As I have a strong bond to the Blue Mountains – it is a few minutes from my house – I wanted to get some further information on this proposal to identify the pros and cons. The raising of the dam was rejected in 1995 by the Carr Labor Government and as nothing has changed it's hard to see why it has again been proposed.
The raising is being driven by developers who want to build on the Hawkesbury-Nepean flood plains. The developers predict that 134,000 people will live in this flood plain over the next 30 years. There are alternative solutions to raising the dam wall which are not being considered.
The cons
It would inundate 4700 hectares of World Heritage-listed bushland and 65 kilometres of wilderness streams.
It would wipe out numerous indigenous cultural heritage sites belonging to the Gundungurra people.
It would have significant impact on listed threatened species of flora and fauna.
Even with raising the wall, and due to floods originating from catchment areas not above the dam, flooding will still need to be managed on the flood plains.
Given that the dam will not stop flooding it is quite possible that properties built on the flood plain could not be insured against floods.
Alternate flood mitigations and risk reduction measures are available.
The new dam would be visible from a number of tourist places, adversely affecting Blue Mountains tourism.
It is quite possible that the WHA listing would be at risk. If the WHA listing is removed then there will be a significant reputational loss for the Blue Mountains, which relies heavily on tourism for the regional economy.
Apparently the government has a secret plan to raise the dam an extra three metres than the public proposal, to 17 metres. Sneaky hey ...
The Insurance Council of Australia considers the Hawkesbury-Nepean river Valley to have the highest single flood exposure in NSW.
It has been reported that a developer has already profited after purchasing land in the floodplain and selling it the undeveloped land for an extra $100 million profit.
The pros
The only pro of this development will be that it will allow development of downstream floodplains in Sydney’s north-west, but this is only good for developers. Even this will be for the short term as one flood and the buyers will vanish. If there's a flood and houses are damaged it will be interesting to see who accepts responsibility.
Also, the increasing the height was the most cost-effective option, obviously not even considering environmental protection, endangered species or even indigenous heritage sites upstream.
Well, all I can say is that I came out of the documentary with grave concerns that this will go ahead.
There is a strong fight on against this going ahead, so if you are interested in what the proposal is, or you want some more information, go and see the documentary and do your own research. The Colong Foundation for Wilderness and the campaign Give A Dam are fighting hard.
Go on get behind them and stop this from going ahead.
Bushwalk
