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

Submitted By

1051 Results

Search Type

Sort:

Sort Results By

Comment From: Angie Poteet

2/04/26 @ 10:10 AM

I strongly oppose the dam on the Chehalis River. Do not create another problem while disguising it as a solution. The dam would have negative effects on the community as well as the natural habitat. No dam!

No attachments

Comment From: Vince Panesko

2/04/26 @ 10:00 AM

Topic: Total Life Cycle Cost Analysis:

Many alternatives described in Appendix 1 (Section 6) of the draft EIS have been discarded because of an unfavorable total life cycle cost.

The June 2, 2025 OCB Memorandum made the statement that "The total l...↓

No attachments

Comment From: K C

2/04/26 @ 9:51 AM

Our Southern Resident orcas rely on Chinook salmon as a vital food source for survival. The proposed Chehalis dam would significantly reduce Chinook salmon habitat and cause harm to active fish runs. Interrupting this natural cycle will cause irrever...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Teri J. Franklin Teri J. Franklin

2/04/26 @ 9:50 AM

February 2, 2026

Teri J. Franklin
397 Powers Creek Rd
Elma, WA 98541

SEPA Revised Draft EIS for Chehalis Flood Damage Reduction Project
c/o Bobbak Talebi
Southwest Region Office
P.O. Box 47775
Olympia, WA 98504-7775
Applicant: Chehalis River Basin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: THOMAS M HARGROVE

2/04/26 @ 9:40 AM

This dam is a damn bad idea. If flood control is a real objective you create a dam with the flood gates wide open and only close them when an actual flood stage is reached. That creates only temporary and local effects much like an actual flood and...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ashley Johnson

2/04/26 @ 9:39 AM

I am opposed to this method of flood control as it will further harm the salmon. It takes us decades to get dams removed or altered to protect salmon - we don't have decades to fight this after we put it in and realize it was the wrong choice. Fewer ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kristi Wysocki

2/04/26 @ 9:33 AM

This flood mitigation recommendation at Chehalis river does not show clear benefit and definitely shows predictable harm to the salmon flow and then consrwuently the SRKW.

PLEASE care about our wildlife. They need us desperately. This damn will tak...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Deborah Buck

2/04/26 @ 9:32 AM

I oppose building a dam on the Chehalis River, which would permanently damage this major salmon river. There are flood solutions that protect both people and fish.

No attachments

Comment From: Vince Panesko

2/04/26 @ 9:31 AM

Page S-7 of the draft EIS summary states the following:

"What Other Alternatives are Evaluated in the EIS?
In addition to the Proposed Action, a Local Actions Alternative and a No Action Alternative were evaluated in the EIS. SEPA regulations requir...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Padmini Harchandrai

2/04/26 @ 9:29 AM

I oppose the formation of a dam on the Chehalis river. I understand this is to help protect communities downstream from flooding, and perhaps there might be ways to protect them without impacting the salmon that call the Chehalis river home. As one o...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michael Rourke

2/04/26 @ 9:25 AM

This is an expensive ecological disaster waiting to happen. We should be looking at natural flood mitigation to protect homes and businesses rather than another costly, taxpayer funded project. These dams benefit power companies but also destroy impo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Shawn Nixon

2/04/26 @ 9:21 AM

My wife and I enjoy traveling to this region for its natural beauty. A dam would destroy the area and interfere with migratory steelhead patterns

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/04/26 @ 9:16 AM

I oppose a new dam. Please seek options to help people and fish.

No attachments

Comment From: Amanda Baker

2/04/26 @ 9:14 AM

I am commenting in OPPOSITION to the damming of the Chehalis River. Putting any kind of dam on this river would be catastrophic for salmon populations and in turn, for our critically endangered Southern Resident Killer Whale population. Investing ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Alex Herron

2/04/26 @ 9:14 AM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Sp...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Robin Pitt

2/04/26 @ 9:12 AM

I am writing to provide comments on the Department of Ecology's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
I do not support a plan to construct a large dam on the upper Chehalis River
The footprint created by the temporary reservoir will significant...↓ly impair spawning habitat spawning and will reduce survival of salmon and steelhead migrating out of and into the upper Chehalis basin
The site of the proposed dam is located directly in an area in an area with one of the highest spawning densities for wild steelheed, coho, and Chinook. It has also been identified as some of the best rearing habitat for juvenile salmon and steelhead in the Basin. 93% and 87% of Spring Chinook and Fall Chinook redds, respectively, are located withing the proposed temporary reservoir; 32% of coho redds are located within the reservoir footprint
15% of the steelhead produced in the basin come from the upper Chehalis River, at or above the proposed dam site, and it represents only 4% of the total habitat
Steelhead in this upper river section are genetically distinct from steelhead in lower river areas. This section already is critical for steelhead production and protection of life history diversity and will become more important in the face of climate change, as fish, both adults and juveniles, seek cold water refugia at higher elevations in the basin
As stated in the DEIS, the proposed dam would cause irreparable impacts on all Viable Salmonid Population (VSP) parameters for steelhead and salmon—abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and diversity
This revised proposed dam— is 45% wider than the original proposed dam, increasing from a width of 1550 to 2250 feet at the crest—and temporary reservoir would back up and submerge 824 acres and almost six miles of the river corridor above the proposed dam site. It would store water during major flood events and release the water over a period of about a month, with a stated goal to not stop floods, but merely reduce their impact in the many downstream communities, including Chehalis and Centralia along the flood-prone Interstate-5 corridor
Modeling indicates that water temperatures in the Chehalis River within the reservoir footprint and immediately downstream are expected to increase by up to 2° C. These elevated water temperatures increase stress on juvenile and adult salmonids on an already temperature stressed system

No attachments

Comment From: Randy Resimius

2/04/26 @ 8:42 AM

Please prevent this Damn from being constructed, it will forever change the ecology of the area and river.

No attachments

Comment From: Megan Osterhout

2/04/26 @ 8:32 AM

The project will permanently alter critical salmon habitat and it's not something we can afford to lose; I've been forced to watch multiple SRKW succumb to starvation from the lack of salmon, both wildlife and our fisheries depend on this critical re...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Vince Panesko

2/04/26 @ 8:27 AM

The draft EIS states that the FRE project will lower flood waters in the Doty area by 10 feet. Since Doty has never flooded, this statement is misleading (false).

Appendix N-2 if the draft EIS, Fig N.2-3a, does not show a flood plain in the Doty are...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Teri Wright

2/04/26 @ 8:26 AM

See attached.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Christine Lovelace

2/04/26 @ 7:23 AM

No dam! Prioritize orca & salmon recovery.

No attachments

Comment From: Thomas montanari (Thomas montanari)

2/04/26 @ 6:57 AM

the project is not in the interest of the fish/game that inhabits that area. very poor insight on the powers that be

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/04/26 @ 6:41 AM

This project is a farce and complete affront to healthy rivers and salmon runs on the chehalis river. Billions of dollars to make the port of chehalis/centralia more attractive to more fast food restaurants, it's a joke. This project was doomed from ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: THOMAS Baker

2/04/26 @ 5:29 AM

Have we learned nothing from the damage dams have done to salmon, steelhead and other species???
Building a dam on an anadromous river in today's world in nothing short of insane.
Have you missed that we are now tearing down dams to restore damaged f...↓ish habitat???

I do not support a plan to construct ANY dam on the upper Chehalis River. Period.

The temporary reservoir damages spawning habitat and reduces survival of salmon and steelhead migrating out of and into the upper Chehalis.
The site of the proposed dam is located directly in an area with one of the highest spawning densities for wild steelheed, coho, and Chinook. It has also been identified as some of the best rearing habitat for juvenile salmon and steelhead in the basin. 93% and 87% of Spring Chinook and Fall Chinook redds, respectively, are located withing the proposed temporary reservoir; 32% of coho redds are located within the reservoir footprint

Steelhead in this upper river section are genetically distinct from steelhead in lower river areas. This section already is critical for steelhead production and protection of life history diversity; and will become even more important in the face of climate change, as adult and juvenile fish seek cold water refugia at higher elevations in the basin
As stated in the DEIS, the proposed dam would cause irreparable damage on all Viable Salmonid Population (VSP) parameters for steelhead and salmon-abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and diversity
This revised proposed dam- is 45% wider than the original proposed dam, increasing from a width of 1550 to 2250 feet at the crest-and temporary reservoir would back up and submerge 824 acres and almost six miles of the river corridor above the proposed dam site. It would store water during major flood events and release the water over a period of about a month, with a stated goal to not stop floods, but merely reduce their impact in the many downstream communities, including Chehalis and Centralia along the flood-prone Interstate-5 corridor
Modeling indicates that water temperatures in the Chehalis River within the reservoir footprint and immediately downstream are expected to increase by up to 2° C. These elevated water temperatures increase stress on juvenile and adult salmonids on an already temperature stressed system

There are better ways to manage flooding throughout the basin.

NO NEW DAMS! NEW DAMS ON ANADROMOUS RIVERS ARE INSANE!

No attachments

Comment From: Tom Grant

2/04/26 @ 3:36 AM

I recognize the need for a solution for flooding issues but the proposed dam is a short-sighted and expensive approach with limited flood control benefits with too many adverse impacts to Chehalis River steelhead and salmon and does not provide a hol...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Pacific Rivers (Liz Gilliam)

2/04/26 @ 1:46 AM

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please see the attached document.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Jon Harwood

2/04/26 @ 12:17 AM

This Draft EIS is insufficient. Over and over it refers to mitigation plans that are not included. How is the public to judge whether the Draft EIS is adequate when it lacks critical details?

Appendix 1
p.2
Refers to the "revised mitigation plan" p...↓

No attachments

Comment From: American Rivers (Neina Chapa)

2/04/26 @ 12:15 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/04/26 @ 12:05 AM

I would follow the lead of the Chehalis Tribe and Quinalt Nation for aquatic species enhancement and restoration, along with the other extant, localized mechanisms in the no-action alternatives, given the irrevocable damage to salmonid spawning habit...↓

No attachments

Comment From: vince Panesko

2/03/26 @ 11:59 PM

TOPIC: REVISION 1 of previous comment, DISPOSAL OF OVERBURDEN EXCAVATED FROM DAM SITE

The 2020 EIS for the previous dam site stated that 900,000 to 1,200,000 cubic yards (CY) of overburden would have to be excavated from the proposed site of dam con...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Shay Kim

2/03/26 @ 11:47 PM

To the EIS, my name is Shay Kim. I live in the redwood mountains of Santa Cruz California, but have spent much treasured time within the Puget Sound, from Port Townsend, Kingston, Port Gamble, Bainsbridge Island, Port Angeles, Mount Rainier, The Oly...↓

No attachments

Comment From: September Yew

2/03/26 @ 11:26 PM

Please so not take away precious habitat for the salmon our remaining orcas have to eat. This damn will negatively affect them and other species that depend on chinook to live. We love them so much. This damn will only add unnecessary suffering for ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: American Whitewater (Thomas O'Keefe)

2/03/26 @ 11:06 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Stella Anonymous

2/03/26 @ 10:59 PM

Hello, I am a high school student writing to stop the proposed dam on the Chehalis River. My favourite animals are Orcas; I've loved them since I was little.

The Southern Resident Killer Whales are the pod of Orcas that live near me and they are en...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Andy Zahn

2/03/26 @ 10:32 PM

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed FRE dam on the Upper Chehalis River. Not only would such a dam result in catastrophic and irreparable damage to salmon runs, it would pose an extreme risk to the safety of downstream commun...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Katherine Feldmann

2/03/26 @ 10:09 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Ivaylo Stoilov

2/03/26 @ 9:40 PM

Dams have destroyed the salmon and steelhead runs along the western seaboard.
I strongly oppose the Chehalis River Dam.
Respectfully
Ivo Stoilov, MD

No attachments

Comment From: Alex Goodell

2/03/26 @ 9:26 PM

The science is clear. In a world where dams are being removed at a record rate, it is entirely nonsensical and ignorant to build a new one - especially on a river that is so critically important to preventing ecosystem collapse. This is a step in th...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Robert Price

2/03/26 @ 9:25 PM

When it comes to building the flood retention facility (FRE) as part of the Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project, I strongly oppose and ask that you consider alternate methods (discussed below). The Chehalis River, which is the ma...↓instem of the second largest river basin in the state of Washington, is an extremely important habitat for several threatened and endangered species, including anadromous fish and amphibians. It should also be noted that this particular river is one of the last major rives on the entire west coast that has not been altered with a dam (Western Rivers Conservancy 2020). This community should be proud to have such a river flowing right through it, and want to work to improve its quality, not degrade it even further (as the EIS states the project will do). Too many west coast rivers have fallen victim to expensive dams, many of which are outdated and cost more to keep up in the long run than it would to remove them (Pacific Rivers n.d.). One example of this is the Lower Snake River Dam, which can be 60% less expensive to remove than to maintain over a 30-year period. This plan seems outdated considering the number of current projects to remove dams in order to restore anadromous fish populations to their previous glory.
Consider what NOAA has said about the effects of dams on water and habitat. Dams, and yes this facility is a dam, alter fish habitat by creating huge reservoirs that anadromous fish are not used to, they reduce natural flow, can raise temperatures to lethal levels, mix in unhealthy amounts of nitrogen, lower oxygen levels from eutrophication (increase in algae that disrupt nutrient and oxygen levels), and retain toxic substances that could settle behind the dam (NOAA, 2024). Within the environmental impact statement (EIS) of your proposal, it says "Reduced fish passage, degraded habitat, and mortality caused by rerouting the river around the FRE facility site through the bypass tunnel would have a significant adverse impact on salmon and steelhead," which shows that you're fully aware of the damage you would cause to this highly sensitive habitat, and to several species whose numbers have been significantly declining over the past century. According to an article from Oregon Public Broadcasting, California Department of Fish and Wildlife found that the bypass tunnel at The Iron Gate Dam killed over 830,000 juvenile salmon in a week due to gas bubble disease brought on by the pressure changes associated with the dam (Neumann, 2024). You can also refer to the disastrous Winchester Dam Repairs in 2023 that killed over 550,000 Pacific Lampreys (Johnson, 2025). Aside from the bypass tunnel, the EIS says that the construction of and the completed, operational project will have "significant adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, aquatic and terrestrial habitat, recreation, earth, water, transportation, wetlands, land use, Tribal resources, cultural resources, environmental health and safety, environmental justice, and public services and utilities. All of which can be avoided by not constructing this facility on the river.
The best alternate method to consider would be, as mentioned in the EIS, to halt development in the flood plan, restore water retaining wetlands, buy out and relocate at risk properties, and rerouting I-5. These steps would mitigate damage caused by floods by removing at risk infrastructure from flood prone areas. Wetlands are extremely helpful ecosystems when it comes to a reduction in flooding. A single acre of a wetland can hold about a million gallons of water. (Environmental Protection Agency, 2006). With that kind of water retention, and with the return of natural trees and vegetation to the wetlands, the risk of a catastrophic flood will be significantly reduced, and two important ecosystems will be saved. I suggest as wetlands are getting restored, to also restore the beaver population, as these animals are ecosystem engineers. According to a study by Puttock et al. (2021), the reintroduction of beavers into wetland sites significantly reduce the "flashiness" and impacts of flood events. This method of storing water would be natural, last indefinitely, and cost significantly less than the proposed $2.5 dollars to construct the facility (not considering regular maintenance, repairs, and operation), which has only been guaranteed for the next 60 years (what happens after 60 years? How much will that cost?).

Sources:
Washington State Department of Ecology. (2020). State Environmental Policy Act: Draft environmental impact statement for the proposed Chehalis River Basin flood damage reduction project summary (Publication No. 20-06-002).
https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/2006002.pdf

Western Rivers Conservancy. (2020, January). Chehalis River. River of the Month.
https://www.westernrivers.org/discover/river-of-the-month/chehalis-river

Neumann, E. (2024, March 3). Hundreds of thousands of juvenile Chinook salmon die in Klamath River while moving through dam. Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB). https://www.opb.org/article/2024/03/03/chinook-salmon-die-klamath-river-dam/

Johnson, H. (2025, March 5). Will removal of Winchester Dam cause another massive fish kill?
Winchester Dam.
https://winchesterdam.com/will-removal-of-winchester-dam-cause-another-massive-fish-kill/

Pacific Rivers. (n.d.). Dam removal and prevention.
https://www.pacificrivers.org/dam-removal-and-prevention.html

Environmental Protection Agency. (May 2006). Wetlands: protecting life and property from flooding. Office of Water. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-02/documents/flooding.

Puttock, A., Graham, H. A., Ashe, J., Luscombe, D. J., & Brazier, R. E. (2021). Beaver dams attenuate flow: A multi-site study. Hydrological Processes, 35(2), Article e14017. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.14017

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Jamie Rogers

2/03/26 @ 9:14 PM

Dear Washington State Department of Ecology:

As a citizen of the United States of America, I am writing to you to urge you to not approve the construction of a flood-retention dam and reservoir on the Chehalis River near the town of Pe Ell.

If thi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Felton Jenkins

2/03/26 @ 8:48 PM

I am commenting on the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project. Flood risk in the Chehalis–Centralia area is a problem, but this is not the solution. You should be working with landown...↓

No attachments

Comment From: David E. Ortman

2/03/26 @ 8:38 PM

The attached comments are submitted by David E. Ortman, Seattle, WA.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Kris Fancher

2/03/26 @ 8:33 PM

Stop the dam, save the salmon and the much needed food for the resident orcas to thrive. There are only 74 and their babies keep dying due to lack of food!!! Save the whales!!!

No attachments

Comment From: Rianne Magbuhat

2/03/26 @ 8:30 PM

The Chehalis River Basin will negatively impact the migration of the salmon and disrupt indigenous communities land, thus disrupting their livelihood and practices. This land is significant to their wellbeing and to change the flow of nature would cr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Stephanie Morris Morris

2/03/26 @ 8:14 PM

Please do not dam the Chehalis River. Our salmon habitats cannot take another hit. This river is one of the only undammed rivers on the West Coast. Habitat destruction is one of the primary struggles faced by our salmon. With the difficulties the sal...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Allen Casey

2/03/26 @ 7:44 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/03/26 @ 7:31 PM

I am concerned about the proposed FRE dam on the Upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, it would cause disastrous harm to endangered native salmon & steelhead.
I am also concerned about the scale & cost as well as safety & geotechnical risk. The...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Laurie Dils

2/03/26 @ 7:18 PM

This dam, if built, would cause irreparable harm to salmon and other fish that rely on the river and watershed, as well as harm to native people and their lands. Please deny this proposal again,in line with the decision made a few years ago. Thank yo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Christopher Lish

2/03/26 @ 6:58 PM

Tuesday, February 3, 2026

Subject: Reject proposal to dam the free-flowing Chehalis River -- Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement

To Director of the Washington State Department of Ecology ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Steve Belz

2/03/26 @ 6:58 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Sierra Bleakley

2/03/26 @ 6:55 PM

This is a crude example of human wants over earthly needs. The right for orcas to pass without any man made object interfering is detrimental for our environment. Orcas play and important role in salmon and fish passage as well as keep the whole ecos...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Abby Cooper

2/03/26 @ 6:50 PM

The Chehalis River is a vital habitat for wild salmon, including Chinook salmon, which are crucial to the endangered Southern Resident killer whales. Construction of the dam would inundate approximately 847 acres and extend 6.2 miles, leading to the ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: M. Roberts

2/03/26 @ 6:44 PM

The risks to Chinook salmon, orca populations and the local fishing industry are irreversible and far outweigh the potential benefits of the proposed Chehalis River dam. Please consider other avenues of flood mitigation.

No attachments

Comment From: Kyla Perlstrom

2/03/26 @ 6:41 PM

Please look at other options besides dams to help our ecosystems. There are better water management options now that help protect vulnerable species like our Southern Resident orcas.

No attachments

Comment From: Avery Anonymous

2/03/26 @ 6:39 PM

I oppose the Chehalis river dam. The dam will harm chinook salmon, which are endangered and actively trying to be brought back by the state of Washington. Why keep spending money on salmon restoration if we are going to place new dams that will be di...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jessica Koehnen

2/03/26 @ 6:39 PM

We all know the impact of these dams and at some point we need to prevent further damage instead of trying to reverse it after its devastating affects on wildlife. We need complete ecosystems, follow the science it is there. We all know what these da...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Claudia Crosier

2/03/26 @ 6:35 PM

Hello! I am vehemently opposed to the dam!! We need to let rivers and streams flow so that salmon can spawn. The Southern and Northern resident orca are struggling to survive and reproduce. Their main food source are salmon. Especially chinook/ We ne...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Katie Hallett

2/03/26 @ 6:09 PM

The Chehalis River Basin is integral to the cultural and subsistence practices of local tribes, including the Quinault Indian Nation. The dam's construction would inundate tribal lands, disrupting traditional activities such as fishing, hunting, and ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cassandra N

2/03/26 @ 6:05 PM

I oppose the Chihais River dam! I live on the ocean in Victoria BC and have watched the southern population first hand in my backyard. The orcas need our voice. Protect the chinook salmon.

No attachments

Comment From: Marcia Stone

2/03/26 @ 6:04 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am a volunteer with the Cedar River Salmon Journey and have been talking with the public about salmon and the importance of caring for our rivers and watersheds for years.

I am writing to express my concerns about the...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Weyerhaeuser Company (Adrian Miller)

2/03/26 @ 6:01 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Seedpod Farm (Julie Gullett)

2/03/26 @ 5:51 PM

Greetings. My name is Julie Gullett. My family and I own Seedpod Farm on the banks of the Skookumchuck River just north of Centralia. I have attended most of the hearings on the Flow Through Dam's EIS. I would first like to start by thanking the Depa...↓rtment of Ecology and the OCB Board for this type of participatory process where public input is solicited to in part, identify gaps in our thinking. Clearly, a lot of resources- time, money and brain power are being put towards problem-solving what is a complex array of challenges with no quick and easy solutions
As I've listened deeply to the concerns of my neighbors at each of these sessions I have heard the concerns about habitat and aquatic species impact. I do share some of these concerns and we are working in our own way, to mitigate what we can on our farm. We all need to do better in our own way. I am also impressed with the innovative approach of the Flow through Dam. Ten years ago, a traditional dam was proposed, scrutinized and sent back to the drawing board. What they have come back with is an innovative design that is used elsewhere in the world ---- in Japan for example with good success.
As I understand it, part of the estimated cost of the FRE is to restore forest habitat back to proper riparian forests which can withstand an occasional flooding event unlike the board/paper timber that is planted there now. What I know about restoration comes from being a farmer on land that includes prairie habitat and 2 1/2 acres of riparian zone. Restoration takes time and research. We know more now.
Between the Chehalis, Newaukum, and Skookumchuck we have three hoses going into the Chehalis Basin bucket. But we do have a spigot on one of those hoses. Mitigation of the Skookumchuck Dam and Reservoir- a piece of infrastructure owned by Trans Alta, was outside of the bounds of this EIS but is certainly integral to the impact of flooding in the basin. By improving the water retention capacity of the reservoir and reworking fish passage- we have the potential to dramatically effect the amount of water entering the basin during a flooding event. It would seem to me that in order to determine the effectiveness of the FRE, we would need to ask ourselves if we can expand reservoir capacity at the Skookumchuck Dam.
Looking at the before and after hydrological maps shows that the FRE can be a promising investment for the Chehalis Basin to address flooding impacts with sensitivity to the environment. I wonder how they would change if the Skookumchuck Reservoir was greatly improved not just for water retention in the event of a flood, but also to do everything we can to improve fish passage.
When you know better, you do better.....I appreciate all of your efforts to help us all do better for the place we call home.

No attachments

Comment From: Dan Calvert

2/03/26 @ 5:43 PM

To Whom it May Concern with the Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. I live in the region and regularly recreate on the Chehalis River – it is an amazing salmon fishing res...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bonnie Altshuld

2/03/26 @ 5:30 PM

Please do not build a massive dam on the Chehalis River. You should instead focus on solutions that keep communities and fish runs safe. This dam will impact the salmon and steelhead runs that are already hurting. Chehalis Basin residents need modern...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Susan OConnor

2/03/26 @ 5:24 PM

Dear Department of Ecology:
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project. I am writing to oppose the flow-through dam option due to the environmental ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Eastside Audubon (Jeremy Lucas)

2/03/26 @ 5:20 PM

Hello, Eastside Audubon opposed the Chehalis River Basin Flood Reduction project. Please find out comments attached.

-Jeremy Lucas

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Laura Jones

2/03/26 @ 5:01 PM

I live in lewis county and have a business in Chehalis. I personally experienced 8 ft of water in my business next to I-5 and saw the Boistfort and Adna valleys filled from north to south with 7 feet of water. The county road looked like a ribbon m...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Vince Panesko

2/03/26 @ 4:59 PM

Topic: Quantity and Quality of Quarry Rock:

My analysis of the West Quarry revealed that there appears to be an adequate quantity of rock, perhaps 3 to 4 times in excess of needs. However, the quality of the rock for construction is highly questiona...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Elaine Hickman

2/03/26 @ 4:48 PM

We cannot afford to spend $2 billion to build a dam, which is becoming an obsolete concept, to provide flood control. As necessary as addressing the need for addressing flooding is, the solution needs to also preserve fish habitat and comply with Tri...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Orca Behavior Institute (Monika Shields)

2/03/26 @ 4:29 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing to oppose the construction of a dam as a way to mitigate flooding in the Chehalis River Basin. I believe the impacts on wild salmon, and consequently also on tribes and the endangered Southern Resident killer wha...↓les, are too great to risk, especially because there are viable non-dam alternatives.

With recent dam removal projects on the Pacific Coast ranging from the Elwha to the Klamath, it's clear this is an era of dam removal, not dam construction. The Chehalis remains a free-flowing river, resulting in its being one of the top salmon producing rivers in the state of Washington. A dam would drown spawning habitat, increase water temperatures, and degrade water quality. The DEIS acknowledges that there would be significant adverse impacts on salmon.

I have studied the Southern Resident killer whales for over 20 years and am well aware of their movements and dietary requirements throughout their range and throughout the year. K and L Pods specifically spend the late winter and early spring months on the outer coast of Washington and Oregon. Salmon returning to the Chehalis are part of the Washington Coast salmon stock identified as a priority source of Chinook for the Southern Residents, and they spend regular time foraging right off Grays Harbor where the Chehalis meets the ocean. The whales have now been on the endangered species list for 20 years, yet their population continues to decline. We need to be looking for ways to increase the abundance and quality of fish they have available rather than putting one of their key prey resources at further risk.

Non-dam alternatives exist, including elevating buildings and bridges and investing in other more natural upstream methods of flood control. These solutions would likely cost less and are supported by tribes, environmental groups, and the residents who live in the flood plain.

The first proposal for a dam on the Chehalis failed for a reason. Constructing new dams is not the way forward to the future we all want for the west coast, one where people can live safely in a changing climate alongside wild salmon runs that are also adapting to a changing world. We need to give wild salmon the best opportunity to survive, and that means staying out of their way - in this case literally, by keeping the river free-flowing. The environmental impacts are clear, and a dam on the Chehalis River is not the right solution for flood control.

Thank you for your consideration
Monika Wieland Shields
Director, Orca Behavior Institute
Friday Harbor, WA

No attachments

Comment From: Jim Livingston

2/03/26 @ 3:54 PM

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Spring Chinook, Coho, Fall Chin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Northwest Indian Fisheries Com... (Justin Parker)

2/03/26 @ 3:53 PM

Good Afternoon,

Attached is a letter from NWIFC Executive Director Justin Parker to the SEPA Revised Draft EIS for Chehalis Flood Damage Reduction Project in the c/o Bobbak Telebi, Southwest Region Office, regarding NWIFC Comments on the SEPA Revise...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/03/26 @ 3:29 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Ruth W.

2/03/26 @ 3:26 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Spr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Brandon Hakulin

2/03/26 @ 3:23 PM

Good Day I am a concerned citizen and Marine Corps veteran,

writing to provide comments on the Department of Ecology's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
• You do not support a plan to construct a large dam on the upper Chehalis River
The...↓ footprint created by the temporary reservoir will significantly impair spawning habitat spawning and will reduce survival of salmon and steelhead migrating out of and into the upper Chehalis basin
The site of the proposed dam is located directly in an area with one of the highest spawning densities for wild steelheed, coho, and Chinook. It has also been identified as some of the best rearing habitat for juvenile salmon and steelhead in the basin. 93% and 87% of Spring Chinook and Fall Chinook redds, respectively, are located withing the proposed temporary reservoir; 32% of coho redds are located within the reservoir footprint
15% of the steelhead produced in the basin come from the upper Chehalis River, at or above the proposed dam site, yet it represents only 4% of the total habitat
Steelhead in this upper river section are genetically distinct from steelhead in lower river areas. This section already is critical for steelhead production and protection of life history diversity; and will become even more important in the face of climate change, as adult and juvenile fish seek cold water refugia at higher elevations in the basin
As stated in the DEIS, the proposed dam would cause irreparable impacts on all Viable Salmonid Population (VSP) parameters for steelhead and salmon—abundance, productivity, spatial structure, and diversity
This revised proposed dam— is 45% wider than the original proposed dam, increasing from a width of 1550 to 2250 feet at the crest—and temporary reservoir would back up and submerge 824 acres and almost six miles of the river corridor above the proposed dam site. It would store water during major flood events and release the water over a period of about a month, with a stated goal to not stop floods, but merely reduce their impact in the many downstream communities, including Chehalis and Centralia along the flood-prone Interstate-5 corridor
Modeling indicates that water temperatures in the Chehalis River within the reservoir footprint and immediately downstream are expected to increase by up to 2° C. These elevated water temperatures increase stress on juvenile and adult salmonids on an already temperature stressed system
I recognize the need for a solution to flooding issues but support a collaborative process that reduces local flood impacts throughout the basin, restores habitat, and supports long-term resiliency of both fisheries and people,

Sincerely,

Brandon Hakulin

No attachments

Comment From: Ann Pryich

2/03/26 @ 3:19 PM

Please, no more expensive dams! Leave the free flowing river and stop building in flood plains. We are losing all of our salmon and another dam will not help. Our southern resident orcas are going extinct without enough salmon to eat. Please, no more...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jeanne Ripp

2/03/26 @ 2:51 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Martha Young-Scholten

2/03/26 @ 2:45 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Gil Zemansky

2/03/26 @ 2:30 PM

Attached are the comments of the Wise Use Movement, P.O. Box 17804, Seattle, WA 98127

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Stephanie Ehinger

2/03/26 @ 1:13 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express strong concerns about the proposed flow-through dam/flood retention facility on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unavoidable harm to salmon and s...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jacob Ostheller

2/03/26 @ 1:11 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unnecessary harm to salmon and Steelhead Trout, including major losses...↓

No attachments

Comment From: William Errico

2/03/26 @ 12:34 PM

I have been instructing fly fishing for over 25years. Not only has it been an environmental and educational sport for Scouts and nationally to all ages.
In addition, fly fishing has been an excellent re-ablative tool for inner city youth, Scouts, dis...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jerry Myers

2/03/26 @ 12:23 PM

Thank you for this oportunity to comment on the proposed Chehalis Flood Control Dam. I am opposed to this project for the following reasons. 1- This project would create additional stresses to salmon and steelhead by eliminating productive habitat, b...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Thurston County (Thurston County)

2/03/26 @ 12:18 PM

Please add the attached comment by Thurston County to the public record

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Kathy Pierson

2/03/26 @ 12:07 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Dan Watson

2/03/26 @ 12:04 PM

It is surprising that we are still considering dams on wild rivers in the 21st Century after the proven fact that fisheries are badly impacted where fish spanning grounds and paths to the ocean are impeded.
Dam removals of the last several decades ha...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Scott Ziegenfuss

2/03/26 @ 12:00 PM

I'm writing to voice mu opposition to the proposed Chehalis River dam. The negative environmental effects outweigh any potential benefit.

No attachments

Comment From: WILL CARNAGHI

2/03/26 @ 11:57 AM

Hello,

I'm writing to submit my view of that the proposed dam is ineffective for actually controlling flooding and ecologically destructive on top of that.
There are much more effective alternatives for flood mitigation than building in flood prone...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Mark Smith

2/03/26 @ 11:57 AM

The Chehalis River has long been one of the richest natural resources to SW Washington for decades, it has provided transportation, recreation and abundant natural resources that supported growth in and around its valley. Do to its natural flow and ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Dennis Hebert

2/03/26 @ 11:52 AM

Enough fish have been killed by dams and spawning grounds ruined by dams and the diversion "fish ladders". All science points to leaving rivers free flowing for the best environment and ecology of the areas. Damn the Dams!

No attachments

Comment From: Susan Rounds

2/03/26 @ 11:37 AM

In an era of increasing rate of dam removals to reverse environmental damage and environmental degradation, it doesn't make sense for build an expensive new dam on the last free flowing river in SW Washington. For the sake of budgetary economy, pro...↓

No attachments

Comment From: One Voice Lewis County (One Voice Lewis County Board of Directors)

2/03/26 @ 11:34 AM

For more than 100 years, state, local and federal efforts to address flooding and fish enhancement in the Chehalis basin failed. Study after study would be issued with no action while the fish runs declined and flood damage increased for the communit...↓ies in the basin. Our volunteer citizen group came together after the catastrophic 2007 flood which displaced thousands of families, covered I-5 for five days and caused more than $920 million in damage according to Washington state. We named our organization "One Voice" to make clear that on this issue, our communities are united. We have pushed for a basin-wide flood solution in combination with aquatic species habitat restoration since 2007. Army Corps research from previous decades and a study from the engineering firm Shannon and Wilson showed holding 62,000 acre feet of flood water above Pe Ell would benefit every community downstream. After reviewing this data, we came out in favor of water retention as part of a basin-wide fish and flood solution.

Tribal and environmental opposition to a conventional dam was clear. We supported the work led through the Governor's office and the Governors Chehalis Basin Work Group, which directed a worldwide search for a structure that could provide the flood protection benefits of a dam matched by aquatic species protection, especially fish. The state search found this model in Japan in the form of the flow-through dam. Japan is in the process of building their third such structure. As in Washington state, fish and other seafood play a significant role in Japanese culture and economy. If the first of their flow-through dams was not found to be compatible with maintaining fish runs and sediment transport while protecting downstream communities from flooding, that nation would not be now building their third. This is not a new, untested kind of facility, but reading the draft EIS, we wonder if Ecology has spent time looking at the template for the proposed Flood Retention Expandable (FRE) in the Chehalis basin? We believe this proposed FRE can break the historic deadlock in this basin between the fish vs. flood interests, if the facts are put forward clearly and accurately in the final EIS.

Storing 62,000 acre feet of flood water above Pe Ell temporarily during the next catastrophic flood will protect thousands of families from flooding. Families in the floodplain are disproportionately low income and disproportionately Hispanic or members of another minority. After more than a century of study, including 14 years of the current Chehalis basin process, there is no other action that will provide more protection to families, communities, churches, schools, businesses and key infrastructure including I-5 and state highways than this facility.

When our organization was formed, the option of a levee-based plan was on the table. The Army Corps had designed a plan to install levees along I-5. We learned then and still understand that levees don't reduce the amount of flood water. Levees pick winners and losers by redirecting the flood waters, keeping some areas dry and increasing the flood levels for those misfortunates on the other side.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: craig shreeve

2/03/26 @ 10:56 AM

Do Not Build this dam!

No attachments

Comment From: Jordan Van Voast

2/03/26 @ 10:41 AM

This dam would result in irreparable damage to critical environmental habitat. Please deny the permit

No attachments

Comment From: Heather Ikeler

2/03/26 @ 10:39 AM

The Chehalis River is richly biodiverse, providing habitat for an array of species including beavers, salmon and elk. All will be negatively impacted by a (hugely expensive) dam with no guarantee of success. There are already science based, proven me...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Lin Provost

2/03/26 @ 10:39 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Jill Kershaw

2/03/26 @ 9:40 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Sarah Anderson

2/03/26 @ 9:08 AM

Please do not proceed with damming one of the few free flowing remaining rivers in the State of Washington. The 2 billion dollars that this would cost can be used for other flood mitigation measures while protecting the livelihood of local tribes. ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: William St. Jean

2/03/26 @ 9:00 AM

I oppose this Dam as a professional Fisheries Biologist for 40 years this action is bad for the wild fish in this river system and I am very confident would not be allowed by NOAA if ESA list species were here. As a resident of 30 yea resident of Bu...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nastasya Clark

2/03/26 @ 8:06 AM

I am writing to express my serious concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Spring Chinook, Coho, F...↓

No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]