By Stephen Floyd | Nov. 28, 2025 | Our Town Community News
The Oregon Water Resources Commission (OWRC) is set to discuss next steps on whether or not to approve an irrigation dam on Drift Creek, outside Silverton, during its regular meeting in December.
This follows an Aug. 7th Oregon Supreme Court decision undoing the commission’s prior rejection of the dam and directing OWRC to use additional criteria when evaluating the proposal.
An executive session is scheduled for Dec. 11th for OWRC to discuss legal options and next steps. The commission can either issue a new decision or remand the matter back to the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) for additional review.
At issue is an application by East Valley Water District (EVWD), headquartered in Mount Angel, to build a 70-foot-tall dam on Drift Creek that would create a reservoir covering 384 acres.
The district was formed in 2002 to address water shortages on 36,000 acres of agricultural land owned by district members. EVWD is made of more than 50 farming families located between Silverton and Woodburn, and between the Pudding River and Cascade Mountain foothills.
Neighbors Challenge Reservoir
In 2013 the district filed a water storage application with OWRD for the dam and reservoir, and in 2014 received tentative approval. The application was then opposed by farmers whose land would be inundated by the reservoir, as well as the environmental nonprofit WaterWatch of Oregon.
The affected farmers, led by resident Joel Rue, and WaterWatch argued the reservoir would negatively impact the spawning of cutthroat trout and other fish species.
The neighboring farmers also took issue with the district’s plan to use eminent domain to take possession of the portions of their land inundated by the reservoir. While this process would involve fair monetary compensation, the farmers said they could not be compensated for the impact of losing land that had been in their families for generations.
Our Town reached out to Rue for comment. He said the position of himself and his neighbors has not changed and “our concerns are the same as they were 20 years ago.”
Rue said the matter is now between the district and OWRC and “ultimately the decision will be settled without our input.”
In June of 2018 a hearing was held before an administrative law judge to consider arguments against the dam. In February of 2019 the judge recommended the application be approved with minor modifications, and later that year the director of OWRD issued a final order approving the dam.
Opponents appealed to OWRC and in November of 2019 the commission reversed the final order and denied the application. EVWD appealed this decision to the Oregon Court of Appeals, who affirmed ORWC’s denial in November of 2023. The matter was then sent to the supreme court.
Before the Supreme Court
The high court’s decision hinged on a state law that outlines seven “public interest factors” to be used when weighing the merits of a water storage application. These include whether or not enough water is available, economic impact, control measures such as sanitation and drainage, and broad public benefit.
When rejecting the application in 2019, OWRC cited only one of the seven factors, specifically that the dam would infringe on an existing water right.
The Supreme Court did not dispute this finding, but said OWRC failed to adequately consider the other six factors in its decision.
“The commission’s final order reflects an erroneous interpretation of law and, accordingly, the Court of Appeals erred in affirming that order,” read the majority opinion written by Justice Roger DeHoog.
In the dissenting opinion, Justice Stephen Bushong said OWRC’s consideration of the other six factors was “implicit” even if they were not specifically mentioned in the order. He said, when the commission’s final order is read in its entirety, it is clear the commission followed the law.
The Path Forward
Our Town reached out to EVWD attorney Kirk Maag, with Stole Rives, to learn what the district expects after the supreme court’s ruling. Maag said he sees a path toward the application being approved because, during its 2019 review, OWRC took no issue with the other six public interest factors.
“EVWD’s proposed use of water is clearly in the public interest,” said Maag. “We’re glad the Supreme Court required the Commission to carefully consider the public interest beyond the narrow and truncated review reflected in the Commission’s prior order.”
He said OWRD and the administrative law judge both found the application fulfilled all seven factors and that OWRC accepted these as findings of fact, less the factor related to water rights.
Maag said the proposed dam and reservoir are the result of “a multi-generational effort by area farmers” and that new water storage is vital to address scarcity in the lowlands.
If the water storage application is approved, EVWD would have 10 years to construct the dam.
This story originally appeared in the Our Town Community News on Nov. 28, 2025.
WaterWatch staff photo of Drift Creek overpass by Tommy Hough.