Retired U.S. Forest Service Hydrologist Dick Dyrland looks out onto the East Fork Lewis River in August 2018.
Public comments on a recently-drafted plan for improving water quality on the East Fork Lewis River showed concerns over instream flow, with the Washington State Department of Ecology planning to address the issues in the final plan document.
Ecology released a memo Oct. 27 addressing comments received following the release of its draft East Fork Lewis River Water Cleanup Plan in August. Most of the comments came from different organizations involved in the greater East Fork Lewis River Partnership, a group formed to address water quality issues on the river.
Chief among the comments was the need to address instream flow on the river. Low flows, specifically during the summer, were a concern, as they could lead to impacts on water temperature, one of the major issues identified in the draft plan.
Along with temperature impacts, the Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board (LCFRB) noted that streamflow conditions were considered a “key limiting factor” to salmon populations in the watershed, including steelhead, fall Chinook, chum and coho.
Though other issues were noted in the public comments, the impacts of low streamflow was a priority, especially for the Friends of the East Fork. The group’s comments said low flows and high temperatures, along with sedimentation in the river were the “core problem” in the river.
Streamflow restoration was not originally included in the draft plan, though Ecology’s memo stated the final plan would include a chapter dedicated to the issue. The draft plan did address potential causes of both increased water temperatures that can impact fish populations, as well as bacterial pollution in the river. The plan identified those issues stemmed from nearby septic systems, agricultural practices, deteriorated riverside habitat and stormwater impacts.
Other public comments looked at some of those previously-identified issues. The memo noted that commenters wanted riverside habitat restoration to go beyond simply planting trees to increase shade on the river, cooling water temperatures.
Multiple sets of comments stressed for stronger enforcement of septic system inspections. The LCFRB recommended that inspections be mandated in the county, with financial assistance available to property owners.
The draft plan did include a goal for 100-percent up-to-date septic system inspections as well as any potential connections of properties to sewer utilities by 2030, with failing systems’ issues addressed within six months of identification.
Comments also focused on expanding stormwater management efforts. The draft plan largely focused on La Center and impacts on Brezee Creek, though the memo noted comments also wished to see the portion of McCormick Creek in Ridgefield brought into consideration.
The draft plan did address impacts from McCormick Creek, though it mostly focused on historical agriculture impacts on water pollution.
Though the Friends of the East Fork’s comments stated that the major issue of streamflow was not addressed in the draft plan, the group spoke positively of the draft report, stating it had more data and information that past reports and included “much more comprehensive substantive content to address the challenges of today and future.”
The Friends of the East Fork’s comments were authored by retired hydrologist Richard Dyrland, who also provided his own, personal comments, addressing another issue about past and present gravel mining near the river. Dyrland wrote that pools at mining sites would lead to warm water infiltrating into the watershed, raising temperatures, and years ago some of the operations were discharging mining slurry water into the river and tributaries in excess of what they were permitted.
Dyrland noted that legal action and the attention of Ecology got the discharges stopped and treated, “but tremendous damage was done to the two streams,” he wrote.
