enough to live at Wentworth Falls.
This is a precious and irreplaceable national park. Raising the dam will be a clear breach of the undertakings and Australia's obligations under the World Heritage Convention. WHI status is given in recognition of the Outstanding universal Value for the whole of mankind.
45% of floodwaters come from areas outside of the upstream Warragamba Dam Catchment, so no matter how high the dam wall, it will not stop future flooding.
There are so many reasons not to raise the wall and a fully comprehensive EIS would show this.
Do not let the greedy land owners who want to build more hot unhealthy suburbs push this foolish construction.

I oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall.

The NSW Government's proposal to raise the Dam wall wilfully flies in the face of its responsibility to protect the unique culturally and ecologically rich Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
Raising of the dam wall will put at risk over 1,500 identified First Nations’ cultural heritage sites and wilderness areas valued by all Australians and internationally.
The proposal to raise the dam wall is being progressed without the consent of the Gundungurra Traditional Owners. The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Report (part of the EIS) is the subject of serious criticism by the Commonwealth Department of the Environment and International Council on Monuments and Sites. Only 27% of the impact area was assessed for Aboriginal Cultural Heritage.
The scheme will result in the inundation of 65 kilometres of declared wilderness rivers and 1,300 hectares of National Parks within the WHA and another 4,400 hectares in National Parks outside the WHA. The richly diverse eucalypt forests that give the Greater Blue Mountains WHA its Outstanding Universal Value will be threatened, including the already endangered Grassy Box woodlands and the Camden White Gum. The critically endangered Regent Honey Eater and Sydney's last Emu population may be driven to local
extinction.
The loss of habitat for plants and animals will weaken the prospects for the flourishing of species diversity generally as well as prejudicing actually endangered species.
The EIS is fundamentally flawed. It fails to consider the impact of the devastating 2019/20 summer fires. Threatened species surveys do not meet guideline requirements. Alternative flood risk mitigation strategies are not comprehensively assessed and there is no modelling of the stated flood and economic benefits of the dam wall raising contained in the EIS.
With an average of 45% of Hawkesbury and Nepean floodwaters being sourced from areas outside the Warragamba Dam catchment, no matter how high the dam wall is constructed it will not prevent flooding in the valley. Further development
downstream of the dam wall would exacerbate flooding due to increased storm water run-off from paving and roads.
Rather than raising the dam wall, the NSW Government should end development on the Cumberland flood plain while also returning existing housing and commercial areas to farmland. This approach, supported by the Insurance Council of Australia, has been adopted successfully in the Netherlands and there is no reason it could not and should not happen in the case of Western Sydney.
The EIS is defective in that while it purports to consider the impact of climate change on the project it does not consider the implications of the project for the climate crisis. The plan is to flood over 5500ha of forest and woody vegetation. The effect would be to clear an area in excess of 7.4km X 7.4km and kill all the trees and other plant life there, as well as all animal life. That is about one tenth of all of the annual tree clearing done in NSW, and generally agreed to be excessive. To destroy such a significant carbon sink in the face of looming climate catastrophe is itself irresponsible. Less directly but very significantly it sends the worst kind of message to our citizenry and the world about the government's real seriousness about the climate catastrophe and undercuts the government' s stated concern as to the climate issue.
Tree loss on Sydney's fringes is continuing at an unabated rate to make way for "development" and to expand roads to deal with traffic congestion. It is shocking that the government would exacerbate tree and other plant destruction when there are other options to secure drinking water supplies and for flood mitigation - such as desalination, use of now improved weather forecasting to better strategically release stored water before anticipated heavy rains, and halting and progressively relocating inappropriate development presently in the flood plain.

I frequently go bushwalking in the Cox's and Kowmung river areas and do not want to lose access to this incredible area.
I am concerned about the loss of World Heritage bushland and cultural sites.
I feel strongly that Gundungirra Traditional owners must give consent for the Dam proposal to proceed.
Consequently, I oppose the raising of the dam wall and wish for alternative solutions to be investigated.
I accept the Department's submissions disclaimer and declaration.
I have not made a reportable political donation in the past two years.
I am comfortable with my personal details (name and suburb) being published.

Raising the wahrragamba dam wall will amount to vandalism of World Heritage Areas and Cultural sites that should be protected. I will oppose any government now and foreover that engages in such vandalism.

I am absolutely appalled by the proposal to raise the Warragamba Dam wall and the implications this will have on the Blue Mountains World Heritage Area. I have lived in the Mountains for over two decades and as an avid hiker have spent a lot of my time walking and guiding clients in remote areas of the Park, in particular Kanagra and the Kowmung. This is a wild, wonderful region that is such a valuable asset to the country - from an environmental perspective as well from a walker's. Few places in the world can boast such incredible pristine wilderness and this has to be truly valued.
I'm horrified that the Government would even consider risking our World Heritage listing yet this is what is on the line - purely for the sake of developer greed. If the dam wall were raised, as is proposed, it would devastate the area's eco system, inundating and ruining the Kowmung river and well as threatetning a number of already fragile ecological communities and endagering the habitat of the critically endangered Regent Honey Easter and Sydney's last emu population.
There are also a significant number of cultural heritage sites that are at risk too...yet these are our countries heritage. They are sacred and must be protected.
I'm at a loss for words to try and comprehend the mentality that even considers such options. There are various alternatives available that would protect commuites and need to be explored thoroughly.

I wish to object to the proposed raising of the Warragamba dam wall. I have walked in the potentially affected area of the Coxs River and do not believe the proponents have any deep knowledge of what they would be destroying by inundation.
The proponents say that the inundation would only be occasional and transitory but in the long term the will be strong political pressures to store more water and raise the height of the normal storage levels.
The proponents have not considered other less destructive alternatives for flood mitagation. In addition there are serious doubts about how effective raising the dam wall will be in preventing flooding because there are potentially large inflows to the flood plain from catchments below the dam wall.
The proponents are disingenous in claiming that this development is to prevent flooding. The main reason for the development is to foster property development on the flood plain.
Th proponents have ignored the wishes of the traditional ownwers and the need to protect World Heritage Areas

To whom it may concern,
Only those hoping to profit could champion such a cause as the raising of Warragamba Dam wall.
Short term memory seems to be a problem with many, even politicians. Stuart Ayres is younger than I by about 40 years and yet he has seemingly forgotten the decision made only about 20 years ago, namely when we first moved to Penrith, about RAISE THE WALL AND SAVE US ALL. It was rejected as TOO DAMN DANGEROUS, for the very reason I learnt as a kid, about ten or twelve years old. My younger brother and I were walking THROUGH Warragambe Dam during it's construction, with our father, BOB MCMILLAN, then a very esteemed Consulting Civil Engineer in Sydney, he had a reputation for NEVER agreeing to anything that was not absolutely 100% safe, including all the drive-in screens around Sydney, they were a wretch to remove when it all went out of fashion, and I remember as a kid that he shut the St. Ives shopping centre at one hour's notice as it was all so dodgy and in danger of collapsing. Took about six months to fix. I believe he was hired as the engineer to check it when cracks started appearing soon after it was opened. I can remember him coming home and telling our mother NOT to go there at all at one stage, can't remember when that was. But the Warragamba episode I remember very well, and I checked with my brother Brian who now lives in Brisbane. He remembers it too. But I distinctly remember asking my Dad why they didn't build the wall higher, the terrain seemed to suit a very high wall. His answer I certainly remember too, "WELL, THEY CAN'T, BECAUSE THE NATURE OF THE SURROUNDING ROCK IS TOO UNSTABLE". I just accepted that as gospel, as he did know what he was talking about, having a wide range of interests including geology, astronomy, history, etc., as well as being a good engineer. I think he was invited to look over the building of the dam and he took his two oldest kids, probably to give our mum a break. I have since SEEN FOR MYSELF THE FRACTIOUS NATURE OF THE BLUE MOUNTAINS ROCK in the many walks I took with the Glenbrook Historical Society over a few years, not happening much in the current climate or in summer anyway.
But to have to reconsider it all now, that is just plain ... well, it seems stupid to me. I also remember that the situation was settled after the Raise the Wall campaign by testing the nature of the terrain and deciding exactly what my Dad had said and deciding that if the dam did seriously overflow in a monster flood, then the foot of the spilway would not be suffiicient to prevent the undermining of the wall and that a very large new spilway was built on the Eastern side of the dam to rectify this problem anyway. I was pleased with this change at the time and thought that the episode was finalised. I obvously didn't consider the greed of those hoping to profit from more work, or is it the developers who built on what was always deemed to be flood prone. I know the locals living in the developement at Waterside cannot get flood insurance ... ! Also Hobartville in the Hawkesbury is all flood prone apparently. There is a story about championship horses being allowed into the top floor of Hobartville House way back in some great flood, maybe even 1867. Have any of the Warragamba Dam Wall Raisers seen the poles with river heights marked, best in Devlin Road west of Castlereagh Road at Castlereagh or closer to Stuart Ayres office, on the GreatRiver Walk nearly at the current end off Cassola place in Penrith. There is even now a painted diagonal line on the path there, with 21.3.21 at 4.00pm marked on the slightly uphill side of the line of debris I saw a couple of days later. It STILL FLOODS HERE. But raiising the dam wall will cause FAR greater damage all over the East of the Great Dividing Range south of Sydney.
Please consider all those opposed to any planned raising of the wall, they all have very good reasons.
DON'T DO IT.

I strongly oppose the raising of the Warragamba Dam wall. I live in Silverdale NSW, the roads and infrastructure do not support the extra traffic that will be entering the township everyday. The township and businesses will suffer as well as the dreadful impact of noise and dust which will be constant.

I believe the environmental impact statement is remiss in so many areas that it qualifies as being absolutely useless. The impact on wildlife and vegetation will be irreplaceable. Everything possible should be made to preserve the sacred aboriginal sites and this would not be possible if this development proceeded.
Please do not go ahead with raising Warragamba Dam wall as this would be a loss for NSW and the environment and could never be rectified.