Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 507.010 (2026)

Oregon-Washington Columbia River fish compact

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

507.010 Oregon-Washington Columbia River fish compact. Congress, by virtue of the authority vested in it under section 10, Article I, United States Constitution, providing for compacts and agreements between states, having ratified the recommendations of the conference committees of the States of Oregon and Washington, appointed to agree on legislation necessary for the regulation, preservation and protection of fish in the waters of the Columbia River, over which said states have concurrent jurisdiction, and other waters within either state which would be affected by such concurrent interest, recommendations being as follows: “We further recommend that a resolution be passed by the legislatures of Washington and Oregon, whereby the ratification by Congress of the laws of the States of Oregon and Washington shall act as a treaty between said states, subject to modification only by joint agreement by said states;” and the recommendation having been approved by resolution adopting the report of the conference committee, there exists between the States of Oregon and Washington a definite compact and agreement, the purport of which is substantially as follows: All laws and regulations now existing, or which may be necessary for regulating, protecting or preserving fish in the waters of the Columbia River, over which the States of Oregon and Washington have concurrent jurisdiction, or any other waters within either of said states, which would affect the concurrent jurisdiction, shall be made, changed, altered and amended in whole or in part, only with the mutual consent and approbation of both states.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1969–2011 · leading case: State v. Alexander, 607 P.2d 181 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Alexander, 607 P.2d 181 (Or. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 7× “I conclude that Oregon has jurisdiction with Washington over the waters of the Columbia River as established by the Oregon Admissions Act and ORS 507.010. [1] I *191 also conclude that where Oregon has jurisdiction it is not required to yield to another state in the prosecution…”

Sohappy v. Smith, 302 F. Supp. 899 (D. Or. 1969). “Nothing in the Compact (ORS 507.010) or in the Act of Congress consenting thereto ( 40 Stat.”

Girod v. Kroger, 268 P.3d 562 (Or. 2011). “Also, as a result of more than 50 years of litigation over the lawfulness of various Columbia River fishing practices and policies, the federal courts have issued several orders designed to manage the fisheries in accordance with those laws and regulations.”

State v. Pepper, 803 P.2d 1213 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “It refused to discuss the more drastic holding in Ex parte Desjeiro, supra.”

State v. Lindstorm, 581 P.2d 988 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “Under the Columbia River Fish Compact (ORS 507.010, 1 Oregon and Washington had established an "early fall” commercial salmon season on the river from August 14 to August 19 and from August 21 to August 23.”

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.