How do we know raising the dam is about floodplain development?

Desecrating Indigenous culture

The southern Blue Mountains is an extensive and rich cultural landscape belonging to the Gundungurra People. The rivers, waterholes and mountains of the Blue Mountains landscape tell one of the most intact and documented dream-time stories in Australia - the epic battle of tiger cat (Mirrigan) and snake (Gurrangatch) which formed the southern Blue Mountains.

When Warragamba Dam was built in 1960 it resulted in the flooding of a large proportion of the cultural heritage and dreamtime stories of the Gundungurra people. If the dam wall is raised the remaining sites of this story - including Indigenous archeological sites, creation waterholes and cave art - will be destroyed.

An indigenous cave art site that would be inundated.

They have already applied for an Aboriginal Place nomination to the NSW Government to try and stop the dam raising destroying their last cultural sites [i]. By getting involved with the campaign, you can assist the Gundungurra people save their remaining cultural heritage from destruction. Having lost so much already, we need to make sure we stop the dam raising to protect what is left.

[i] Isla Cunningham (2018) Gundungurra Group Lodge Proposal to Protect Sacred Sites at risk in Warragamba Dam Plan, The Blue Mountains Gazette. Available Online: https://bit.ly/2NN8xbp

A developers' dam

The dam raising is being driven by developer interests on the Hawkesbury-Nepean floodplain. The NSW Government has stated in its principle document advocating the dam proposal that it plans to allow an additional 134,000 people to reside on western Sydney floodplains after the dam is raised [i].

Infrastructure NSW map showing planned development areas on the Hawkesbury-Nepean floodplain [ii].

There have been numerous inappropriate western-Sydney floodplain developments green-lighted in 2017/18 (the same year legislating to raise the dam was rammed through the NSW Parliament). These include the Penrith Panthers, Penrith Lakes, Marsden Park North and Vineyard development proposals. The SEPP for a number of these areas allows for development below the 1:100 year flood planning level [iii]. International best practice dictates that floodplain development should not occur below the 1:500 year level [ix].

Minister Ayres, the Minister for Western Sydney has himself said that he plans for future development across the low-lying Penrith floodplain "as far as the eye can see" in the coming years [x].

The Western Sydney Leadership Council's chairman, Christopher Brown, has flagged developing flood-prone land as a potential funding source for the dam wall extension [xi], saying:

"I think there's the capacity to use a value-capture funding method to reduce the impact on taxpayers," he said.

"Maybe via levy on land release that was previously considered flood-prone so we might be able to do it at a cheaper rate than what the Government's talking about."

[i] Infrastructure NSW (2017), Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley Flood Risk Management Strategy, page 3. Available online: https://bit.ly/2wDd4VL

[ii] Molino Stewart (2012), Hawkesbury-Nepean Flood Damages Assessment, Prepared for Infrastructure NSW, page 15. Available online: https://bit.ly/2MXahcH

[iii] Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, State Environmental Planning Policy (Penrith Lakes Scheme) Amendment 2017, page 19. Available online: https://bit.ly/2PrXwrT

[ix] Caroline Wenger, Karen Hussey & Jamie Pittock (2012) The Use of the 1:100 Year Standard in the United States: Insights for Australia? Australian Environment Review, Vol. 27, pages 337-342

[x] Channel 9 News (2014) 4th of December 2014 News Coverage of Penrith Lakes. Available online: https://bit.ly/2EpcaPu

[xi] Sarah Gerathy (2016) Warragamba Dam: Wall Flood-Protection Plan Raises Environmental Concerns, Australian Broadcasting Company. Available online: https://ab.co/2G8np0E