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

Submitted By

1051 Results

Search Type

Sort:

Sort Results By

Comment From: Andrew Dober

2/03/26 @ 6:57 AM

• 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
• You 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

No attachments

Comment From: Luke Schultz

2/03/26 @ 6:41 AM

I do not support a plan to construct a large dam on the Chehalis River. The plan, as proposed, will significantly reduce spawning and rearing habitat for salmon and steelhead as the dam site is located at one of the largest spawning areas in the enti...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bruce Noble

2/03/26 @ 4:49 AM

Please remove the dam. It would be best to remove the old dam and return the river to its natural state. That would be best for steelhead migration. The steelhead used the river for spawning for thousands of years before the dam was built. It wo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Stuart Levy

2/03/26 @ 12:33 AM

The age of mega projects ought to be over. Their impacts are mostly destructive and hard to mitigate. Working with the landscape (even at the cost of development) are always going to pay dividends, cope with their consequences, and if absolutely nece...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Marie Lee Jenkins

2/03/26 @ 12:20 AM

I am concerned about the environmental impacts of the proposed dam on the Chehalis river. Salmon populations will be devastated by this project, and for minimal benefit. Viable alternatives that are less costly and, most importantly, less harmful do ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michael Deckert

2/03/26 @ 12:00 AM

I've paddled the Chehalis River above Pe Ell at flows from 900cfs to 6500cfs. This mega-dam poses significant risks to both recreation and the environment. And, Better Solutions Already Exist!

Communities across the basin need real, lasting flood ...↓protection -- but a dam doesn't provide it. Proven, effective, and more affordable approaches, including the Local Actions Non‑Dam Alternative, are already being developed. These can be implemented sooner, avoid the worst ecological harm, and provide more widespread protection.

The Proposed Action poses significant risks. The proposed action spans 2,250 feet (0.4 miles) and carries a price tag estimated at $1.3–$2.3 billion. There is currently no clear long‑term funding plan, and the proposal does not fully account for operations, maintenance, repairs, or lifecycle costs. The proposed site presents significant unresolved geotechnical issues (including fractured bedrock, landslide risk, and potential faulting) raising major concerns about long‑term feasibility and safety, as well as the concerns over of ballooning costs.

As stated in the DEIS, the Proposed Action would cause significant adverse impacts on recreation. 6.6 miles of the Chehalis River would no longer be accessible for kayaking and whitewater rafting, and 13.2 miles of riverbank would no longer be available for riverbank fishing. (p.140)

The Proposed Action would also have significant adverse impacts on fish, which would impact recreational fishing by reducing the number of fish available to be caught. Displacement of wildlife would reduce the availability of game and recreational viewing opportunities. Closure of recreational sites and loss of access would have significant adverse impacts on recreational activities such as fishing, hunting, hiking, and birdwatching (p. 140).

Construction and operation would have significant adverse impacts on spring-run Chinook salmon, fall-run Chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead from degraded habitat, noise, and fewer fish surviving passage around the FRE facility (P.84).
Reduction in fish passage during construction of the FRE facility would have a significant adverse impact on species like salmon, steelhead, and lamprey that require access to the upper Chehalis River and headwaters to complete their life cycle (P.88-89).

The Proposed Action results in irreversible impacts to salmon and wildlife. The upper Chehalis River is one of only three main spawning areas for Chinook and Coho salmon and Steelhead in the Basin. The DEIS shows the impacts would be devastating. The loss of one of these three key spawning grounds would threaten the overall resilience and survival of these species across the entire Basin: Spring Chinook could be driven to extinction by mid‑century, Coho salmon would be nearly extinct by mid‑century, Fall Chinook and Steelhead would see major, long‑term population declines

Finally, the DEIS itself states the ecological impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Even with mitigation, much of what would be lost cannot be replaced.

In conclusion, the Chehalis River basin needs up-to-date, proven flood solutions that protect people, the land, and salmon. The proposed mega-dam design is based on an unproven, untested concept, and it's hugely expensive, costing Washington up to $2 billion or more. Now is the time to put this proposal to rest and focus on proven solutions that will keep communities up and down the river safe and our fish runs healthy.

No attachments

Comment From: Dave Eibert

2/02/26 @ 11:13 PM

Hello, I am writing to oppose this flood mitigation project to support the transformation of wild fish habitat. Modifications like this to the landscape are damaging and will cause significant impact to natural areas that are dwindling in our society...↓

No attachments

Comment From: John lesea

2/02/26 @ 10:54 PM

Save the already endangered fish. Do not build this dam.

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/02/26 @ 10:47 PM

I am writing in opposition to the proposed FRE facility. The presented evidence in the draft EIS makes it clear that the proposed dam/flood retention facility would have severe adverse impacts on salmon, water quality, and wildlife. Building a dam in...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Patricia Trippet

2/02/26 @ 10:34 PM

I am not in favor of the proposed Chehalis Meg-Dam. The mega-dam would devastate salmon runs, permanently damage one of the remaining free-flowing rivers in Southwest Washington, and cost taxpayers billions- despite safer, proven flood protection alt...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Aaron Kopp

2/02/26 @ 9:42 PM

I would like to see the WA Dept of Ecology to apply its own guidance for integration in floodplain management. This was the guidance provided in the Integrated Floodplain Management Status Report supported by the WA Dept of Ecology. Refer to page 8 i...↓

No attachments

Comment From: GAIR Hemphill CRUTCHER CRUTCHER

2/02/26 @ 9:39 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 unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Sp...↓

No attachments

Comment From: John MacDonald

2/02/26 @ 9:19 PM

I have briefly reviewed the draft EIS and as a layman, it seems that this is a solution looking for a problem. The apparent scope of the upstream disruption and destruction of native fish spawning grounds far outweighs the potential benefits downstr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ezekiel Richardsom

2/02/26 @ 8:56 PM

Hello,

I am extremely concerned 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 Chinook...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jesse Robbins

2/02/26 @ 8:55 PM

My name is Jesse Robbins and I live in Springfield, Oregon. I'm a former resident of Washington, and a dedicated angler and outdoorsman. I am writing to provide comments on the Department of Ecology's Draft Environmental Impact Statement regarding th...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ruth Morlas

2/02/26 @ 8:46 PM

I read the EIS for this project and it looks like a total environmental disaster in return for very minuscule level of flood protection if at all. The report states that this will cause "significant and unavoidable adverse impacts on wildlife, wetlan...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jamie Jones

2/02/26 @ 8:43 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Ann Anonymous

2/02/26 @ 8:42 PM

To Whom it may concern,

I wish to voice 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...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Wendy Ogaard

2/02/26 @ 8:22 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: Carla Lindquist

2/02/26 @ 8:14 PM

I would ask that this proposed dam does not go through as the impact on salmon could very likely be detrimental. Surely there must be another way to alleviate the issues that are being faced.
Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Gary Roulston

2/02/26 @ 7:44 PM

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. In an age where dams are being removed to improve habitat, it s...↓eems counterproductive to propose building a new dam.
The footprint created by the temporary reservoir will significantly impair spawning habitat 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 Steelhead, Coho, and Chinook Salmon. 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 within 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 refuge 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 the 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 not to 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. A dam is far from the best solution and it might well be the worst solution.

No attachments

Comment From: Alycia Scheidel

2/02/26 @ 7:16 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Kenten Danas

2/02/26 @ 7:00 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Chris Taylor

2/02/26 @ 6:56 PM

Introduction: You are 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 reservo...↓ir 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
You 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.

No attachments

Comment From: Scott Lucas

2/02/26 @ 6:52 PM

I oppose building a dam on the Chehalis, no matter what the structure is called and no matter how long it is supposed to be there. There are better alternatives, and the damage from building the proposed structure will be irreversible.

No attachments

Comment From: Nadia Crane

2/02/26 @ 6:51 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Margie Van Cleve

2/02/26 @ 6:48 PM

Dear Washington State Department of Ecology,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement. In an era of increasingly tight state revenues, we should...↓ not continue to fund projects like this. Dam proposals for the Chehalis River have been floated (bad pun, I know) since at least 2009. Those proposals all had many things in common including:

• The dam proposals did not deal with continued development in the flood plain or moving homes and businesses out of harm's way.
• The dam proposals would all destroy various miles of the free-flowing Chehalis river.
• The dam proposals would all harm native salmon and steelhead runs.

This proposed dam also joins the previous proposals for a Chehalis River dam that should not be built. Modeling suggests it would reduce flood impacts but not eliminate them. Construction of the dam will increase sediment load in the river from clearcutting within the proposed reservoir area, reduce river shading, and increase river temperatures; all of these issues putting more pressure on already decreasing runs of native salmon and steelhead.

Section 5.3: Key findings from the Department of Ecology's "State Environmental Policy Act Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement" state:
"- Construction and operation of the Proposed Action would have a significant adverse impact on aquatic habitat from the headwaters of the Chehalis River to the middle mainstem. The removal of vegetation, increase in temperature, and reduced water quality would negatively affect aquatic habitat and species.
- Construction and operation would have significant adverse impacts on spring-run Chinook salmon, fall-run Chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead from degraded habitat, noise and fewer fish surviving passage around the FRE facility.
- Construction would have a significant adverse impact on migratory non-salmon fish such as lamprey and whitefish from degraded fish passage around the FRE construction area, and a less than significant adverse impact on resident fish such as minnows and sculpin. However, operations would have significant adverse impacts on all types of fish.
- Construction and operation would have significant adverse impacts on shellfish and aquatic macroinvertebrates. It would have a less than significant adverse impact on Southern Resident killer whales and other fish-eating marine mammals and birds.
- These impacts on fish and aquatic species and habitat would be significant and unavoidable unless the Applicant's proposed Fish and Aquatic Species and Habitat Management Plan and other mitigation plans meet regulatory requirements and implementation is feasible."

With these key impacts identified, the proposed dam should not go forward.

The Chehalis is the second largest river basin in Washington State, one of the largest free-flowing rivers in Washington State. In the early to mid 1990's, the whitewater sections of the Chehalis River (always upstream of Pe Ell) were some of my favorite whitewater kayak runs in WA state. While these river miles are no longer accessible, they are a resource that should not be drowned.

Washington State has been a leader in removal of "deadbeat dams." We should learn from our experiences in dealing with these type dams and not allow more to be built.

No attachments

Comment From: South Sound Fly Fishers (P.O. Box 2792 )

2/02/26 @ 6:22 PM

No on the Dam. Please read attached letter.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Ken Kraybill

2/02/26 @ 6:02 PM

The proposed dam would cause irreparable harm to local Tribes, their culture and livelihoods, and Tribes in the area have spoken in opposition to the project.

No attachments

Comment From: Lindie Gardner

2/02/26 @ 5:49 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Pieter Terpstra

2/02/26 @ 5:48 PM

Feel free to adapt our sample letter below and submit your comments

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 u...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Denise Snyder

2/02/26 @ 5:45 PM

No attachments

Comment From: John kelly

2/02/26 @ 4:42 PM

No attachments

Comment From: James Overton

2/02/26 @ 4:38 PM

To whom it may concern,
I believe that Communities across the Chehalis basin need real, lasting flood protection. However, a mega‑dam isn't the solution. There are proven, effective, and more affordable approaches such as the Local Actions Non‑Dam...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Lynn Quanstrom

2/02/26 @ 4:31 PM

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Draft EIS. The Chehalis River is one of the last un-dammed, free-flowing rivers left on the West Coast of the United States and one of the top salmon-producing rivers in the state of Washington.

We a...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/02/26 @ 3:51 PM

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. At a time in which so much work has been done to promote salmon recovery in our region, the completion of a project that would cause ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kerry Brooks

2/02/26 @ 3:31 PM

The DEIS describes irreparable harm (that cannot be mitigated).

The upper Chehalis River is one of only three main spawning areas for Chinook and Coho salmon and steelhead in the Chehalis Basin. The loss of any one of these three key spawning gro...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Peter Dykstra

2/02/26 @ 3:15 PM

Flooding in the Chehalis River Badin has been studied for decades. The one thing that I haven't seen addressed is the problem of the gorge between Boistfort and Adna. The floods of 1990, 1996, and 2007 were made worsen when the water from the main...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Vince Panesko

2/02/26 @ 3:08 PM

Subject of Comment: Overburden from West Quarry:

The draft EIS fails to address the environmental impacts of creating the West Quarry to produce aggregate for dam construction. The West Quarry is located on a 1,313 foot high, 2,000 foot wide steep ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jordan Hamann

2/02/26 @ 3:03 PM

I oppose the construction of a dam on the Chehalis river. There is definitely a need for enhanced flood control in the Chehalis basin, but a dam is a step backwards. It will inevitably lead to increased human development within the flood plain (once ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Gayle Hunt

2/02/26 @ 2:58 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Carolyn Scafidi

2/02/26 @ 2:51 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

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 los...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Harold Weight

2/02/26 @ 2:41 PM

I am not a Washington resident (am Oregon resident) but I have concerns about the impact of the proposed dam. My biggest concern is the impact on anadromous fish. At a time when many species are struggling to maintain populations up and down the We...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Manisha Joshi

2/02/26 @ 2:40 PM

I was born and raised in Washington and feel that adding more dams on our rivers is counter productive for supporting Salmon restoration. We should be removing dams from rivers instead of building more.

No attachments

Comment From: Therese Livella

2/02/26 @ 2:29 PM

Please, leave the river alone. She knows what to do to keep herself healthy. If humans have a problem with how she does that, the human should move or adapt as needed.

No attachments

Comment From: CRAIG CHAPMAN

2/02/26 @ 2:21 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Zoie Tingstad

2/02/26 @ 2:18 PM

I am writing to oppose the proposed Chehalis River dam due to its irreversible impact on the ecosystem.
The Chehalis Basin is a vital nursery for Chinook salmon, which are the primary food source for our endangered Southern Resident Killer Whales. Co...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Courtney Sullivan

2/02/26 @ 2:17 PM

No attachments

Comment From: MALINDA Fugate

2/02/26 @ 2:15 PM

There is no lack of information on the damage humans do to the land. Even if we refuse to listen to indigenous wisdom, science has also demonstrated the harmful impact that large scale construction projects have on our environment. Official environme...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Joe Moore

2/02/26 @ 2:02 PM

I'm a registered voter in Oregon, and so not directly a constituent in the area that will be affected by this project. But I have spent some quality time along the Skookumchuck tributary to the Chehalis, and I've spent lots of time canoeing and hik...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nancy Lewis-Williams

2/02/26 @ 1:57 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Paul Butler

2/02/26 @ 1:54 PM

I have a Masters and PhD in Geology from the UC Berkeley and Davis campuses. My area of expertise is Hydrology and Fluvial Geomorphology and I taught college-level courses in those subjects for over 25 years. In my first view of the map locating the ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ferdi Businger

2/02/26 @ 1:50 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Ellen Williams

2/02/26 @ 1:33 PM

I strongly object to this dam project. I trust the environmental review that states plainly that fish and wildlife habitat will be severely impacted.. that Tribes object is reason enough. Solving flooding with a dam is going backward from respecting ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Linda Castell

2/02/26 @ 1:31 PM

I am opposed to building any dam on the Chealis river as the salmon are already struggling to survive in this once salmon abundant river. A dam on this river would irreparably damage the local tribes culture. The damage to the proposed building si...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/02/26 @ 1:12 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Galen Torneby

2/02/26 @ 12:32 PM

To the Washington Department of Ecology,

I am submitting this comment to oppose the proposed Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project centered on construction of a large flood-retention dam near Pe Ell.

Flooding is a natural and necessar...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Paul Jensen

2/02/26 @ 12:10 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Jeff Norman

2/02/26 @ 11:54 AM

Dear Department of Ecology,

The era of dam-building is dead. Never again will we dam rivers and destroy natural determinants. I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Based on the DEIS, the project ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Sierra Club Washington Chapter (Edward Humble)

2/02/26 @ 11:46 AM

Comment from the Washington Chapter Sierra Club. See attachment.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Anne March

2/02/26 @ 11:23 AM

I am opposed to the construction of the Chahalis Flood Retention Dam. Call it what it is - a dam.

The proposed dam is far larger than originally planned, requiring dramatically more concrete and infrastructure. Estimated costs are very high, with...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Orca Conservancy (Shari Tarantino)

2/02/26 @ 11:05 AM

Please add the attached comment by Orca Conservancy to the public record.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Elliott Winter

2/02/26 @ 10:52 AM

The proposed dam in the upper Chehalis basin should not be constructed, plain and simple. There is no way to mitigate the impacts of a permanent dam structure that will absolutely impact salmon and steelhead. The dam itself will permanently prevent m...↓

No attachments

Comment From: James Sessa

2/02/26 @ 10:52 AM

If you value the vital ecosystem that our children will need in our NW home then please do not build this dam and consult with those that can offer other solutions, thank you!

No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth Larson

2/02/26 @ 10:41 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Eric Dale

2/02/26 @ 10:40 AM

No attachments

Comment From: South Sound Bird Alliance (for... (Laurie Gneiding)

2/02/26 @ 10:23 AM

The South Sound Bird Alliance is providing comments to the proposed Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project ("Proposed Action") SEPA EIS, particularly for terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna and their required habitats (Appendices E, ...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Melissa Montgomery

2/02/26 @ 10:14 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Cowlitz Indian Tribe (Iyall William)

2/02/26 @ 9:40 AM

Please see the attached letter and comment matrix from the Cowlitz Indian Tribe.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Ryan Krapp

2/02/26 @ 9:23 AM

To whom it may concern,
I can appreciate the desire to protect the loss of property and infrastructure; however, we have had a terrible track record of building in unsuitable and unsustainable areas. Let's not perpetuate the human damage to natural e...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Mark Darrach

2/02/26 @ 9:05 AM

I could hardly be MORE steadfast AGAINST moving forward with this ill-considered dam construction project. The ecological impacts of this project, should it come to fruition, will surely be massively negative. The dam building era in the Pacific Nort...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jessie Lin

2/02/26 @ 8:51 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Jill Ungar

2/02/26 @ 8:50 AM

We do not need new dams anywhere. Habitat is the key to keeping ecosystems in balance. Also, STOP allowing construction in flood zones!!!

No attachments

Comment From: Maria Naumann

2/02/26 @ 5:34 AM

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed flood retention facility (dam) on the Chehalis River. I am deeply concerned that this project will further jeopardize the survival of our endangered Southern Resident Orcas.

The Revised Dr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cris Gonzales

2/02/26 @ 3:50 AM

We do not need dams, we need to get rid of them to help the population of tge salmon, which in turn helps the Southern Orcas. We spend all the money on creating fish drainage over highways and I-5, just to put in dams, it defeats all that money spen...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

2/02/26 @ 2:32 AM

No attachments

Comment From: Ana Mujica

2/02/26 @ 1:48 AM

The creation of this dam will adversely affect the population of steelhead trout and salmon populations. Which alone with global warming will affect the orca population. Many communities depend on orca focused tourism for their income and community s...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Brandy OBray

2/02/26 @ 12:48 AM

Hello,
I am a resident of Southern California and British Columbia Canada. I spend time on San Juan Island each year and have been blessed to see the Southern Resident Killer Whales from shore in the ocean, it is magical and life changing. It is app...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jacob Beilock

2/02/26 @ 12:12 AM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. I am a student at Bellingham Technical College in the fisheries science program. We do lots of hands on work with salmon and see ...↓the loss that is brought from trying to tame the rivers. Salmon numbers are not doing well and putting up more dams will ensure their demise. Lately we studied the dams on the lower Snake River and whether on not they should be breached. While the answer to that is complicated by the power generated by those dams along with the transport for goods they provide, there is no complication with whether this dam should go up (the only "positive" it provides is meager flood control). It should NOT go up.

No power will be generated by this proposed dam. Habitat will be buried. Fish will die. The river will die. Algae blooms in the reservoir, choking gills, killing peoples dogs, children told by their parents they can't go swimming, ruining a summer's day. When that algae dies, eutrophication will occur removing oxygen. A sludge of nutrients will build at the base of the dam unable to go downstreams and spread out over the land. Downstream farms close because they can't grow and compete with megafarms halfway across the country.

The people the dam was to protect will leave. Culture erased. Species gone. When the salmon are gone, they will not return.

The salmon will not return once they are gone.

Based on the DEIS, the project would cause significant and unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Spring Chinook, Coho, Fall Chinook, and Steelhead populations. This stretch of the river is one of the Basin's key spawning areas, and once damaged, these habitats cannot be replaced.

I am also concerned about the scale and cost of the proposed structure, as well as the unresolved safety and geotechnical risks identified in the DEIS. At an estimated $1.3–$2.3 billion, the dam would offer limited benefits while putting the river's ecological health—and the communities that rely on it—at long-term risk

More effective, less damaging flood‑reduction approaches already exist, including the Local Actions Non‑Dam Alternative. I urge Ecology to pursue these solutions instead of the proposed dam.
Thank you for considering my comments.

If this dam goes up, I will spend my life as a scientist, advocate for salmon, advocate for the harmony we need to return to with nature, fighting to tear this dam down. The more we fight the Earth, the more we will be humbled by our planet.

Sincerely,
Jacob Beilock

No attachments

Comment From: Megan Muir

2/02/26 @ 12:11 AM

This seems like a step backwards. Preserving fish runs of all types, and salmon in particular, is critical to our state's economy and ecology. Commercial fisheries, sport fisheries, the whale-related economy all depend on healthy fish runs. Decreasin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michelle Z

2/01/26 @ 11:51 PM

I understand there was severe flooding all throughout the state, but this was due to climate change. By creating more dams, we only worsen climate change. The earth is an ecoSYSTEM, it works together like a domino effect. Everything effects everythin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michelle Z

2/01/26 @ 11:47 PM

Hello,
PLEASE do not approve the building of this dam or any others in the state!
Salmon populations are already at critically low numbers and our ICONIC southern resident orcas depend on mainly salmon for food. All of the toxic chemicals leaching ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Matthew Stevenson

2/01/26 @ 10:55 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River.

As a practicing environmental engineer, I have worked to counteract the massive and irreparable harms that dams have done thro...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jessica Page

2/01/26 @ 10:28 PM

I thought Washington was focused on protecting salmon runs in order to protect the last remaining Southern Resident Orcas and their food source. This would directly inhibit that goal. You may have had a big flood, but I am 38 years old and have been ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Mary Farley

2/01/26 @ 10:24 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Larry Hewitt

2/01/26 @ 10:02 PM

Unbelievable. Damming the Chehalis raises its unsustainable head every few years while both Chehalis and Centralia continue to build in the flood plain. Haven't we learned anything about damming salmon rivers? We should be removing dams and restoring...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Natalie Valett

2/01/26 @ 9:49 PM

As a Washington citizen I urge you, please do not dam the last major free‑flowing river in southwest Washington. The development would drive the salmon - the lifeblood of Washington's ecology, biodiversity and life - to extinction.

Proven, effective...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ellen Punyon

2/01/26 @ 9:17 PM

Dear Department of Ecology,

I am writing to express my concern 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 Spr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jayme Jonas

2/01/26 @ 9:08 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 unavoidable harm to salmon and steelhead, including major losses of Spr...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Shannon Leighton

2/01/26 @ 8:58 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Marc Gauthier

2/01/26 @ 8:42 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Karen Davis

2/01/26 @ 8:26 PM

We are facing an extinction crisis and a climate crisis. I find it hard to believe you are even considering building a dam now that we know the devastation that dams bring to biodiversity and the environment as a whole.

I recently drove as much of ...↓the Chehalis river basin as I could without trespassing on private property (mostly "owned" by Weyerhaeuser). On several occasions, I got out of my car and walked along the roadside, peering down at the steep chasm and the beautiful, wild river below. When I looked up, I saw rampant mismanagement of the land. There were massive clear-cuts along steep hillsides flanking the river corridor. It's no wonder it floods!

Why on earth are we discussing building a dam when those kinds of environmental atrocities are allowed? A dam is not the solution! The solution is addressing the mismanagement of the land that already exists and using proper land management strategies to mitigate flooding in the future.

We are seeing keystone species like salmon and steelhead being driven to extinction by human activities. Their numbers are already declining even without this dam. So that means we must work even harder to restore the habitat for these crucial species, not put the final nail in their coffin by building this misguided facility! This is our habitat, too. This is OUR ecosystem. And like it or not, we rely on it to sustain us.

We devastate our environment with clear cutting and we issue building permits in a known flood plain and then we build a dam to clean up our mess. Well, one environmental atrocity doesn't fix another. The United Nations recently put out a report that states, "Humans are making Earth a broken and increasingly unlivable planet through climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. So the world must make dramatic changes to society, economics and daily life."
A dam should not even be on the list of options. You must come up with a REAL solution that works with the environment and takes these critical species into account, as well as the tribes, fishermen, the orcas and all the others who would be harmed by its construction. If you continue on the path towards building a dam, you are in for the fight of your lives, because OUR lives depend on preserving our environment and we will fight to the death to protect it.

Sincerely,
Karen Davis

No attachments

Comment From: Joanna Buehler

2/01/26 @ 8:26 PM

Washington Department of Ecology
Having served as the representative of Save Lake Sammamish for nearly three decades on many land use / water quality and quantity / salmon-recovery efforts, including Issaquah Creek Basin and Non-Point Pollution Plan...↓, Sammamish Basin & Non-Point Pollution Plan, WRIA 8 (Cedar River & Lake Washington Basins), I strongly oppose the proposed FRE dam on the Upper Chehalis River for the following reasons:

1) As disclosed in the RDEIS, such dam would cause "significant and unavoidable harm" to steelhead and salmonid runs and some of their best, irreplaceable spawning areas. As DOE is well-aware, many Pacific salmonid runs have been lost or endangered due in part to the cumulative impacts of irresponsible land use and development in floodplains, with consequent damage to fish, water quality and humans. Our State has spent much effort and money attempting to restore depleted habitat and fish runs. Prevention is cheaper and easier than restoration. A sensible rule is "Save the Best - Improve the Rest!"

2) RDEIS also reveals adverse impacts to water quality, temperature and river morphology. In my opinion, the Issaquah Creek Basin Plan has been effective in reducing flooding and improving habitat over time. The Plan evaluated and prioritized various projects; such as restoration of wetlands, adding riparian vegetation, meanders and complexity to improve habitat and water quality, and to recharge the Aquifer. Acquisition and removal of buildings on frequently flooded properties has been a significant improvement and cost saving.

3) Cost at $1.5 - $2 billion for the proposed dam is prohibitive. Few engineering projects of this magnitude are completed without time and budget over-runs. Funds have not been allocated and the State budget currently has a $16 Billion funding deficit. Less expensive and destructive options to alleviate flooding, such as those described in the Local Actions Non‑Dam Alternative, are available.

4) Geologic hazards have not been adequately addressed.

The RDEIS is merely a disclosure document enumerating the environmental impacts of proposed projects and reviewing alternatives. DOE may approve or deny permits based on that information. Based on the level of ecological damage it would cause and the fact that less expensive alternatives exist, I urge the Department to deny the Chehalis Dam project and pursue the Local Actions Non‑Dam Alternative.
Thank you for your consideration of my comments.

Yours truly,
Joanna Buehler

No attachments

Comment From: Anne Clay

2/01/26 @ 8:23 PM

A dam on the Chehalis would have negative effects on salmon as well as property. We don't need it. Dont do it.

No attachments

Comment From: Desiree Aponte

2/01/26 @ 8:18 PM

We don't need this in an era of dam removal. There are other ways to help with flooding that don't involve damming up the river, destroying habitats, and losing species. Despite what some may think, humans, not just other animals and plants, need nat...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Seth Cool

2/01/26 @ 8:08 PM

I write to oppose the proposal. Our state already has too many dams, and the effects of these days has been devastating to anadromous fish and riparian habitat. These dams are also difficult and expensive to remove later when the harmful impacts beco...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Gabrielle Weber

2/01/26 @ 7:56 PM

No attachments

Comment From: amy tsui

2/01/26 @ 7:30 PM

I'm opposed to building the proposed FRE dam on the upper Chehalis River. Building dam impedes natural development and there are better way to manage water. Salmon and wildlife would be cut off from spawning grounds.

We can find alternatives to bu...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Vince Panesko

2/01/26 @ 7:12 PM

Impacts on Logging caused by Dam:

Ecology has deemed there would be no significant environmental impacts on transportation caused by dam construction or dam operation (Appendix K, Section 3.2.4.3, page 87.) This statement will mislead decision make...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Micahel Smell

2/01/26 @ 7:07 PM

Let's talk rainfall. As the 9 December 2025 rainfall event showed, most of it occurred below the dam site which made the dam, should it have been in place, now worth one. The flooding that occurred was the 5th highest flood on the Newaukum River. T...↓

No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]