Chehalis River

I saw this on another site.
I know this has been discussed here in the past so I thought others might have interest in this.
SF

https://vimeo.com/377676805

Well thank you for raising my blood pressure. Gee golly whiz, we've fvcked up our watershed with logging, agriculture, and urban development in the natural floodway, so state and federal taxpayers should come bail us out and put up the money for this dam so we can finish the job of screwing up this watershed. That's basically what they're saying, just not as directly as I said it.

I watched a recent video about the dam and it was designed to handle a 10 year flood. Gonna spend a lot of money to accomplish next to nothing because the problems are floods greater than the 10-year. Plus, as climate changes and develop more, the 10 will become the 5; if it hasn't already, and they will still have plenty of damage.

If you really want to protect things, build it at least for the (current) 100 year flood.

WE DON'T NEED A FUKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKING DAM ON THE CHEHALIS!

P-E-R-I-O-D ! ! ! !

The 07 flood was more or less a flash flood that a dam would not have stopped. You know this is all about I-5 and frankly if a few days shut down every decade or so is that important just raise the bloody freeway.

The cheapest (non)solution will prevail. Dams aren't cheap, but they cost less than raising I-5 or relocating the farms and businesses in the flood plain. More cheap, riverfront real estate in Centralia/Chehalis; salmon be dammed.

One has to wonder if the long-range management paradigm for salmon of fishing populations down rather than meeting ecological needs, substituting wild fish/wild ecosystems for hatchery fish/controlled ecosystems is really not part of a long-range plan to allow as much development as possible (multiple use).

We don't need reasonably protected ecosystems because we can mitigate with fish hatcheries. We don't need to stay away from floodplains; we can build levees and dredge. We can always "fix" things instead of leaving them alone.

The dam will, unfortunately, be built because economic need always wins. Which gets back to ecosystem management. IF we had managed the Chehalis for ecosystem needs (and Rivrguy has those numbers) there would be some pretty big annual terminal fisheries that would depend on keeping the watershed working. But, since we would rather support remote economies with those fish the locals, who bear the burden on land-use, will opt for what rewards them. And is they never see a fish in "their" creek, why protect the creek?

It's all about money.

Once again friends and neighbors, I gotta' suggest calling or emailing your legislators and let 'em know, "Hell no, I won't pay!" Tell 'em not one more cent pissed away on this Chehalis dam project. It won't build itself, and the locals who want it can only have it if they can snooker the Legislature and Congress into fleecing taxpayers for it!

Here's why we don't need a Chehalis River dam:

1. I-5 being closed for 4 or 5 days every 10 years isn't as big a deal economically as we're being told. There are always detour routes available, so our fresh lettuce from CA will still arrive on time at Safeway.

2. Flood victims get a check from FEMA. I don't think they should because that just encourages people to live in the flood plain. But that's the way it is; so be it.

3. The dam would be an environmental and fisheries disaster. Is this really what we want to be known for in the 21st century?

4. It's a waste of tax dollars. The Corps of Engineers has studied a Chehalis dam 4 or 5 different times and always concludes that the benefits are not worth the cost. That is why this current boondoggle effort is not being sponsored by the Corps, who loves to build dams.

You remember that conversation back then do ya! The people that shoulder the vast majority of cost to preserve salmon stocks get the least access. Then the fact that they actually expect to see fish in the streams for the sacrifice. When you add the value of stream setbacks for RMZ's , sewage, use restrictions the number is really large, in the billions in the Chehalis Basin alone.

The next bit is a true story about one of the best volunteers I ever had on my team. A retired Boeing guy he worked his butt off fencing a upper basin stream. Then he worked on getting his neighbors to do the same and was successful until that fateful evening when he went to a meeting where harvest was discussed. Next came the phone call with a simple direct question. If they succeeded with their stream and say got it to produce 1000 more fish what would the co managers do? The honest answer was and is harvest them. In a simplified theoretical scenario we have an escapement goal in the Chehalis Basin anything above that the co managers will try to harvest. ( a bit less now with the GHMP ) So in a theoretical look those 1000 fish die in harvest if you harvest to MSY, which despite denials by the agency is what the escapement goal is.

Second part of the question was suppose a real community effort took place and natural production of smolt was increased by 50% what would happen when the adults return? The answer is simple I told him, they will harvest them to the same level as they always have. Some will get back to be sure I told him but the stream would not get full benefit in the sense of more fish in the stream spawning. The benefit of habitat restoration and enhancement resulting in enhanced smolt production does not mean the benefit is to the stream in the sense of adults returning but rather more for harvest. His response, " I quit "

Another example. WDFW and the co-Managers were looking to restore coho in the Yakima. Nice idea. But, the juvenile coho will reduce, through competition, the resident trout that support a rather extensive fishery including guides, lodges, etc. So, the residents of the watershed were essentially asked to preserve habitat for coho and give up the resident fishery to some degree. WDFW bio response? They can go fish coho in Buoy 10.

Time tells all BUT Chehalis and QIN tribes might just hold the "winning hand".

Let's hope so. Otherwise, this is just like the Pebble Mine project in Bristol Bay. Almost nobody wants it, but those who do have deep pockets and will spend as much as it takes to make an irresponsible project allowable.

The current administration is doing everything it can to remove environmental protections, and without question, that gives these interests a lot more leverage. Remember that when you cast your ballot in November.

Expecting politicians to do anything BUT look out for themselves is an irresponsible pipe dream.

They would bend over their own mother.

Very similar story on Cedar Creek on the North Fork Lewis River about 10-15 years ago.

Gary Loomis (yes, that GLoomis) was very active in setting up Fish First! which was an advocacy group that focused on restoring salmon habitat and jump starting salmon re-introduction (but no politics). And since the Lewis River is his backyard (literally), he choose Cedar Creek which is a tributary across from WDFW’s Lewis River hatchery, to restore native coho salmon.

His group worked tirelessly with landowners and stream-restoration groups to remove culverts, install large woody debris, re-plant trees, and build fish screens on diversions. They re-introduced coho. The stock took off very quickly. It wasn’t long before escapements were very impressive.

But the harvest managers at WDFW decided that Cedar Creek was “over-escaping” so they increased the commercial harvest on coho. The commercial guys took every adult they could, including the Cedar Creek wild coho. The excuse from WDFW was that the excess coho were actually destined for the Lewis River hatchery so they didn’t want too many hatchery adults on the spawning grounds.

That might be true, but since wild and hatchery adults migrate upstream at the same time, both got hammered by the nets. The wild coho from Cedar Creek quickly vanished. Gary was livid. And he still is. He quit Fish First! and began the effort to bring the Coastal Conservation Association (CCA) to the PNW. That was about 10 years ago. And, as we know, CCA is all about politics, not habitat restoration.

The native coho in Cedar Creek have not recovered to this day.

The lesson is that stream restoration cannot even begin unless harvest is restricted enough so that those folks who make the sacrifices are assured their efforts will be rewarded. But who is going to make those assurances? Certainly not WDFW, given that their mission is, in part, to support commercial fishing.

The problem with the Cedar Creek scenario is that WDF/WDFW had to approve the work. So they let them spend the money, get the results, and then destroy the fish. Rather cynical. But on the plus side, it kept those guys busy and out of WDFW's hair for a few years, and on somebody else's dime.

BTW, I posted the video link as others may not have seen it and the dam idea had been discussed here before.
I'm not in favor of a dam, which I think is a idiotic idea.
SF

The end result was somewhat predictable since hatchery coho and wild coho migrate at about the same time. So any fishery would be a mixed stock fishery, with predictably disastrous results for the wild fish. It might have been okay for a recreational fishery since we have to release unclipped fish, but not so for the commercial fishery. This was known before Gary started his restoration program.

I don't blame Gary for being extraordinarily upset and frustrated, but lots of folks could have predicted what would happen if he was successful.

And they would have been correct......

Cohoangler - Can you help me understand your statement about CCA? I've been a member for several years, and admit I sometimes have mixed feelings about the organization. But I'm unaware of any other organization that is attempting to coalesce individual sports fishers to speak to our legislators with one voice on local fisheries issues. I find value in that and feel some personal satisfaction when I participate in those efforts. What am I missing?

LE- You didn’t miss anything.

Gary helped to start Fish First! as an organization that helped salmon restoration by improving habitat and supplementing stocking with net pens.

https://www.fishfirst.org/

They use on-the-ground methods such as stream bank stabilization, installation of large woody debris, and local volunteers to help restore important fish habitat. The group was successful in several tribs in SW Washington, including Cedar Creek.

However, when the results of his efforts on Cedar Creek (coho salmon) were scooped up by the commercial fishermen, as the behest of WDFW, Gary realized there was another battle to be waged. So about 10 years ago, he jumped on-board with the idea of bringing CCA into the PNW to help change fish politics, especially in Washington State. And that is what CCA does, as you have correctly indicated. So he went all-in on CCA-Washington.

He didn’t abandon FF, but he realized there is more to fish restoration than just fixing habitat. It includes harvest reforms too, and that often involves politics.

I misspoke when I said that Gary quit FF. He’s still active. My mistake. Apologies to Gary.

http://www.chronline.com/news/chehalis-b...e0b17d196c.html

Unfortunately, flood mitigation comes at the direct expense of fish habitat. The 50:50 appropriation would simply cancel itself out and the state will have foolishly wasted $700 million over the course about three chinook life cycles. Forrest's mama said it best... stupid is as stupid does.

The most troubling part of the article?

“I think we could support this bill if we get some language in it, that I don’t need the word guarantee, but that dictates that we split the $700 million as equally as we can with flooding and habitat restoration,” said Harry Pickernell, board member and chairman of the Chehalis Tribe. “That’s the only concern the Chehalis might have.”

Tyson Johnston, representing the Quinault Indian Nation, agreed.

Where is this $700 million coming from? It doesn't grow on fuvking trees! General obligation state bonds get paid back from the state GF. Here is Rep. De Bolt's effort to fleece taxpayers all over the state for the Chehalis. I've said repeatedly there is no way local citizen taxpayers can afford or would ever agree to pay for the Chehalis flood debacle. So they're just going to dip into every taxpayer's pocket a little bit.

And nice as habitat improvement projects might be, the proven most cost effective habitat measure is to not destroy it in the first place. Priority number one in the Chehalis basin should be to stop degrading and destroying fish habitat with flood control projects. It really is that simple, unless you're a flood subsidy seeking land owner/developer.

The other thing to consider is that these projects are "welfare" for folks. I can see the Tribes being happy that $350 might be coming to them for projects. It just might not come without the dam, so.......

What the dam WON’T do:
• Prevent flood damage for residents throughout the basin
• Generate hydro power for Lewis County residents
• Supply irrigation water to Chehalis basin farmers
• Create new recreational fishing and boating opportunities

What the dam WILL do:
• Require significant logging and costly ongoing debris removal
• Drown six miles of critical salmon and steelhead habitat
• Worsen the Chehalis River’s existing water quality issues
• Increase the risk of future flood damage, if it triggers more floodplain development

Well, $hit, what are we waiting for? This looks like a slam dunk!

One would think this BS project might be set back a bit by the fact the State and the Feds are going to be severely underfunded when this virus thing is done with us, probably for many years to come. Governments are hemorrhaging unemployment and meanwhile bringing in much less revenue. Our state budget relies heavily on consumer taxes that get cut off severely when people aren't buying a lot of gas, for example. Not a lot of good will come from our present circumstances, but maybe, just maybe, we can quit talking about spending much needed infrastructure dollars on a dam with so little social value for a while.

How did we try to get out of the Depression? Federally funded projects like Grand Coulee and the CCC. That dam would be on on the list of putting people back to work. The social value would people working.

But there are zero federal dollars available for the Chehalis River dam. And the state can't print its own money. If this dam goes forward, it proves that the state Legislature and Governor are no match for flim-flam artists, con artists, and grifters. Or that they can be bought at aggregate discount pricing.

Makes no sense to build a dam & screw up fish habitat because people are out of work. Lazy to put it nicely. If they really wanted to secure a job how about restoring the rivers that have habitat issues. It would take a long time to figure out what needs to be done as well as accomplishing it. Handouts are temporary, costly, & are just an excuse to be repeated again because they don’t work the first time.

Having no dog in the fight this. If you look at the map developed as to spawning areas it is not a large number impacted. One never knows about unforeseen consequences which are always around. After that this whole thing started due to desire to keep I-5 from being closed again. The flood that hit them last time was more or less a flash flood and a dam will not effect that at all. Lots of rain / short time frame you got trouble.

Take the Satsop 4 in two days in a row you have a big flood but normal. Now if the 4 in come down back to back such as 8 pm to midnight and then midnight to 4 or 5 am you get a bloody 100 year flood. If the river is already at or near flood stage when this happens you get a 10,000 year flood. At to the mix in the 1930's ES ( he lived in the valley ) said that when that flood happened he had 18 in of snow on the ground and everyone was snowbound when the rain hit blowing like hell. He went to bed and when he got up to stoke the fire at daylight none, all gone. That day the water got in his barn which he had never seen before and has not happened since.

That’s good information now if people could comprehend what happens in a situation like that they could use the money for a dam to relocate people to an area which wouldn’t be affected.

I will add this. The Wynoochee Dam was for flood control and has worked. For the Chehalis in tide water it is Olympic and Upper Basin both at flood stage with wind holding the bay. The dam times it discharges in emergency situations to reduce the Wynoochee flows at high tide in flood events, mostly. Had some difficulties few years back when TP managed to flows but it is my understanding the Army Corp straightened that out. My house is 20 ft from the Chehalis in tidewater so I am well aware of how the river works. Big flood Satsop years back 18 in below floors, the big event upper Chehalis around 8 in below the floors. The big / flood with the windstorm that blew everything apart, 1 in. Full flood and that wind held the river at full flood at slack water ( and I mean the river went slack ) for nearly two hours.

Contrary to common beliefs Mother Nature is not a nice person and you will never be able to plan for everything, she will getcha sooner or later be it a flood, hurricane, volcano, or earthquake. Your never 100% safe.

Wholly chit!!!

I better put my mask on then.

On the topic of the 2007 flood that started this whole debate and solidified it in the community, I'm surprised by how often the real data on why the flood was so bad doesn't come up more...and how where the problems the occurred to make it so bad have absolutely zero to do with the project above Pe Ell.

https://www.seattletimes.com/news/slide-damage-in-the-stillman-creek-drainage/

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/mudslide-photo-spurs-look-at-logging-practices/

Seriously? That the Stillman slide and other logging practices can and do cause damage is a given. Just as urbanization and all human activity does, be it logging is far more visible.

After that there was nothing anywhere in that event that was the drive for the event but rain. Rain in record amounts in a small area ( in geographic terms ) in a short time span. It was simply a world class flash flood that took out everything in its way downstream. Always compare apples with apples, works better.

And it would have overwhelmed the proposed retention project as well.

JUST SAY NO!

Spend the money to elevate I-5

The liability to further development in the flood plain is entirely up to the potential developers to shoulder themselves. BEWARE, and proceed at your own peril if you are risk averse.

Incentives to help folks relocate should also be considered

Sorry... life ain't fair!

I remember being told by Salmo that this dam would NEVER happen.

I sure hope he is right.

Salmo said that it wouldn't happen as a federal flood control project because under four separate analyses by the Corps of Engineers it doesn't meet the benefit - cost requirements. Lewis Co. representatives have co-opted a few other legislators in Grays Harbor and Thurston Counties and are trying, and succeeding so far, to make this a state project. With no federal cost share (usually 75%), the entire 100% will have to come from the state budget. I hope I am right that enough of the state legislators will see the financial stupidity of the project and never agree to budget for it.

I agree......

I also agree with Doc's comments, in his post above!!!!!

You build in the flood plain, shame on you.!!!!!!!!

You would think our "green" GUV would have squashed this years ago!

"Time tells all BUT Chehalis and QIN tribes might just hold the "winning hand"."

I don't really have a dog in this fight either, but living in the Upper Columbia Region where it seems Dams were dispensed like candies from a Pez dispenser...Francis & D-rifter bring up excellent points! Every few years, one of the local tribes is in litigation with the "Owner" of a Dam (most Dams over here had multiple investors at one time anyhow) over lost opportunities, habitat degradation, undervalued property adjustments, etc. Even though the majority of the population believes that the issue was already settled ($$$) in the past. It's never settled...ever!

Dimslee will always support his constituents and their hard earned "campaign contributions" from the slot machine/tribal-trail truck stop slush-fund. He's just a politician...

Money talks and BS walks.

Hope you guys are in shape.

ON BOARD AT LONG LAST!

https://www.conservationnw.org/news-upda...chehalis-river/

Let's hope this really sets the scene for the death of this project.

And let's hope that on APRIL 21RST during the next webinar for public comment on this project that we get MORE THAN 3 FISHERMAN /GUIDES to actually comment! The turn out for the last webinar was f@cking embarrassing!

That's good news from the Quinault Tribe.

And a correct conclusion by the tribe, in my opinion.

The upper Chehalis spring chinook are the result of long-term historic annual temporal isolation resulting from naturally occurring summer low flow and thermal barriers in the mid-river reaches during the mid-summer low discharge periods. They ascend the Chehalis early each year before those low flow and high temperature conditions restrict chinook access to the headwaters until later in the year when rainfall and lower temperatures eliminate the mid-basin migration obstacles for fall chinook run timing. The early spring chinook were historically abundant- and still occur- above Pe Ell in the canyons below Fisk Falls and and in other upper chehalis headwater streams including Stillman Creek, S Fk Chehalis, and Newaukum drainages. Currently, the importance of those upper watersheds and the mid-summer chinook migration separation has been under-appreciated in the dam discussions. The dam has a high potential to disrupt this natural separation of chinook timing. This I know from my 40 years as a professional fish biologist very familiar with the Chehalis watershed.

Good decision by the Quinaults.

Give the man a cigar! MR that is the best description of Chehalis Springers I have seen. In the natural state we had Springers outlined by MR, Summers mostly on the Satsop and some other locations, fall which where dispersed all over and Dec returning to the East Satop, Delezen, and Cloquallum. The Chehalis being rain driven allowed the Chinook to develop to varying conditions in the basin. Just as the late Coho primarily came from the East Fork Satsop and Bingham and other tribs this was driven by the dry bed creeks not watering up until the aquafire was fully charged in late Nov and Dec. It is the environmental conditions that created the huge genetic diversity in the Chehalis Basin salmon.

Talking about history is great.

No different than looking in the rearview mirror to see where your driving. Our managers only see tail lights getting further and further away.

Our fish are screwed.

If you don't know where you came from you will not know where you are and will be totally clueless as to where you are going.

Now to get the Chehalis tribe to write a letter.....they need to be more active on the anti dam movement....The dam will have a negative affect on the Chehalis tribe...imo

Plant fish or talk.

Reading the history, it makes me wonder about previous posts
that stated the Department did not think the Skookumchuck dam would
effect springers. I still think that would be a prefect place to plant springers.

If they really want a dam for flood purposes, I don't know why they could not do a diversion or or over flow type dam, where the after a certain flow the water is diverted into a channel to a holding area and then slowly let out when flows are down.

That holding area you speak of is call a "Flood Plain". Just where would you propose putting all that water, where would the "holding area" be that would keep that many square miles dry?

Actually that was old WDF and mitigation for Springers was not required because Region 6 staff stated the dam was to have a tri level discharge creating ideal conditions for Springers and a " vibrant " fishery. Several other measures also and one was a separation wier that was not done or given up on, I do not remember which. They even moved Skook salmon mitigation construction and rearing funds and all to the East Satsop at Simpson Hatchery. ( now Bingham ) That was stopped years back by citizen activist mostly from the upper basin. Kinda sounds like the Wynoochee Mit thing the agency is pushing through don't you think? Some things never change.

Old game got a conditioning pond for steelhead near the dam but most of the funds went to another facility. Locals said paving and landscape at Chambers Cr but one of those things that never had much conversation that I was around taking place.

One last thing. When the Dam went in HS thought a Springer hatchery program linked to mitigation would work. Years later shooting the breeze over some Chehalis things he said he was OK with not having the program but still called BS on Region 6 thoughts. In the end it was simply that the natural population was to small and fragile to support the harvest that would come with hatchery production and damage the natural production in other Chehalis tributaries. You see he had seen it before with Hood Canal Chum and it was a lesson learned.

Thanks to ALL who testified LIVE at the webinar public hearing this evening OVERWHELMINGLY in OPPOSITION to the Chehalis dam project.

https://youtu.be/W0PC5Xa_CSc

Stonefish, Thanks for posting the link to this film. Just watched the first seven minutes and decided I wanted to watch the rest on the big screen. It appears to be an excellent production.

It's an excellent video.

We should be embarrassed that this dam project ever got past the "Hey, you know what we should do..........." phase.

Thanks for the link, stoney!

Yes but were any Bigfoot spotted??

Pretty good show there.
Many local folks that I recognize and some I know.

Building a dam is ridiculous.

This dam can only be built with OPM - Other People's Money. Keep an eye out for the con.

Very informative. Thanks for the post!

So you're telling me there's a chance it won't get built???

FYI

https://www.kuow.org/stories/inslee-puts...non-dam-options

SF

Well, that's some good news, albeit temporary. Looks like tribal influence was Inslee's major push.

Good. But will Never vote the bum.

http://www.chronline.com/news/federal-ag...IdkFVXliDhEMl4E

The Corps has never met a government boondoggle that it doesn't like.

J-ust
F-or
C-larification....

YGTBFKM, right?

01/09/2021

Time for the QIN and Chehalis Tribes "to get the war drums going". There seems to be a "dam under current"..... just when it seems to be a "NO DAM", the project gains new legs......... grrrrrrrrrr

Not a fan of dams and the mitigation, the Wynoochee is great example, but if one wants to argue against something it is best to put emotion aside and use facts. Below is a C&P of info and one can see it is I 5 not the businesses or locals driving this but it is for them a don't look a gift horse in the mouth time. Also the effects on fisheries are outlined. Now one should not buy that as gospel because all things have unintended consequences. Take the Wynoochee it ended up being the mitigation for areas above the dam were not the greatest loss but rather down stream. As a flood control dam it has been of great value but by controlling the high water it reduced the natural habitat building processes. Then WDFW has failed to implement the full mitigation required for 25 years. Always be a little concerned about mitigation with WDFW's dubious record in the Chehalis Basin.

Why & How:
The proposed facility is unique in design and proposed operation. It would only function as a dam for a few weeks every seven to 10 years when huge winter tropical storms will create major flood events. During regular operation, fish will be able to pass unimpeded both up and downstream through the open base of the structure. The Corps found that the proposed facility, when combined with raising of the Chehalis-Centralia Airport levee, would protect Interstate 5 in floods as large as the forecasted 100-year flood event. Interstate 5 has been closed through the Twin Cities in flood events of 1990, 1996 and 2007, when the freeway was overtopped for five days.

"Both of these problems are getting worse. Since 1986, the floods have gotten larger, and the fishery has been in decline for decades" said Dr. John Henricksen, of Chehalis, who chairs the citizens group One Voice. "After 90 years of pointless government studies followed by no action on both of these problems, the Chehalis Basin process is making real progress with more than 100 local fish and flood projects completed on time and on budget. This proposed facility above Pe Ell is critical to protecting more than 1,300 homes, schools and small businesses, but it is only one piece of a basinwide flood protection and fish restoration strategy."

And The Fish:
The Army Corps EIS also evaluated the potential impacts of the proposed flood structure on aquatic species. The Corps’ basinwide look showed that the proportional impact on Coho and fall Chinook salmon and steelhead would be 0 percent, with a 2 percent potential loss of spring Chinook if no mitigation measures were taken.

"The environmental impacts outlined in this federal EIS and the earlier state EIS will have to be avoided, minimized or mitigated, if we proceed to seek a permit," said Lewis County Manager Erik Martin, director of the Flood Zone District, which is the project applicant. "Washington state Department of Fish and Wildlife conducted an extensive search for upper Chehalis river salmon and steelhead between 2013-19. Their published findings show that in 2019, there were three Chinook salmon spawning fish found in the main stem above the city of Chehalis. Only one of those three spawned above the site of our proposed facility. We will need to mitigate or avoid impacts to the fishery. We think we can and then make that a condition of our federal and state permits."

So if your going to provide input " you dirty rat " approach will fail. There are ample examples of unintended consequences and mitigation failures ( in the Chehalis Basin ) by WDFW and others to allow for a rational pointed argument opposing.

In order for the dam to function as you describe, the whole reservoir area will have to be skinned of trees, to optimize storage. You can probably keep it in low brush or, more likely, just grass. That will really warm the river up in summer.

If WDFW recorded one fish spawning above the dam site what was it doing? Playing with itself??

good god if that was the case that it only takes one fish reproduce they can cut the escapement goal by half! Also that would be one nimble fish!

Not my description but a C&P of the article linked.

Don't tell WDFW or they will cut them in half. Gotta keep the fisheries going.

Curious what the Quinaults have to say about this.

The Tribes have opposed this all along. The fact things appear to be moving forward again suggests they may have "struck a deal," but of course I don't know. Without question, though, they're the only ones who COULD stop this.

It's starting to look like this is going to happen. As long as we have to deal with a dam, I suppose one that doesn't operate as such except under extreme conditions seems ideal, but I share Carcassman's concern about leaving a large part of the upper basin completely exposed to the summer sun. The river already gets dangerously warm at times....

Good points FF but not sure about large part though. Chehalis is the second largest in the state and in mileage terms overall the area is not that substantial. The warm water bit comes into play in the mainstem in the twin city reach and down stream but not so much above that area in the tribs. That said any substantial rise in temperatures on a fork certainly would not help what exist in the mainstem.

From what I understand the Nation does not support the dam concept. When you consider that one of their senior fish managers still would like to remove the Wynoochee dam I think opposed is where they end up on the subject.

any time you're talking about removing trees from a watershed it's an issue

The best argument against the dam continues to be economic. In order to qualify for federal funding, the benefits must exceed the costs. So look closely at how the alleged benefits are valued. The Corps has studied Chehalis River flooding numerous times, and every single time, the costs of any effective flood control project has exceeded the benefits. The only way this dam gets built is if federal funding plays a role. Lewis County sure can't afford to pay for it. And WA state, while it possibly could, should know better. And the only way federal funding can be had is for the WA Congressional delegation to include an exemption to the B:C requirement in some other piece of legislation.

Such a big deal is made about I-5 being closed for up to 5 days once every 10 years due to flooding. It's not that big a deal! There are functional detours that may result in an inconvenience and delay of maybe an hour or two, depending on the alternative route used.

Building the Chehalis River dam would be an exercise in throwing good money after bad. Don't fall for it!