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

Submitted By

1051 Results

Search Type

Sort:

Sort Results By

Comment From: Cynthia Pantos

1/15/26 @ 7:41 AM

Please consider better environmental options than dam building in the Chehalis River Basin! This plan is ineffective and expensive when better ideas are available. Thank you for your consideration for environmental justice.

No attachments

Comment From: CARL PRELLWITZ (CARL Prellwitz)

1/15/26 @ 7:38 AM

The Chehalis Basin needs proven flood solutions, not a poorly planned, gigantic, $2 billion dam on the Chehalis River.

No attachments

Comment From: Judith Koch

1/15/26 @ 7:37 AM

I have read through all I can find on this project. It has been proven again and again that dams are not the answer. Once built the real effects come to play and generally cannot be undone resulting in disastrous consequences. Time and again natur...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anca Vlasopolos

1/15/26 @ 7:37 AM

Please stop this mega-dam from damaging the ecology the the Chehalis River Basin. It's hard enough to restore what's lost without more anti-environmental and extremely costly plans to wreck this sensitive habitat.

No attachments

Comment From: Cheryl Reid

1/15/26 @ 7:28 AM

We need to protect not put in dams that not only destroy the landscape but destroy wildlrfe.

No attachments

Comment From: Katherine Werner

1/15/26 @ 7:27 AM

We don't need another unnecessary dam that will cause more harm than rectifying the flooding issue. We need more natural flood plains. Nature needs room -- room for flooding, room for salmon to thrive, room to behave as a river should. Human interfer...↓

No attachments

Comment From: john stanley

1/15/26 @ 7:27 AM

Any actions taken must be designed to protect the fish population (salmon and steelhead). Their numbers are already challenged by a myriad of manmade issues, not the least of which is the effects of climate change. The proposal is yet another impedim...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jamie Shields

1/15/26 @ 7:08 AM

It's 2026. We all know that dams aren't the answer—not when we have modern, proven flood solutions that can protect people, the land, and salmon

No attachments

Comment From: Chad Evans

1/15/26 @ 12:55 AM

Put this proposal to rest, and instead focus on proven solutions that will keep communities up and down the river safe, and help return the fish runs to their historical health. We don't need more dams.

No attachments

Comment From: priscilla martinez

1/14/26 @ 10:36 PM

We need to take better care of what is left of our environment, for wildlife, marine life, plant life, and people.

No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Austin

1/14/26 @ 7:49 PM

Building a dam on the Chehalis is the most expensive and ecologically damaging way to mitigate potential flood damage. Not only would this dam severely degrade habitat for native salmonids, many of which are already endangered in Washington, but it i...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Michael Hoffman

1/14/26 @ 7:32 PM

I am opposed to damming the Chehalis River. We have years of controversy on other dammed Washington State rivers regarding their negative impacts on wildlife, especially salmon. There is now active work to remove many of these dams due to their negat...↓

No attachments

Comment From: E Chapp

1/14/26 @ 6:36 PM

These impacts would be devastating to the environment with only moderate flood protection to the communities. Recent flooding has shown that dams are also prone to cracking and sudden failure. There are better ways to protect communities that also re...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Caroline Armon

1/14/26 @ 5:25 PM

The dam would cost up to $2 billion. There is no plan for how to pay for it, but the cost would likely go to Washington tax payers.

Alternate plans already exist through the Local Actions Non-Dam proposal. These would benefit the entire basin as ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

1/14/26 @ 3:19 PM

Department of Ecology to put this proposal to rest, and instead focus on proven solutions that will keep communities up and down the river safe, and help return the fish runs to their historical health.

No attachments

Comment From: Matthew Anderson

1/14/26 @ 1:30 PM

I oppose this proposal due to its huge environmental and financial costs.

Please put this proposal to rest, and instead focus on proven solutions that will keep communities up and down the river safe, and help return the fish runs to their historica...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Virginia Davis

1/14/26 @ 12:52 PM

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposal to build a dam on the Chehalis River. Advocates and experts throughout the region are concerned about his project for its huge environmental and financial costs.

The Department of Ecology shou...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jill Reifschneider

1/14/26 @ 12:36 PM

A new dam is so last century. This proposal threatens both our environment and financial future. Please stop it.

No attachments

Comment From: JL Angell

1/14/26 @ 12:08 PM

Please put this proposal to rest, and instead focus on proven solutions that will keep communities up and down the river safe, and help return the fish runs to their historical health. All west coast salmon survival is interrelated and you must do yo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Adam High

1/14/26 @ 12:04 PM

I would like to express my disapproval for this project. Considering the overall cost in both final design, construction, and long-term maintenance needs of this project, it seems like an illogical use of public funding. The only bonafide benefits th...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Stephen Bailey

1/14/26 @ 12:02 PM

The LAST thing we need is more dams! We've come dam (pun intended!) close to killing off more than one species of our salmon! ENOUGH DAMS!!

No attachments

Comment From: Kathryn Vinson

1/14/26 @ 11:59 AM

Rather than spending so much money building yet another dam, destined to be torn down, why not focus on proven solutions that will keep communities up and down the river safe, and help return the fish runs to their historical health? Continuing to us...↓

No attachments

Comment From: FOGH (Friends of Grays Harbor) (Arthur Grunbaum)

1/14/26 @ 9:43 AM

Please see the attached file

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Winston Hackett

1/14/26 @ 8:16 AM

Dams should NOT be built on the Chehalis. Local flooding is a serious issue that should be addressed by allowing buffer zones of the floodplain and diking around important settled areas. Dams will cost taxpayer dollars and bring little benefit relati...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Malorie Silvesan

1/13/26 @ 11:45 PM

Reject the dam construction and keep the Chehalis flowing free, the way Mother Nature created. We're experiencing enough environmental disasters as it is.

No attachments

Comment From: Mitchell Sheridan

1/13/26 @ 11:09 PM

Over the last 20 years, science has made it increasingly clear that dams pose significant harms to our ecological and environmental systems, as well as long-term economic sustainability. The economics simply do not add up, and the negative impacts ca...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kimberly Fritz

1/13/26 @ 4:32 PM

I am opposed to this as this will significantly harm our Southern Residents. Dams are what are responsible for them being critically endangered! This is a really irresponsible proposal! We've spent millions repairing passages for the Salmon, only to ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ashley Lewis

1/13/26 @ 3:26 PM

I oppose the dam project on the Chehalis River. The Quinault Indian Nation has clearly articulated its opposition. The project is an attack on Native Nations.

The dam undermines restoration of the upper river, and accelerates decline of Chinook pop...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bonnie Carson

1/13/26 @ 2:36 PM

Thank you for the oppoturnity to commit on this important issue. I am Bonnie Carson and I am a new resident to Washington state. This is a wonderful place to live and I hope we can all keep it ecologically healthy. I have seen in this past year flood...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Marian Roh

1/13/26 @ 2:08 PM

We are tearing dams out all across America, because they are fish-killers and cause/increase environmental degradation. If you want flood control, bring in beavers and let them reform the waterways. Do some research. They are better engineers than we...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cathy Lehman

1/13/26 @ 10:46 AM

Dams are not the answer in Western WA. Widespread flooding just last month show us that we need comprehensive water solutions for local communities - not antiquated tools with exorbitant costs that destroy human and natural systems. Comprehensive flo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Ron Figlar-Barnes

1/13/26 @ 10:17 AM

Revised Draft Comment Letter to the Washington Department of Ecology
(Including Cost Concerns)
Ron Figlar-Barnes, Elma, WA 98541 PO Box 1946

Subject: Key Environmental, Cultural, Hydrologic, and Cost Concerns in the Revised Draft EIS for the Propos...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Melissa Holloway

1/12/26 @ 10:41 PM

I respectfully submit this comment in opposition to the proposed dam on the Chehalis River.

The Chehalis River is one of the last remaining large, undammed river systems in Washington State. Its free-flowing condition supports salmon recovery, healt...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Bobbi Holt

1/12/26 @ 10:36 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Brittanni Holt

1/12/26 @ 10:32 PM

No attachments

Comment From: R Smith

1/12/26 @ 7:38 PM

The Upper Chehalis river above the Skookumchuck and Elk Creek,is the last true wild steelhead river in our area. I believe this is important enough to find another alternative than building in the PeEll Canyon.
The flood plain from the Newakum to Por...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Paitten Holloway

1/12/26 @ 5:23 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Pete Richardson

1/12/26 @ 1:12 PM

We should not be placing new dams on rivers in this state anymore, especially when there is so much work being done, and debate focused on removing them. History, in addition to the studies conducted here, has shown that they are extremely damaging t...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Catherine Miller

1/12/26 @ 9:38 AM

The proposed dam is costly and unnecessary. Dams and flood control are a deterrent to fish habitats. This is an area that needs a long-term solution, the purchase of land to restore and improve habitat in the public interest. The oversight functions...↓

No attachments

Comment From: JEFFREY WONG

1/11/26 @ 10:04 PM

I have read the Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
I oppose the project based on its adverse effects on fish and wildlife, its impact on water and land resources as well as Native Americ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Kristine Parrish

1/11/26 @ 9:48 PM

I'm commenting in opposition to the proposed dam on the Chehalis, one of the last free-flowing rivers in WA. The dam will not stop flooding long term, but it will cause permanent damage, as evidenced by the DEIS. We need to protect wildlife and their...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jon Harwood

1/11/26 @ 9:47 PM

The Local Actions Alternative "could approximate the Applicant's objective to reduce flooding from storms in the Willapa Hills."(p.28) That sounds great.

But also the authors of the EIS suggest that "Elements [of this action] could include component...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Craig Zora

1/11/26 @ 8:00 PM

I oppose the construction of a dam or flood retention expandable (FRE) facility on the Chehalis River.

TRIBAL PROPOSED MITIGATION To date, there is no information available about mitigation proposed by or supported by the Tribes that would reduce th...↓e unique impacts on Tribal and cultural resources to a level that is less than significant. More detailed studies and review—including identification of specific impacts and mitigation measures and Government-to-Government consultation—would be conducted during the permitting processes, before implementation of the proposed project. Federal NEPA evaluation, Section 106 consultation, and Endangered Species Act consultation timeframes and outcomes are unknown.

FRE BARRIERS TO FISH PASSAGE Fish passage efficiency would be reduced during construction and operation of the FRE facility, potentially creating barriers to movement for some species and life stages, especially weaker ones, placing local fish populations at risk. There is uncertainty around the design and performance of fish passage facilities, especially for resident fish species due to limited data on swimming capabilities and behavior through structures like conduits and bypass channels. Construction of the FRE facility would have significant adverse impacts on anadromous fish due to permanent changes in hydraulic conditions that differ from existing stream channels.

SALMON POPULATIONS IMPACTED Modeled results predict sharp declines in salmon and steelhead abundance, productivity, and diversity due to habitat changes caused by the FRE facility, especially in the temporary reservoir inundation area where life-history trajectories are eliminated. The long-term effectiveness of the Applicant's proposed fish passage facilities and their interactions with different life stages and species are unknown.

MODEL LIMITATIONS Limitations in the integrated Ecosystem Diagnosis and Treatment (EDT) and Life Cycle Model (LCM) include: a) Uncertainties in biological status of species such as spring-run Chinook salmon. b) Uncertainty in fish passage estimates. c) Uncertainty about climate change effects on ocean and Grays Harbor conditions. d) Uncertainty in mid- and late-century flow and temperature conditions e) Inability to evaluate conditions above the FRE facility or in tributaries due to HEC-RAS model limitations. f) Uncertainty in flood impacts due to monthly rather than daily modeling time steps. g) Fixed flood event timing and lack of variation in seasonal flood conditions. h) Lack of data on changes in mainstem river water temperature during flood events.

CAUSES OF FLOODING Many of the analyses presented in the DEIS rely on models to estimate potential environmental effects. As with all models, the assumptions, input data, and methods affect model outcomes. There are differing perspectives regarding the underlying causes of flooding, flood damages, and solutions in the Chehalis Basin. These include discussions about the influence of forest practices, land use practices, and whether flood control infrastructure could alter development patterns or encourage building in flood-prone areas.

The FRE facility is not a solution to flooding in the basin. The solution is the "LAND Alternative" (Local Actions Non-Dam Alternative). LAND is a proposed non-dam approach to flood reduction, focusing on levees, floodwalls, and land-use changes to protect communities like Centralia and Chehalis.

No attachments

Comment From: Todd Davison

1/11/26 @ 2:06 PM

I am writing to state my strong opposition to the proposed Chehalis River Headwater dam or so called water retention facility. After looking at the Chehalis River Basin on Google earth I cannot comprehend how putting such a facility on one branch o...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Derik Meadows

1/10/26 @ 9:58 PM

WHY. Haven't yall done enough to mess with or natural fish runs and haven't you guys done enough to affect and hurt our outdoors?! Washington is an absolute joke when it comes to fish and wildlife but they don't care. What is this dam going to do for...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Cedar Knoll

1/10/26 @ 9:48 PM

Please no dam in the Chehalis river. There are better alternatives for flood protection. I would hope that we can see from experience that dams do a lot more ecological harm then ecological good. Let's invest in alternative infrastructure and communi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jocelin Merly

1/10/26 @ 8:14 PM

Flooding has always been apart of chehalis, that's what happens when you build homes near a river, it floods. What we need is better housing infrastructure, not a dam that is going to impact fish migrations. We don't want a dam on our river.

No attachments

Comment From: Paul von Szalay

1/10/26 @ 7:31 PM

The dam will damage wildlife and livelihoods, it should not be built.

No attachments

Comment From: Jade Roosa

1/10/26 @ 6:01 PM

The dam will damage wildlife and livelihoods, it should not be built.

No attachments

Comment From: Sarra Burnett

1/10/26 @ 3:29 PM

I strongly oppose the construction of a dam on the Chehalis River. First of all, it's a pretty silly idea due to the fact that all over western Washington there are projects REMOVING dams. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to spend millions upon mill...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Amanda Jennings

1/10/26 @ 2:08 PM

The area of proposal will greatly affect the Chehalis tribe water rights. The Chehalis people continue to use the Chehalis river. It is a means of culture and living for fishing, harvest, eco system and wild life. As well as swimming to many. What is...↓

No attachments

Comment From: John Livingston

1/10/26 @ 1:57 PM

We do not need any more dams anywhere in this country. The existing ones are filling with sediment that will cost a fortune to remove and cause major fishery damage. Flood control must start with not building any structures in the flood plain. Neg yo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Frances Pickernell

1/10/26 @ 1:38 PM

I oppose the proposed Chehalis River dam near Pe Ell. The project would harm salmon and river habitat and threaten cultural and fisheries resources while providing limited flood-reduction benefits. I urge decision-makers to reject the dam and focus o...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anonymous Anonymous

1/10/26 @ 12:41 PM

NO DAM

No attachments

Comment From: Matthew Baker

1/10/26 @ 12:40 PM

No dam.

No attachments

Comment From: Jenee Redecker

1/10/26 @ 11:29 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Paige Palmer

1/10/26 @ 3:24 AM

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to express strong opposition to the Revised Chehalis Dam Proposal. The proposed project is costly, unnecessary, and would cause lasting harm to the Chehalis River, Tribal communities, salmon populations, and the broad...↓er ecosystem, while failing to provide reliable or equitable flood protection.

The proposed dam is estimated to cost up to $2 billion, yet there is no clear or viable plan to fund its construction. In all likelihood, this enormous financial burden would fall on Washington taxpayers. At a time when public resources are urgently needed for housing, infrastructure resilience, climate adaptation, and ecosystem restoration, committing billions of dollars to a single, controversial project with limited benefits is fiscally irresponsible.

Effective and less harmful alternatives already exist. The Local Actions Non-Dam proposal offers basin-wide flood mitigation solutions that benefit the entire Chehalis watershed, rather than protecting only certain structures some of the time, as the proposed dam would. These alternatives emphasize community resilience, floodplain restoration, and targeted local actions that address flooding without permanently damaging the river.

Across the country, we are in an era of dam removal, not new dam construction. Hundreds of dams have been removed in recent decades because of the profound damage they cause to rivers, fish populations, water quality, and communities. Constructing a new large dam on one of Washington's last free-flowing rivers runs counter to this national and regional movement toward river restoration and climate-resilient infrastructure.

The proposed dam would also cause irreparable harm to local Tribes, their cultures, and their treaty-protected rights. Tribal nations in the region have spoken in opposition to the project, citing impacts to cultural sites, fishing practices, and their deep, ongoing relationship with the river. Proceeding with a project that would disproportionately harm Tribal communities is unjust and inconsistent with the state's commitments to Tribal sovereignty and consultation.

Environmentally, the impacts would be severe and permanent. The dam would drown critical salmon and steelhead spawning habitat, degrade water quality, reduce wildlife habitat, and increase water temperatures—conditions that further stress already vulnerable fish populations. These impacts would undermine decades of investment in salmon recovery efforts throughout the watershed.

The Chehalis River is the largest watershed entirely within the state of Washington and one of the few remaining free-flowing, undammed rivers on the West Coast. It is one of the top salmon-producing rivers in the state, with the majority of its salmon runs consisting of wild fish rather than hatchery-origin fish. Although Chehalis River salmon are not currently listed as endangered, they have declined dramatically from historic levels, and additional stressors could push these populations toward irreversible collapse.

Importantly, Chehalis River salmon are part of the Washington Coast stock, which is designated as a priority Chinook stock for the endangered Southern Resident killer whales. NOAA data show that Southern Resident orcas continue to target Chinook salmon as their preferred prey year-round, and that outer coast Chinook are an especially important food source during the winter months. Tagging data further indicate that Southern Resident orcas are likely foraging off Grays Harbor near the mouth of the Chehalis River. Any action that reduces Chinook abundance in this watershed directly undermines efforts to recover this critically endangered orca population.

For these reasons, I urge you to reject the Revised Chehalis Dam Proposal and instead invest in proven, non-dam alternatives that protect communities, respect Tribal rights, preserve a rare free-flowing river, and support salmon and orca recovery. Washington can and should pursue flood protection solutions that work with the river, not against it.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important issue.

Sincerely,
Paige Palmer

No attachments

Comment From: Shania Simmons

1/09/26 @ 11:28 PM

NO DAM

No attachments

Comment From: Randi Anonymous

1/09/26 @ 9:36 PM

As a life long resident of Washington State, I have witnessed the stance our State has taken in expressing respect for the tribes of this region. We hear land acknowledgments from all business, organizations and groups. Our community has a deep respe...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Tina Ebeling

1/09/26 @ 9:20 PM

Use common sense. Who does this benefit?! Any sane person's answer would be absolutely not! No, to this dam. The animals, the environment, the next seven generations would be negatively affected with the dam.

No attachments

Comment From: Tina Ebeling

1/09/26 @ 9:06 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Amy Gulick

1/09/26 @ 4:21 PM

I am writing to oppose this dam project for the following reasons:
1) A dam won't stop major flooding long- term, but it will destroy irreplaceable habitat. The DEIS clearly lays out the reality that this dam will have
catastrophic impacts.
2) The C...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nora Polk

1/09/26 @ 2:56 PM

Stop the Chehalis Dam proposal now.

No attachments

Comment From: Elizabeth Abbott

1/09/26 @ 1:02 PM

We built dams because we could and not because we should. Building this dam would disrupt the ecosystem for many years. While it would prevent flooding, the riparian area and floodplain are a less invasive option to prevent flooding. The second optio...↓

No attachments

Comment From: BONNIE GRETZ

1/09/26 @ 12:22 PM

There are many options that are viable to deal with the periodic flooding in this area. Building another dam, when all indices show that taking dams down is a much better way to work WITH natural processes, is NOT the right way to go.

No attachments

Comment From: Jonathan Wilson

1/09/26 @ 10:38 AM

Don't do it

No attachments

Comment From: Hayden Williams

1/09/26 @ 10:21 AM

I grew up in the Grays Harbor watershed, and have been deeply attached to the ecosystems that are affected by the Chehalis River and its tributaries for my entire life. I am against the proposed dam on the upper Chehalis River. I feel it could be the...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Aidan Vlasaty

1/09/26 @ 8:37 AM

By putting a dam on the Upper Chehalis river watershed, it will be blocking miles of important spawning habitat for Anadromous Salmonids that call the river home. Please do not allow construction of a dam on this river.

No attachments

Comment From: Neil Stallings

1/09/26 @ 8:26 AM

Please do not build a flood retention facility on the Chehalis. This is not the long term answer and will have many adverse effects on wildlife and the natural environment they rely upon.

No attachments

Comment From: Violet Snell

1/08/26 @ 10:27 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Deidra Hawkes

1/08/26 @ 7:41 PM

I am not in favor of the proposed Chehalis River Dam near Pe Ell. The proposed project would cause harm to our salmon and river habitat. It would also threaten cultural and fisheries resources and can hinder flood-reduction benefits. I urge decision-...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Nick Reynolds

1/08/26 @ 7:13 PM

It is difficult to imagine why we are considering putting a dam on the Chehalis River. This is only going to benefit properties that have already demonstrated a willingness and ability to deal with the flooding of the river. In addition, if they are ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Thomas Trott

1/08/26 @ 6:34 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Donald Watt

1/08/26 @ 5:35 PM

As a retired Hydrogeologist with the Washington Department of Ecology, and as a resident of the Boistfort Valley during the catastrophic 2007 flood, I have deep concerns about the value and safety of the proposed dam on the upper Chehalis River, near...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Keith Palmer

1/08/26 @ 2:12 PM

This is the worst idea for "water control" so far. This makes no sense and will only create un repairable damage to the forests and the soil as well as the fish. In a year of amazing dam removals like the Klamath (4) in Pennsylvania (27) Virginia rem...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Juliana Harris

1/08/26 @ 1:29 PM

I am writing to oppose the building of this dam. This proposed mega-dam could cost close to $2 billion—with no good plan to pay for it. It would harm salmon and steelhead runs, hurt our fishing and hunting economies, and siphon funding from bigger-pi...↓

No attachments

Comment From: L Millane

1/08/26 @ 1:23 PM

No attachments

Comment From: Kim Kosa

1/08/26 @ 1:21 PM

I highly encourage the Chehalis Basin Board to reject the dam proposal for the Chehalis River. This project simply does not pencil out in any respect. WA state can't even fund a full school year let along cover the cost of a $2 billion dam. On the ot...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Lilith Gist

1/08/26 @ 10:32 AM

NO - DO NOT PUT IN THIS DAM!!!

THIS IS INSANE AND TAKING US BACK A CENTURY. TRUMP IS A PEDOPHILE AND HIS REGIME WILL FALL. IF YOU START TO BUILD THIS #WeThePeople WILL TEAR IT DOWN.

YOU ARE MAD, INSANE AND EVIL TO EVEN TRY TO PUT UP A DAM ON THIS R...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Gwen DeHaven

1/08/26 @ 9:00 AM

To Whom It May Concern:

I strongly oppose the revised Chehalis Dam proposal. This project represents an outdated approach to flood management in an era defined by dam removal—not new construction. Across the country, communities are tearing down dam...↓s because of the devastating impacts they have on rivers, fish, and wildlife. Building a new dam on one of Washington's last free-flowing rivers is a step backward.

The Chehalis River is the largest watershed entirely within Washington and one of the few remaining undammed rivers on the West Coast. It is a lifeline for salmon and steelhead, producing some of the highest numbers of wild fish in the state. These salmon are not yet listed as endangered, but their populations have plummeted from historic levels. They are part of the Washington Coast Chinook stock—a priority prey source for Southern Resident killer whales. NOAA research shows Southern Residents rely on Chinook year-round and forage off Grays Harbor at the mouth of the Chehalis. Every salmon lost to this dam is a blow to orcas already on the brink of extinction.

The proposed dam would drown critical salmon and steelhead spawning habitat, degrade water quality, destroy wildlife habitat, and raise water temperatures—conditions lethal to fish. It would cause irreparable harm to local Tribes, their culture, and their treaty rights. Tribal voices have spoken clearly in opposition, and their concerns must be honored.

This project comes with a staggering price tag of up to $2 billion, with no clear plan to pay for it—costs that would likely fall on Washington taxpayers. Meanwhile, proven alternatives exist. The Local Actions Non-Dam proposal offers basin-wide benefits without sacrificing the river, its fish, or its communities. These solutions reflect modern science and respect for ecosystems, unlike the outdated dam approach.

The Chehalis River is a rare treasure—a free-flowing river that sustains salmon, wildlife, and people. To sacrifice it for a project that only protects some structures some of the time is shortsighted and destructive. We should be restoring rivers, not drowning them.

I urge you to reject the Chehalis Dam proposal and invest in non-dam solutions that protect communities while preserving salmon, wildlife, and the cultural heritage of Tribes. Extinction is forever. Please choose restoration over destruction.

Thank you for considering these urgent concerns.

No attachments

Comment From: STANLEY LANGLAND

1/08/26 @ 8:54 AM

My name is Stanley Langland and I am a volunteer on the floid control zone advisory board. I would like to respectively enter comments in support of the retention structure project.

First I'd like to say how disappointed I am with the sierra club....↓

No attachments

Comment From: Janice Wilfing

1/08/26 @ 1:44 AM

The proposed dam would permanently damage one of Washington's last free rivers putting salmon and wildlife at risk and destroying irreplaceable habitat. Address flooding risks by investing in better, scienced-backed non-dam flood solutions, such as r...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Theresa Bucher

1/07/26 @ 11:24 PM

A dam won't stop major flooding long- term, but it will destroy irreplaceable habitat. The DEIS clearly lays out the reality that this dam will have catastrophic impacts. • The Chehalis supports salmon, elk, birds, steelhead, lamprey, beavers,
otters...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Jason Seipp

1/07/26 @ 9:39 PM

DON'T BUILD THIS DAM, DAMN IT!!!

No attachments

Comment From: Harley maxbauer

1/07/26 @ 8:12 PM

Please prioritize the salmon

No attachments

Comment From: Janet Moser

1/07/26 @ 6:32 PM

Please do not move forward with this dam. It would significantly damage one of the last free rivers in Washington. While it won't prevent flooding on a long term basis, it will destroy habitat that cannot be replaced. Salmon and other indigenous wil...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Alex Bradberry

1/07/26 @ 5:29 PM

This is a poorly revised draft of the environmental impact statement that does not solve continuous flooding issues in the area. Instead, this dam will exacerbate existing habitat issues for resident species within the basin. That $2 billion dollars ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: William Atlas

1/07/26 @ 5:22 PM

Hello, I am writing you to voice my strong opposition to the construction of a flood control dam on the Chehalis River. This project would be an ecological and economic disaster for the state of Washington, and would set back efforts to undo the harm...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Robert Ostrow

1/07/26 @ 4:31 PM

I think the project ought to have a way for salmon to travel through or bypass by any dams or other structures in the river. Thank you.

No attachments

Comment From: Grace Thornton

1/07/26 @ 4:24 PM

As a home owner in Centralia, I find the plan to have both promises of providing flood control while maintaining some natural flowing water during non flooding events is too unrealistic. But after hearing more about the project and some of the commen...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Andrew Halverson

1/07/26 @ 4:01 PM

I am strongly opposed to any dam being built on this river, the ecological impacts a dam would have far more damaging effects than any flood mitigation it might help. I also frequently recreate on the very stretch of water the dam would be built on. ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: John Wert

1/07/26 @ 3:49 PM

I wish to offer information against the proposed Chehalis Dam at Pe Ell. The dam is located almost at the top of the east flowing branch of the Chehalis River and would be ineffective for any type of flood control. It appears that Pe Ell was chosen p...↓rimarily because there is a lot of unoccupied flat land suitable for a dam located behind the dam site, which in and of itself is insufficient to build a dam there. What data do you have that supports flood type water flow at the proposed dam site?
Construction of a dam would certainly inundate the surrounding land leading to loss of life, habitat, and food sources for local wildlife: birds (ducks, raptors, tundra swans, trumpeter swans, sora, american bittern), raptors (osprey, gyrfalcon), turkey vultures, virginia rail, fish (chinook, coho, chum salmon, green sturgeon, white sturgeon) and trout (winter steelhead, bull trout, cutthroat trout, rainbow trout) as well as a variety of game species. The river is also a crucial food source for Southern Resident Killer Whales (SRKW), as well as the Quinault Indian Nation, and others. It could also submerge or damage sites of historical and cultural significance to indigenous peoples, leading to the loss of irreplaceable cultural heritage.
In a 2/15/21 op-ed published in the Chronicle (Centralia), using cherry picked data from state paid surveys and a draft federal environmental study, the potential impacts on salmon and steelhead from the proposed dam on the Upper Chehalis River were minimized. While it is true that Chinook have returned to the upper river in very low numbers in recent years, the same fish surveys found that significant numbers of adult fall Chinook, coho and steelhead returned to the dam's impact area where "spawning occurred almost continuously from September through June." The Governor's State of the Salmon report (2024) underscores that habitat protection and restoration represent our best chance to reverse the decline of salmon.
he Upper Chehalis River where the dam would be built is relatively undeveloped and offers one of the better habitat restoration opportunities in the entire state. Especially for spring Chinook. The upper river historically was one of three strongholds in the Chehalis Basin for springers. Salmon strongholds are not just places where fish are found in large numbers: they are also keepers of the genetic and spatial diversity that make salmon so resilient and able to adapt to changes in their environment. Creating the conditions salmon need to rebuild that diversity is just as important to recovery as boosting their numbers.
The state of Washington's Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) found that the dam poses "significant impacts from both construction and operation." The Quinault Indian Nation found, based on independent scientific analysis, that both the state and federal government studies dramatically underestimate the dam's impacts. Despite dam backers' assertions, the proposed Chehalis dam and temporary reservoir would have most of the same catastrophic effects on fish as a typical dam.
The original analysis under the 2020 draft EIS stated that the dam would have significant adverse effects, such as: reducing fall-run salmon and trout (SRKW prey), reducing native aquatic species and wildlife, degrading habitat, degrading water quality, and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Other solutions do exist.

No attachments

Comment From: John Schmittauer

1/07/26 @ 2:24 PM

Please protect this area.

No attachments

Comment From: Kelley Platt

1/07/26 @ 2:23 PM

Putting a dam on the Chehalis River is not a good solution to flooding issues. In fact it would flood one area at the expense of other areas. It is also destructive to salmon and steelhead runs. Dams don't solve problems they cause them - this ha...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Valerie Weiss

1/07/26 @ 2:18 PM

Building a dam is the wrong answer environmentally for the ecosystem. Wildlife, fish, especially salmon would be adversely affected. Restoring flood plains can make a huge difference and requires far less funding. Let's care for what is left of na...↓

No attachments

Comment From: John Wert

1/07/26 @ 2:14 PM

The choice of Pe Ell as the dam site doesn't make much sense. There won't be enough flood control to be effective, since the dam would not be far enough downstream to have very little, if any effect. Moving down the Chehalis River towards Claquato wo...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Allison Everitt

1/07/26 @ 1:53 PM

A dam won't stop major flooding long- term, but it will destroy irreplaceable habitat. The DEIS clearly lays out the reality that this dam will have
catastrophic impacts.
The Chehalis supports salmon, elk, birds, steelhead, lamprey, beavers,
otters,...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Adelaide Steely

1/07/26 @ 12:03 PM

Salmon are sold all over the USA and we need the river to be clear to produce salmon.

No attachments

Comment From: Oakley Brooks

1/07/26 @ 12:02 PM

This dam should not be built, and the State of Washington should concentrate on non-dam solutions to flooding and habitat restoration.
Here's why this proposal doesn't hold water:
-- Too costly. $2B for something that won't comprehensively solve floo...↓

No attachments

Comment From: char laughon

1/07/26 @ 11:32 AM

Army Corp of Engineers sucks. Please pay attention to the massive problems California has because of the damns that were built that cause MAJOR environmental problems.

Major destruction is cause for many communities when environmental protections a...↓

No attachments

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]