By Lee First
Although I’ve lived and worked in the Chehalis Basin for 15 years, I did not experience the 2007 and 2009 floods first hand. But I vividly remember the footage of catastrophic property damage, dead cattle, and images of people and their families devastated by the floods. I think most people in Western Washington were affected by the cascading impacts of those events, in one way or another. After a tragedy like that, it is normal to seek a solution. And after more than a decade without one, many of us are left searching for something, anything, to make sure it does not happen again.
Talk of a new dam on the Chehalis River has been around since the 1980s. Originally proposed as a way to control flooding and create a recreational destination above Pe Ell, it has taken many forms, but the general idea is the same – hold back water to reduce the flood extent around the Twin Cities, reducing flood damage and increasing opportunities for development. Unfortunately, the new dam proposal falls well short of these goals.
There has been a lot of information published about the dam – most of it true and some of it not. This article is meant to lay out the facts about the dam and its ability to reduce flood risk in our communities. Let’s begin with the first and most widely reported claim: The dam will provide substantial flood protection throughout the basin.
There are a few types of flooding that happen along the Chehalis River. Minor and moderate flooding happens every winter, when streams and rivers fill to their banks and sometimes spill over, creating shallow pools and soggy fields. This type of flooding is important in sustaining fish and wildlife in the basin.
Then there is major and catastrophic flooding, which happens about every seven years or more, when the main stem of the Chehalis River exceeds 38,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at Grand Mound. This is the type of flooding that forces evacuations, can overtop roads, damage property and in the worst circumstances, result in the loss of life. The most recent events happened in 1990, 1996, 2007 and 2009 and were well over 38,000 cfs. While these types of floods are severe, they are hardly new.
Both Chehalis and Cowlitz history speak of great floods in the basin. The Indigenous names for many places—like the modern-day Black River, which literally means “becomes a lake”—indicate the long history and understanding of these natural flood events. Early settlers were warned by their tribal neighbors to build on the hills outside of the lowland valleys, which they knew regularly filled from valley wall to valley wall. And early settlers heeded those warnings, building on high ground and also witnessing the frequent floods. In the book, “Centralia, The First Fifty Years, 1845-1900” by H. Smith, one group of settlers described “a sea of water – a mile to dry land in all directions” just south of Centralia.
The target of the proposed dam is to reduce flooding during major or catastrophic events on the main stem of the Chehalis River around Chehalis and Centralia – not the entire basin. It does relatively little to reduce flood damage from moderate or large floods in the Chehalis, and nothing to address floods of other streams and rivers such as those that occurred in the Newaukum and Skookumchuck in 2009. The storms we had in early January caused the Chehalis River to crest at just over 30,000 cfs, meaning the dam would not have reduced any of the damage or erosion that occurred.
As many of us are witnessing, heavier winter rains are becoming more frequent every year. Four major and catastrophic floods in 20 years is not normal, and recent climate projections from the University of Washington’s Climate Impacts Group confirm that flooding on the Chehalis is increasing. The State’s Environmental Impact Statement (SEPA) for the new dam projected that flooding would increase by 26 percent by 2080, but more recent estimates show that was a conservative estimate and flow increases may be as high as 50 percent.
A recent letter to the Chronicle newspaper in Centralia claims “those downstream can be at ease knowing the dam will help control flooding in the whole Chehalis watershed to Aberdeen.” That is blatantly untrue. Reductions in flood levels are targeted at the Chehalis and Centralia area and will have almost no effect downstream of Centralia much less Aberdeen. According to the SEPA’s conservative estimate, more than 56 percent of structures inundated during major and catastrophic flooding events will still be inundated even with a dam, and “areas where the [dam] reduces flooding may still be flooded in larger floods like the 2007 flood,” which are becoming more common. Even if a dam is built, significant flood damages will continue during future floods.
Other recent articles and studies have claimed that the dam will reduce the flooding so significantly that new development can occur in previously flooded areas. This is perhaps the most dangerous claim that has emerged. It is a pattern that has repeated itself for over a century across the county – usually with devastating consequences. Large infrastructure projects like levees or dams are constructed with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, flood risk is reduced just long enough for people to move in and develop the floodplain, then the infrastructure either fails or cannot keep up with a changing environment and the people that moved in pay the price. Their families are now in harm’s way, insurance rates skyrocket and homes and businesses lose value, making it almost impossible to leave.
This is a common trend and one that is entirely preventable. Unfortunately, it is being ignored by Lewis County, which still has not adopted higher floodplain management standards and new FEMA flood maps that were developed in 2010, the last significant major flood. Relying on old and inaccurate flood maps has increased the flood risk for our community, all for short-term economic gain.
We know that flooding in the Chehalis is common and increasing. At the same time, our communities are growing, and we need to create a more secure future for our families.
Despite all of the recent information stating the dam is the only viable option to obtain this future, that is simply not the case. The only way to reduce long-term flood damage is to work with communities to relocate the highest-risk homes and business out of flood-prone areas and prevent future development from making the situation worse. If this approach were adopted it would result in massive economic opportunities for our communities in a way that is sustainable with future climate predictions.
We can create a different future for ourselves – one that invests our tax dollars back in our communities to reduce local flood risk and create high-paying local jobs. We can create new business districts and development opportunities on high ground that will be safe from flooding and provide long-term economic growth for our communities.
Right now, the best thing to do is acknowledge the problem, plan for it by improving local defenses, helping those who would like to get to high ground and not make the situation worse by continuing to develop in flood-prone areas. I do not want my kids and grandkids to be dealing with this issue in the future, I want my neighbors to be safe and I want all of our communities to thrive. That won’t happen with short-sighted solutions that benefit the few at the expense of the many. We need to think more holistically about this issue, and we need long-term basin solutions that are resilient and adaptable to ensure the long-term prosperity of our communities.
Lee First lives in Cosmopolis and is the Twin Harbors Waterkeeper, representing the Waterkeeper Alliance. For more information on that go to http://twinharborswaterkeeper.org
