The NSW Government is proposing to rezone a large area of land at Marsden Park North, a decision that would result in the destruction of animal habitat to make way for industrial development, new housing, transport links, and supporting infrastructure.

What this means on the ground is the removal of places that are already home to animals, including Riverstone Wetlands. Riverstone Wetlands are living habitat, providing food, shelter, and refuge for animals that already depend on this place.

The proposal assumes this habitat can be destroyed and replaced elsewhere. Animals are treated as if their homes are movable, interchangeable, or expendable. If these were human homes, there would be an expectation of protection, consultation, and the right to object. Animals are given none of that.

When habitat is cleared, animals do not get time to adjust or relocate safely. They lose shelter, food, breeding areas, and refuge immediately. Many do not survive the disruption.

Animals cannot speak up or fight back against planning decisions that erase their homes. Your voice is critical in this process. This guide exists to help you understand what is being proposed, what animals stand to lose, and how to speak on their behalf through the submission process.

⏰ Submissions close: 5pm Friday 30 January 2026

Why your submission matters

Public submissions are a formal part of the NSW planning process. They are reviewed and summarised in the planning assessment and form part of the public record used to justify whether a proposal proceeds or is changed.

In this case, submissions matter because the proposal would destroy Riverstone Wetlands, a documented wildlife refuge that supports internationally protected migratory shorebirds and threatened native species.

Submissions put animal protection on the official record and make it harder for decision-makers to ignore the destruction of documented wildlife habitat.

How to make your submission

It’s simple and only takes around 10 minutes. Submissions can be as short or long as you like - even one paragraph helps.

You lodge your submission on the NSW Planning Portal on the Marsden Park North Precinct page.

On that page, scroll to the very bottom to find the submission form.

Animals need your voice!

If Riverstone Wetlands are destroyed, animals lose a place they cannot replace.

This wetland is described as one of the most important waterbird refuges in Western Sydney and supports large numbers of local and international birds during critical seasons of migration and flooding.

By making a submission, you can help:

• Protect a rare flood free refuge that migratory birds rely on to survive long distance journeys and extreme weather events.
• Defend habitat for over 190 international migratory shorebirds and hundreds of Australian waterbirds whose survival depends on this site.
• Stand up for one of Sydney’s last populations of the Green and Golden Bell Frog, already vulnerable by habitat destruction.
• Challenge a proposal that replaces a functioning wetland with a smaller, deeper, flood prone site that the documents state is unsuitable for the animals who live there.
• Hold decision makers accountable for assessment work described as inadequate and incomplete when animal lives are at stake.

Even short, heartfelt submissions make a difference. They show that animals are seen, valued, and defended, and that their lives are not an acceptable cost of development.

8 Points to Consider When Writing Your Submission

Use these key points in your own words.

• The wetlands should be retained
  Riverstone Wetlands are an existing, functioning ecosystem that already supports wildlife. Destroying a wetland that is actively used by animals and attempting to recreate it elsewhere results in permanent loss, not protection.

• Animals cannot simply be relocated or replaced
  The animals who rely on Riverstone Wetlands depend on its specific conditions to survive. When habitat is destroyed, birds, frogs, and other wildlife do not move neatly to a new location. Many fail to survive the disruption.
  

• The proposed replacement wetland would not meet animals’ needs
  The replacement wetland would be smaller, deeper, and located on flood-prone land. These conditions do not support migratory shorebirds that need shallow feeding areas, nor do they support species that rely on stable, flood-free habitat.

• Riverstone Wetlands are a critical refuge during floods
  Riverstone Wetlands provide a rare flood-free refuge in Western Sydney. During flood events, this site becomes a last safe haven for birds displaced from surrounding habitats. Removing this refuge removes a key survival pathway.

• Threatened species would be placed at greater risk
  The wetlands support a remaining population of the Green and Golden Bell Frog, a species already in decline. Destroying known habitat for a threatened species increases extinction risk rather than reducing it.
  

• Habitat destruction adds pressure to already declining bird populations
  Migratory shorebirds are already under pressure from habitat loss across Australia and internationally. Removing one of their key resting and feeding sites further undermines their ability to survive long-distance migration.
  

• Wildlife protection should come before development convenience
  Once this wetland is destroyed, it cannot be meaningfully restored. Short-term development gains should not outweigh the permanent loss of habitat that animals depend on for survival.
  

• Australia has legal obligations to protect these animals
  Australia is stated as legally bound to protect the international migratory shorebird species present under agreements with China CAMBA, Japan JAMBA, and the Republic of Korea ROKAMBA.

View more resources:

Read more details about Riverstone Wetlands and the animals who depend on them, the resources below provide further background and context.

Details of Riverstone wetlands and its significance

Save the Riverstone Wetlands

Submission example for those short on time

I am writing to object to the proposal that would result in the destruction of Riverstone Wetlands.

Riverstone Wetlands are an existing, functioning ecosystem that already supports wildlife. Destroying a wetland that animals actively rely on, and attempting to recreate it elsewhere, results in permanent loss rather than protection.

The animals who depend on this site cannot simply be relocated. When habitat is destroyed, many birds, frogs, and other wildlife fail to survive the disruption. The proposed replacement wetland would be smaller, deeper, and flood-prone, and would not meet the needs of migratory shorebirds that require shallow feeding areas or species that depend on stable, flood-free habitat.

Riverstone Wetlands also provide a rare flood-free refuge in Western Sydney. During flood events, this site becomes a last safe haven for displaced birds. Removing it removes a key survival pathway.

The wetlands support a remaining population of the Green and Golden Bell Frog, a species already in decline. Destroying known habitat increases extinction risk rather than reducing it. Habitat loss here would also add further pressure to migratory shorebird populations that are already declining due to widespread habitat destruction.

Australia has committed to protecting international migratory shorebirds under agreements with China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. Allowing the destruction of habitat these birds rely on undermines those commitments.

Once this wetland is destroyed, it cannot be meaningfully restored. Short-term development gains should not outweigh the permanent loss of habitat that animals depend on for survival. I urge that Riverstone Wetlands be protected and that this proposal not proceed.

Yours sincerely,

Tips for making your submission

Use your own words. Submissions written in your own voice carry more weight than copied text. You can keep it short. Even a few sentences explaining why you care about animals and habitat protection makes a difference.

Focus on animals and real impacts. Explain what Riverstone Wetlands mean for wildlife and what would be lost if the wetland is destroyed. 

You do not need to be an expert. You are not expected to reference reports or technical studies. Decision-makers must consider community concern, lived values, and ethical responsibility alongside technical assessments.

Keep it relevant to the proposal. Focus on habitat loss, flood refuge, threatened species, migratory birds, and long-term impacts on wildlife.

Short submissions still matter. There is no minimum length. What matters is that animals are represented on the public record.

⌛ Get your submission in before 5pm Friday 30 January 2026

Contact us if you need more help

If you need help writing or lodging your submission, contact us at:

📧 [email protected]

🐾 Follow @AnimalJusticePartyNSW on social media for updates.