Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Submitted By

1051 Results

Search Type

Sort:

Sort Results By

Comment From: Cinda Johansen

12/20/25 @ 9:25 PM

Dams are deadly to migrating fish species for spawning because they are a barrier to the fish's movements. They cause low reproduction and cause the species to become endangered. Bringing down the dams on the Klamath has already seen salmon making th...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Lee First

12/20/25 @ 9:48 AM

The Chehalis headwaters in the Willapa Hills has been devastated by industrial logging, mostly on private timberlands. The WA Department of Natural Resources continues to log the last remaining older forests on State-owned lands in the watershed.

O...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Scott White

12/20/25 @ 5:28 AM

No Damn Dams.

Across the country communities are taking steps to remove dams and return rivers and waterways to a more natural and environmentally friendly state and it is sad that it is being considered to dam a river to fix a problem which is a ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Andrew Steiger

12/19/25 @ 9:04 PM

The idea of adding more dams to watersheds that struggle to support salmonid species is incredibly short sighted. NO MORE DAMS

No attachments

Comment From: Craig Zora

12/19/25 @ 6:30 PM

I'm OPPOSED to constructing a flood retention (FRE) facility and associated temporary reservoir on the Chehalis River, near Pe Ell, Washington.
Modeled results predict sharp declines in salmon and steelhead abundance, productivity, and diversity due...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Brigid Farley

12/19/25 @ 2:49 PM

Hi,
As a Washington state resident I strongly oppose the this project. I am deeply concerned about the impact this dam will have on fish populations within the Chehalis river. Please consider alternatives to a dam to address future flood risks.

No attachments

Comment From: Rosevan Vickery

12/19/25 @ 7:03 AM

Hello,
As a concerned citizen and former resident of the Pacific Northwest, I wish to submit comment regarding the proposed Chehalis flood management plan. I feel strongly that given the known, acknowledged significant adverse impacts on biodiversity...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth DEWREEDE

12/18/25 @ 10:22 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Craig Zora

12/18/25 @ 5:52 PM

I'm OPPOSED to constructing a flood retention (FRE) facility and associated temporary reservoir on the Chehalis River, near Pe Ell, Washington. To date, there is no information available about mitigation proposed by or supported by the Tribes that wo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Rickey Pratt

12/18/25 @ 3:34 PM

I strongly believe that, especially in light of the recent flood event(s), that the time for talk is over. We need to move forward with a plan for the Chehalis River Basin Dam Flood Reduction Project. The MAIN consideration needs to be doing all we ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Linda Leben

12/18/25 @ 7:58 AM

I am very concerned about the ecological impacts of this project on salmon runs during construction, potential for mudslides downstream, and on Tribal land. This region would be better served by salmon restoration projects.

No attachments

Comment From: Mark Moody

12/17/25 @ 6:01 PM

I prefer the "No Action Alternative"

No attachments

Comment From: Matthew Castle

12/17/25 @ 2:13 PM

I am opposed to this action. Put this plan to rest. This is a waste financially, opposed by tribal leaders, and detrimental to the ecology of the area. Seek other proven methods.

No attachments

Comment From: Marian Roh

12/17/25 @ 10:10 AM

Well, after hearing about this grand new plan (sarcasm) I'm thinking you can no longer call yourselves the Department of Ecology. Elsewhere the UAS (hardly at the forefront of envoronmental movements in general) is busy pulling dams down. Rivers need...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michael King

12/17/25 @ 9:33 AM

I oppose construction of the proposed dam on the Chehalis River. The dam will destroy critical spawning and rearing habitats for wild salmon. Wild salmon, in turn, are essential to the endangered 73 remaining Southern Resident killer whales. Pleas...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Luke Moerke

12/17/25 @ 9:07 AM

I support the proposed flood retention facility. After years of study, it's time for action. This will allow the slowed release of high volumes of water during our most susceptible seasons of flooding. It will not be a negative impact to fish during ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Francis Noedel

12/17/25 @ 7:53 AM

Too expensive. Unproven. Out of touch with ecological issues. Devastating to Salmon and wildlife restoration.

No attachments

Comment From: Jared Leavitt

12/17/25 @ 4:19 AM

There are considerable pros and cons with such a large project. In the wake of recent flooding and the high state of alert Washington has experienced this year I am inclined to believe flood defences must be a priority. However at a cost to environme...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Gail Richardson

12/16/25 @ 7:37 PM

For years, some people have tried to build a massive dam on Washington's Chehalis River. It would do little to solve local flooding, while creating a lot of harm for wild fish. The revision does not change this enough to make a difference.

No attachments

Comment From: Valkyrie JS

12/16/25 @ 2:24 PM

No on the Chehalis River Dam! We know the negative environmental impacts of damming rivers and we need to support and protect the ecology of such. There's also huge risk factors for all of the communities who love downstream of the dam. NO MORE DAMS!

No attachments

Comment From: Harley maxbauer

12/16/25 @ 1:08 PM

I am writing a comment in opposition to this project as it would negatively impact the ecosystem.

No attachments

Comment From: Zac Hanson

12/16/25 @ 12:34 PM

m writing to comment in opposition to the proposed Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage
Reduction Project as described in the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
While reducing flood risk is an important goal, the revised proposal contin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Martine Felts

12/16/25 @ 11:26 AM

I am writing to comment in opposition to the proposed Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project as described in the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
While reducing flood risk is an important goal, the revised proposal con...↓tinues to rely on large-scale structural interventions—particularly the flood retention facility and temporary reservoir near Pe Ell—that pose significant and long-lasting environmental, cultural, and economic harms that are not adequately justified by the anticipated benefits.

Environmental Impacts
The proposed flood retention facility would inundate forested lands, wetlands, and wildlife habitat that are critical to the ecological health of the Chehalis River Basin. The EIS does not sufficiently demonstrate how these losses can be avoided or meaningfully mitigated, particularly given the cumulative impacts to salmon populations, water quality, sediment transport, and riparian ecosystems. Once these natural systems are altered, the damage is largely irreversible.

Impacts to Communities and Tribal Resources
The proposal places disproportionate burdens on upstream rural communities while primarily benefiting downstream development. Flooding land near Pe Ell—whether labeled "temporary" or not—raises serious concerns about impacts to private property, working lands, cultural resources, and treaty-protected tribal interests. The EIS does not adequately address environmental justice considerations or demonstrate meaningful consent from affected communities.

Overreliance on Structural Solutions
The project continues to prioritize engineered flood control infrastructure over less damaging, more adaptive alternatives. Non-structural solutions—such as floodplain restoration, land-use planning, strategic buyouts, and relocation from high-risk areas—receive insufficient emphasis despite being more resilient under climate change scenarios and less harmful to river systems.

Climate Change Uncertainty
Climate projections indicate increasing uncertainty in precipitation patterns and flood intensity. The EIS does not convincingly show that a large retention facility designed under current assumptions will remain effective or safe over its lifespan. Locking the basin into a single, inflexible solution risks failure while foreclosing better future options.

Process and Alternatives Analysis
Although this is a Revised Draft EIS, it does not adequately respond to substantive concerns raised on the 2020 Draft EIS, particularly regarding alternatives that avoid damming or intentional flooding of upstream lands. A more robust alternatives analysis is needed before moving forward.

Conclusion
For these reasons, I urge the Department of Ecology to reject the proposed project as currently designed and to require a revised approach that prioritizes non-structural flood mitigation, protects natural river functions, respects affected communities and tribes, and aligns with long-term climate resilience.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

No attachments

Comment From: Robert Richards

12/16/25 @ 11:18 AM

Tribes, many community leaders, fish and wildlife advocates all oppose the proposed dam on the Chehalis River. If built, ecological costs would be irreparable, and negatively impact Chinook salmon populations. I urge you to reject this proposal.

No attachments

Comment From: Art Hasson

12/16/25 @ 11:16 AM

A dam is not the answer. It will harm native fish populations including salmon. It is far better for everyone to create wetland areas along the river beds that can absorb excess flow before it harms populated areas. Some towns can update their draina...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bruce Hlodnicki

12/16/25 @ 9:53 AM

Flooding is normal, natural and necessary for many rivers and stream ecosystems.

Avoiding/limiting all flooding should never be the goal of a natural river system.
Protecting the ecosystems and the humans who live in and around these rivers mus...↓

No attachments

Comment From: STANLEY LANGLAND

12/15/25 @ 5:46 PM

My name is Stanley Langland and I am a volunteer advisory board member with the flood control zone district.

I've heard a very few comments stating a blanket opposition to all dam construction in general. It's important that everyone understand thi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: STANLEY LANGLAND

12/14/25 @ 4:12 PM

Our governor recently spoke in Mt.Vernon about the positive benefits of a flood retention structure protecting the downtown area. It would be good to have an explanation why flood prevention structures promoted by Patty Murray in Skagit County are s...↓

No attachments

Comment From: ALBERTO VITARI

12/12/25 @ 9:46 PM

Constructing a flood retention facility is likely to have major impact on the environment for decades. I urge reconsidering projects and solutions with lower environmental impacts.

No attachments

Comment From: Gary and Kerry Swain

12/12/25 @ 3:59 PM

Being homeowners on the Chehalis river, We have seen first-hand the potential damage to property and to human life. The incredible amounts of water that come through during the rainy season that change this little Meandering creek to a roaring possi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michael Painter

12/12/25 @ 2:15 PM

Just like any other State of Washington project this one has gone on too long, is going the wrong direction and is probably over budget.
IN the beginning was a proposal to put a Hydroelectric generating facility at the headwaters of the Chehalis abov...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Scott Mershon

12/11/25 @ 2:21 PM

I am writing to express my OPOSITION to a dam on the Chehalis River.

Consider what improvements could be done in lieu of building a dam: restoring the natural floodplain, raising the freeway and other roadways, and improving zoning laws. Doing thes...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Theresa Kersey

12/11/25 @ 11:05 AM

I live here in Chehalis, WA. I was here during the 2007 flood. I saw the terrible damage that the flood waters did. I helped clean out a friends home after the flood. They had just purchases this home and never dreamed that their home would be floode...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Arthur Grunbaum

12/10/25 @ 6:01 PM

It appears that this current atmospheric river event would not have triggered the operation of the dam, had it been in place. Assuming that the dam will cost each and everyone of us in the Chehalis Basin through a tax, or bond' what would be the impa...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Austin DeBolt

12/10/25 @ 5:33 PM

Acknowledge the real harm flooding causes to habitat through sediment buildup and surface pollutants
Recognize that limited, temporary water retention during rare flood events has minimal impact on habitat, streamflows, or water temperature
Value how...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Christopher Harjes

12/10/25 @ 5:18 PM

Please reconsider the current proposed plan to unnecessarily dam and destroy an unusually lush and beautiful river gorge! Please instead consider development adjustments for stormwater, and funds to improve resilience of existing structures in the f...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Will Smith

12/10/25 @ 3:05 PM

I am writing to voice my opposition to this proposal. A new dam on the Chehalis River would cause irreparable damage to the ecosystem as a whole, but especially to valuable salmon habitat. The reward is not great enough for the risk. There are other ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Neli Vonwald

12/10/25 @ 2:38 PM

Please create a water retention facility to sustain safer communities around Lewis and surrounding communities.

No attachments

Comment From: Katy Wellington

12/10/25 @ 2:03 PM

I am writing in OPPOSITION to the proposed dam on the upper Chehalis River. I only have to look to the guidance of the Quinault Indian Nation and Chehalis tribe who have published their opposition stating that the project will "virtually guarantee lo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jason Dix

12/10/25 @ 10:59 AM

Dear Department of Ecology Team,

My name is Jason Dix, and I live along the Chehalis River near Chehalis, Washington. I'm writing in response to the recent flood event and as a follow-up to suggestions from community members to share direct, local o...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Duffy

12/10/25 @ 9:55 AM

I support the proposed retention facility near PeEll. This is a well-documented beneficial project with minimal impact on normal flow.

No attachments

Comment From: Stephen Knutson

12/10/25 @ 9:50 AM

Need to keep moving forward on this. Too important to the viability of I-5 to the state.

No attachments

Comment From: James Wood

12/09/25 @ 3:13 PM

I strongly urge the Washington Department of Ecology to decline or deny any attempt to build a dam on the Chehalis River. As an aquatic ecologist (PhD Odum School of Ecology - 20017) it is well known that dams are devastating to the ecology of rivers...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Lee First

12/09/25 @ 1:32 PM

I am deeply opposed to the proposal to construct a dam in the Chehalis headwaters.

This is a disaster made much worse by developing in the floodplain, and industrial forestry in the headwaters.

Ford's Prairie Industrial Park is being built right n...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Larry Franks

12/08/25 @ 7:08 PM

The impacts of this project to anadromous fish would be significant: increased mortality of both downstream migrating smolt, upstream migrating salmon (envision near-death adult humans attempting to run up a steep stairway), increased piscivorous pr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jami Lund

12/07/25 @ 11:05 PM

Summary says:
the project would reduce flooding in the basin but with climate change, flood risks would persist during extreme conditions in the mid and late century. The analysis also found that the project would place additional burdens on salmon a...↓nd other aquatic species and their habitat, even with the fish passage and other mitigation measures. Over the last century, salmon populations in the Chehalis basin have declined due to a variety of factors including habitat loss, increased water temperatures and low stream flows.

The project could also affect archeological sites and cultural resources for nearby Tribes.

My comments:

I'm reluctant to believe that your speculation about late century conditions are reliable.
Even if they are, mitigation of the flooding at so low of an environmental cost is likely worth it.
The value of making more land productive and useful for positive things related to human flourishing weighs heavier than the speculation.

Regarding fish, your own analysis suggests declines absent this structure. It is likely that preventing massive earth relocation in spawning streams is among the actual causes for poor fish runs. Add to that predation (unaddressed by the state), fish passage correction by removing culvertys (also unaddressed by the state), excess takes from tribes/sportsmen/commercial, and it seems the fish runs are impacted by factors independent of a rare seasonal water retention facility.

Is "COULD affect archeological sites" a hat-tip to tribes who are invited to veto any action on flood mitigation? Again, silting out areas with customary practices and obfuscating heritage artifacts seems an equal or even greater threat if flooding isn't managed.

It seems that the value of keeping topsoil in its current habitat-enhancing locations is a value which hasn't been factored in. What is the consequence to running topsoil downstream and ultimately into the sea? Preventing these kinds of flood events have environmental values which aren't being factored in. Likewise, surface toxicity being more likely to find its way into streams during flooding events. Has the facility been credited with saving environmental factors such as these, or are you only working to identify speculative negatives?

I think the facility holds promise and should not be halted by the speculation of the report.

No attachments

Comment From: Bonnie Anonymous

12/04/25 @ 1:16 PM

Please consider the buffer widths and vegetation composition described by the GLO surveyors. Tom Shroeder compiled and analyzed them for SW Washington. His paper called 'presettlement vegetation of the SW Washington' shows the width and veg types of ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

12/03/25 @ 4:32 PM

We are in an era of removing man-made structures from rivers to assist the aquatic community, specifically migratory fish. This project is contrary to these objectives of habitat restoration and Washington State investments of millions of dollars in ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Amy White

11/24/25 @ 3:30 PM

I do not understand why building up the Chehalis Airport dike takes precedence over building a dike to protect hundreds of homes in Centralia. Walmart is more important than homes?

No attachments

Comment From: Julius Strid

11/24/25 @ 3:15 PM

Please don't build this ill- conceived very expensive dam that has so many negative consequences. And those are just what can be forecast, there are likely many other impacts that would only become known after it was built.

No attachments

Comment From: STANLEY LANGLAND

11/23/25 @ 11:50 AM

Attachments:

Download

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]