196.600
Definitions for ORS 196.600 to 196.655. As used in ORS 196.600 to 196.655:
(1) “Compensatory
mitigation” means activities conducted by a permittee or third party to create,
restore, enhance or preserve the functions and values of the water resources of
this state to compensate for the removal-fill related adverse effects of
project development to waters of this state or to resolve violations of ORS
196.800 to 196.921. Compensatory mitigation for removal-fill activities does
not affect permit requirements of other state departments.
(2) “Credit”
means the measure of the increase in the functions and values of the water
resources of this state achieved at a mitigation bank site.
(3) “Mitigation
bank” means a site created, restored, enhanced or preserved in accordance with
ORS 196.600 to 196.655 to compensate for unavoidable adverse impacts to waters
of this state due to activities which otherwise comply with the requirements of
ORS 196.600 to 196.921.
(4) “Mitigation
bank instrument” means the legally binding and enforceable agreement between
the Director of the Department of State Lands and a mitigation bank sponsor
that formally establishes the mitigation bank and stipulates the terms and
conditions of the mitigation bank’s construction, operation and long-term
management.
(5) “Off-site
compensatory mitigation” means activities conducted away from the project site
that create, restore, enhance or preserve the functions and values of the water
resources of this state in order to compensate for the adverse impacts to
waters of this state from project development.
(6) “On-site
compensatory mitigation” means activities conducted at the project site to
create, restore, enhance or preserve the functions and values of the water
resources of this state in order to compensate for the adverse impacts to
waters of this state from project development.
(7) “Permit
action” means activity under a specific removal or fill permit or other
authorization requested or issued under ORS 196.600 to 196.921.
(8) “Service area”
means the boundaries set forth in a mitigation bank instrument that include one
or more watersheds identified on the United States Geological Survey,
Hydrologic Unit Map - 1974, State of Oregon, for which a mitigation bank
provides credits to compensate for adverse effects from project developments to
waters of this state. Service areas for mitigation banks are not mutually
exclusive.
(9) “Statewide
Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan” means the plan created by the State
Parks and Recreation Department pursuant to the federal Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965, as amended (16 U.S.C. 460-L et seq.). [Formerly
541.550; 1995 c.370 §2; 2003 c.738 §3; 2009 c.343 §1]
Notes of Decisions
Waterkeeper v. Port of Coos Bay Or., 423 P.3d 60 (Or. 2018).
· cites it 4× “815 if the director determines that the project described in the application: "(a) Is consistent with the protection, conservation and best use of the water resources of this state as specified in ORS 196.600 to 196.905 ; and "(b) Would not unreasonably interfere with the…”
Owen v. Div. of State Lands, 76 P.3d 158 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 3× “” The permit requirements of ORS 196.600 to 196.905 apply when a person contemplates filling or removing material from wetlands or the “waters of this state.”
Gienger v. Dep't of State Lands, 214 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“810 provides, in part: “(l)(a) Except as otherwise specifically permitted under ORS 196.600 to 196.905, a person may not remove any material from the beds or banks of any waters of this state or fill any waters of this state without a permit issued under authority of the…”
Examilotis v. Dep't of State Lands, 244 P.3d 880 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“825, the director concluded: “DSL has shown that the fill and removal plan proposed by Coos STEP is consistent with the protection, conservation and best use of the water resources of this state, as specified in ORS 196.600 to 196.905, and would not unreasonably interfere with…”
Examilotis v. Dept. of State Lands, 244 P.3d 880 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“825, the director concluded: "DSL has shown that the fill and removal plan proposed by Coos STEP is consistent with the protection, conservation and best use of the water resources of this state, as specified in ORS 196.600 to 196.905, and would not unreasonably interfere with…”
Citizens for Responsible Dev. in the Dalles v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 433 P.3d 364 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“815 if the director determines that the project described in the application: "(a) Is consistent with the protection, conservation and best use of the water resources of this state as specified in ORS 196.600 to 196.905 ; and "(b) Would not unreasonably interfere with the…”
Coos Waterkeeper v. Port of Coos Bay Oregon, 395 P.3d 14 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“That statute provided, in part: “(1) The Director of the Department of State Lands shall issue a permit * * * if the director determines that the project described in the application: “(a) Is consistent with the protection, conservation and best use of the water resources of…”
Cardenas v. Castelli (D. Or. 2024).
· cites it 2× “MSJ"), ECF [24], at 2; Or. Rev. Stat. § 196.600 et seq. As relevant to this action, the law prohibits removing "any material from the beds or banks of any waters of this state or fill any waters of this state without a permit issued under authority of the Director of the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.