This illustration shows what the proposed Chehalis River dam near Pe Ell will look like under normal conditions, allowing the river to run without impediment.
The Washington state Department of Ecology on Wednesday released a draft Environmental Impact Statement on a proposal to build a flood retention dam on the Chehalis River near Pe Ell along with other flood damage reduction efforts in the Chehalis Basin.
The projects have been proposed by the Chehalis River Basin Flood Control District.
The EIS considers that climate change will lead to more frequent and worse flooding, according to a news release from Ecology, and found that the project would significantly reduce flooding to buildings and infrastructure, including Interstate 5.
“It also would have significant adverse effects, mainly along the Chehalis River in the area above the proposed dam and below it to the confluence with the South Ford of the Chehalis River,” Ecology stated in a news release.
The EIS concluded the dam project would have negative effects on salmon, other fish, fish habitat, wildlife including amphibians, water quality, the Chehalis River channel and recreation.
The proposed design for the dam would have it only retaining water during high flood events, with normal flow the rest of the time.
Environmental Impact Statements do not approve or disapprove of a project, but give detailed information about whether a project will have adverse effects on the environment, as required by the State Environmental Policy Act.
“As some folks have said, this is only one piece of the Chehalis Basin Strategy, but it’s a big piece,” said Edna Fund, chair of the Chehalis Basin Flood Control Zone District. “It’s a very important landmark for us as we go forward.”
J. Vander Stoep, a member of the state Office of the Chehalis Basin Board, also mentioned the Environmental Impact Statement’s narrow focus, noting that potential positive effects on fish from the Aquatic Species Restoration Plan — another part of the basinwide strategy — were not taken into account.
The programmatic EIS released in 2017 — a review of the entire Chehalis Basin Strategy that evaluated the construction of a dam and the Aquatic Species Restoration Plan’s effects together — found negative effects from the dam to be much smaller when taking into account the total strategy, Vander Stoep said.
The next step, he said, is for stakeholder agencies to draft specific mitigation options, or ways to lessen negative effects predicted to be caused by the dam.
Vander Stoep also noted the positive effects the project would have — chiefly, the reduction of damage caused by massive flooding in the basin.
“Every Chehalis basin community including every town, county and the Chehalis Tribe and Quinault Nation participates in the Chehalis basin process,” Vander Stoep said in a statement. “Unless a comprehensive fish and flood plan benefits every community, this process will not go forward. The water retention facility is one potential element of the plan. Two extensive state reviews show this: one, without this measure thousands more people will be hit by catastrophic flooding; and two building a dam alone harms aquatic species. Next steps will include the flood zone district producing alternatives to mitigate the negatives impacts plus continued work on the basin-wide Aquatic Species Restoration Plan and the Aberdeen-Hoquiam North Shore levee. I am optimistic that when we see all of these together every community will see a net positive.”
Other elected officials and stakeholders released comments on the EIS Thursday afternoon.
“For us to solve both declining fisheries and the threat of floods within the Chehalis River Basin, we need cooperation,” said Sen. John Braun, R-Chehalis. “This Department of Ecology Environmental Impact Statement addresses the impacts of building a water retention facility above Pe Ell and also other flood reduction projects in the Chehalis River Basin. The EIS does not include key future efforts on rebuilding the fisheries within the basin. It is important to note that both flood reduction and fish habitat advocates work together. Only through cooperation will we be able to solve these complex problems.”
Representatives of the Quinault and Chehalis tribes have long maintained their commitment to finding a balance between strictly flood-related work and habitat restoration for salmon and steelhead species.
“We are no strangers to how flooding is terrible and impacts communities and infrastructure and safety,” said Tyson Johnston, vice president of the Quinault Indian Nation.
Johnston said the Quinault Nation is still working to analyze the full EIS document and is committed to a basin-wide approach to benefit both fish habitat and flooding, but expressed some reservation about the amount of time, money and expertise would be used on the dam project, which would primarily benefit the Centralia and Chehalis areas.
“I do remain concerned about how is this going to impact the resources as far as addressing it basin wide,” he said Friday morning.
In a statement, Harry Pickernell Sr., Chehalis Tribe chairman restated the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservations’ commitment to a “healthy, sustainable watershed.”
"The abundance provided by this watershed has fed our people and shaped our lifeways since a time beyond the reach of memory. Protecting and enhancing the aquatic resources of the Chehalis Basin must be vigorously pursued to preserve the river for the benefit of all citizens and future generations,” he said
•••
The EIS considers two alternatives to the dam: the Local Actions Alternative and the No Action Alternative.
The local action plan includes small, “non-structural” attempts to reduce flooding in the basin, including buying or relocating at risk properties or structures, floodplain work, improving flood response and increasing water storage.
“The No Action Alternative represents the most likely future, including the effects of climate change, if the proposed project is not constructed,” the draft EIS reads.
It includes the effects of projects in progress or funded through 2019.
“The EIS shows that substantial flood damage risks will continue to affect people, the environment, transportation and structures,” the document reads.
However, the report notes that the dam would negatively impact genetically unique salmon and steelhead populations and would “reduce the genetic diversity within and among salmon populations of each species across the Chehalis Basin.”
The EIS also notes that spring-run Chinook spawn in three primary areas in the basin, and that the project would “significantly” affect one of those.
The report also predicts that if agencies took no major action toward flood reduction, climate change would still result in a drop in salmon and steelhead populations of 70 percent below historical populations, but noted that doing nothing would harm fish less than the proposed dam.
•••
Two public hearings have been scheduled to take public comments on the draft EIS. The first is from 5 to 8:30 p.m. March 31 at Centralia College. The second will take place from 5 to 8:30 p.m. at Montesano Jr. Sr. High School at 303 N. Church Street, Montesano.
Comments can also be made online at http://chehalisbasinstrategy.com/eis/, or mailed to Chehalis River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Project EIS, Anchor QEA, 1201 Third Ave., Suite 2600, Seattle, WA, 98101.
The EIS in full is available at fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/2006002.html.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is doing a separate environmental review of the Flood District’s proposal under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The federal draft review is planned to be released in September 2020.
