justicedao/ipfs_state_laws huggingface dataset:
635-100-0191 Lower Columbia River Coho Hatchery Programs (1) Conservation Hatchery Programs: ODFW shall take advantage of existing and new hatchery facilities to supply hatchery fish for selected projects to help restore natural production of wild coho. These projects will be treated as interim and experimental until their conservation value is demonstrated. (a) In 2002 ODFW shall initiate at least 3 projects using hatchery fish to re-establish wild populations in stream sections upstream of artificial barriers at ODFW hatcheries. (b) In 2003 ODFW shall initiate projects to restore natural production using hatchery fish in selected locations within the portion of coho habitat in the lower Columbia basin that in 2000, 2001, and 2003 had a density of wild spawners less than 2 wild fish per stream mile. Implementation of these projects is conditional on adequate funding for appropriate conservation hatchery approaches and monitoring and evaluation programs to assess project success and to manage the risk to wild populations while the projects are being conducted. (2) Mitigation and Harvest Augmentation Hatchery Programs: ODFW shall operate hatcheries in such a manner that adverse genetic and ecological interactions between hatchery and naturally produced fish are minimized through management of hatchery broodstocks, hatchery rearing environments and fish releases. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 History: DFW 112-2001, f. & cert. ef. 12-14-01
635-100-0192 Lower Columbia River Coho Land Management (1) All ODFW operated hatcheries and wildlife management areas shall comply with the survival guidelines for lower Columbia River coho as described in OAR 635-100-0135, including the fish passage and fish screening provisions. ODFW shall complete a report by March, 2002 that sets priorities for the passage and screening modifications necessary at each hatchery from an evaluation of potential gains for natural coho production, the disease consequences to existing hatchery production, and the likely availability of necessary funds. (2) The design of adult fish passage facilities shall incorporate the capacity for ODFW to restrict the number of hatchery fish that are allowed to migrate upstream as necessary once naturally self-sustaining populations have become re-established in these upstream areas. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 History: DFW 112-2001, f. & cert. ef. 12-14-01
635-100-0193 Lower Columbia River Coho Monitoring (1) De-listing decisions and the operation of fishery and hatchery programs requires monitoring and evaluation sufficient to measure risks and describe outcomes. ODFW shall implement such a monitoring program as sufficient funds become available. (2) As funding becomes available, ODFW shall intensify its monitoring of juvenile and adult coho such that the data generated are directly comparable with coho information collected by ODFW from populations on the coast of Oregon. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 History: DFW 112-2001, f. & cert. ef. 12-14-01
635-100-0194 Lower Columbia River Coho De-listing Criteria (1) This rule describes the measurable criteria that define the minimum conservation goal for wild lower Columbia River coho. Upon meeting these criteria, ODFW shall be biologically justified to propose that species be removed from Oregon’s endangered species list. (2) For the purpose of evaluating the biological status of lower Columbia River wild coho with respect to the criteria described in this rule, the following geographic areas where wild coho presently exist or are believed likely to exist in the future are defined as the recovery population boundaries. (a) The Astoria population occurs in Youngs Bay tributaries and all Columbia tributaries upstream to and including Gnat Creek. (b) The Clatskanie population occurs in Columbia River tributaries upstream of Gnat Creek to and including the Clatskanie River basin. (c) The Scappoose population occurs in Columbia River tributaries upstream of the Clatskanie River to the mouth of the Willamette River. (d) The Clackamas population occurs in the Clackamas River basin plus Columbia River tributaries to the Willamette River downstream of Willamette Falls. (e) The Sandy population occurs in the Sandy basin plus Columbia River tributaries downstream to the mouth of the Willamette River. (f) The Bonneville population occurs in Columbia River tributaries upstream of the Sandy River to and including the Hood River basin. (3) To meet the minimum conservation goal, lower Columbia River coho must be found to meet all of the following biological criteria: (a) Population Distribution and Structure — Self-sustaining wild populations are present in the Sandy and Clackamas basins. In addition, at least two of the following populations (Astoria, Clatskanie, Scappoose, or Bonneville) are self-sustaining. (b) Diversity — Naturally reproducing wild coho are present in 65% of the named streams that historically contained coho. Human activities impose only minor artificial selection pressures on the phenotypic character of the wild populations. The ongoing impact of hatchery fish on the genetic character, evolutionary processes, and innate productivity of naturally reproducing populations is minor. (c) Abundance — For three consecutive years, the number of wild spawners is at least 50% of the level necessary to produce maximum smolt recruits (full seeding) for the Sandy, Clackamas, and in at least two of the following populations: Astoria, Clatskanie, Scappoose, and Bonneville. (d) Connectivity — No artificial barriers exist that prevent the dispersing of wild coho between naturally reproducing populations. (e) Persistence and Resilience — The probability of extinction in 36 years is less than 5% for the Sandy and Clackamas populations plus two of the following populations: Astoria, Clatskanie, Scappoose, and Bonneville. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.004, 496.171, 496.172, 496.182, 496.192 & 498.026 History: DFW 112-2001, f. & cert. ef. 12-14-01
635-105-0000 Definitions As used in the Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program1: (1) “Western Snowy Plover” means the subspecies Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus. (2) “Conservation” means the use of methods and procedures necessary to bring a species to the point at which the measures provided under the Threatened or Endangered Wildlife Species Act (ORS 496.172, 496.176, 496.182) are no longer necessary. (3) “Suitable Habitat” means flat, open areas on sandy coastal beaches, sand spits at coastal river outlets, dune-backed coastal beaches, coastal dredged-material disposal sites, and flats east of coastal foredunes that become exposed as deflation plain dry ponds. 1 The Commission adopted the Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program on May 18, 1994. Copies of the Conservation Program are available from the agency. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 30-1994, f. & cert. ef. 5-25-94
635-105-0010 Purpose The Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program provides overall direction for the protection and conservation of the western snowy plover in Oregon. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 30-1994, f. & cert. ef. 5-25-94
635-105-0020 Program Objectives The objectives of the Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program are to: (1) Summarize biological information about the western snowy plover over its range and in Oregon with which to determine research needs and propose management actions; (2) Propose management actions including, but not limited to, systematic habitat and annual population monitoring of the western snowy plover and development of site-specific management plans; (3) Coordinate and share information with federal and state agencies and other states; (4) Propose recovery criteria; (5) Foster public understanding of the western snowy plover, its status, and the factors that influence its survival and recovery; and (6) Prepare for post-recovery management. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 30-1994, f. & cert. ef. 5-25-94
635-105-0030 Program Implementation (1) The Department will prepare a series of individual site-specific management plans in cooperation with land management agencies to address immediate survival needs and longer term sustained recovery of the western snowy plover. (2) Pursuant to ORS 496.182(2), state agencies shall consult and cooperate with the Department to determine whether or not proposed actions are consistent with the Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program before authorizing or providing direct financial assistance for any action on land owned or leased by the state, or for which the state holds a recorded easement: (a) When a site-specific management plan exists, the proposed action and ongoing actions shall be consistent with the plan and the Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program; (b) On lands containing suitable habitat over which the state has legal jurisdiction within the following beach areas, when no site-specific management plan exists, the action agency in consultation with the Department shall determine whether or not the proposed action has the potential to appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival or recovery of the western snowy plover: (A) Columbia River — Necanicum River; (B) Nehalem Spit; (C) Bayocean Spit; (D) Netarts Spit; (E) Sand Lake Spit; (F) Nestucca Spit; (G) Neskowin Beach; (H) Siletz Spit; (I) South Beach, Newport; (J) Alsea Spit; (K) Heceta Head — Siuslaw River; (L) Siuslaw River — Siltcoos River; (M) Siltcoos River — Tahkenitch; (N) Tahkenitch — Threemile; (O) Threemile — Umpqua River; (P) Umpqua River — Tenmile Spit; (Q) Tenmile Spit; (R) Tenmile Creek — Horsfall Road; (S) Horsfall Road — Coos Bay; (T) Whiskey Run — Coquille River (Bullards Beach); (U) Bandon State Park — New River; (V) New River — Floras Lake; (W) Euchre Creek; and (X) Pistol River. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 30-1994, f. & cert. ef. 5-25-94
635-105-0040 Program Review The Commission shall periodically review the Western Snowy Plover Conservation Program and, if necessary, update the objectives and management strategies of the Program. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 30-1994, f. & cert. ef. 5-25-94
635-110-0000 Wolf Conservation and Management Plan (1) The do c um e nt e ntitl e d "O r e g on W olf C ons er v a t i on a nd M a n a g e m e nt P l a n" (Plan) d a t e d June 2019 is in c o r po ra t e d h er e b y re f e re n c e a s a dminist ra tive r ul e . ( This in c o r po ra tion b y r ef e re n c e in c lud e s the bo d y of the P l a n plus its App e ndix A. Oth e r a pp e ndi c e s ar e e x c lud e d.) The Plan in c lud e s p r o g r a m di rec tion, obj ec tiv e s a nd st ra t e g i e s to manage gray wolves in Oregon and defines the special status game mammal designation. C opi e s m a y b e viewed on the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) website or obt a in e d a t the S a l em h ea dqu ar t er s o ff i c e of t h e O r e g on Department of F ish a nd W ildli fe , 4034 Fa i r vi e w I ndust r i a l D r ive S .E., S a l e m, OR 97302. In the event of conflict between this plan and the associated rules, the technical rules govern. (2) To the extent practicable, at least once every five years the Department shall review the Wolf Conservation and Management Plan and make recommendations to the Commission for any changes to the Plan. Review of the Plan should include incorporation of the best available science and should also seek comments from scientific and management experts in Oregon and other western states. [ED. NOTE: To view attachments referenced in rule text, click here to view rule.] Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162, 498.012 & 498.014 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162, 498.012, 498.002, 498.006 & 498.014 History: DFW 76-2019, amend filed 06/17/2019, effective 06/17/2019 DFW 2-2014, f. & cert. ef. 1-14-14 DFW 144-2010, f. & cert. ef. 10-11-10 DFW 148-2005, f. & cert. ef. 12-29-05 DFW 12-2005, f. & cert. ef. 3-9-05
635-110-0005 Definitions (1) “Depredation” means an incident or event that results in the confirmed injury or death of lawfully present livestock or working dogs on federal, state, tribal, or other public lands, or private lands, by one or more wolves. (2)“ I d e nti f i e d c i r c umst a n ce ” m e a ns a c ondition whi c h: (a ) The Department d e t er min e s , b a s e d upon its inv e sti g a tion of the situ a tion, a tt rac ts wolv e s a nd f ost e r s c on f li c t b e tw e e n wolv e s a nd liv e sto c k; a nd ( b) The Department a dvis e s the l a ndown er , liv e st o c k p r odu ce r or g ra z ing p er mitt e e to re m e d y ; but (c ) The l a ndown e r , liv e sto c k p r odu c e r or g ra z ing p e r mitt e e fa ils to re m e d y . ( 3) “ I n the a r ea ” m ea n s wh er e the Department h a s d e t e r min e d the p re s e n c e of t h e d e p re d a ting wolv e s. (4) “Lethal take” means management actions resulting in the death of a wolf or wolves. (5)“L iv e sto c k” m ea ns ra tit e s, ho r s e s, mul e s, j a c k a ss e s, ca ttl e , ll a m a s, a lp aca s, sh e e p, g o a ts, swin e , dom e sti ca t e d f owl, bison, and livestock working dogs, and a n y f u r- b e a r ing a nim a l b re d a nd m a int a in e d (c omm e r c i a l l y or oth e r wis e ) within p e ns, c a g e s a nd hu t c h e s. (6) “ Non - inju r ious h a r a ssm e nt” m ea ns s c a r ing o f f a wolf ( or wolv e s ) without doing bodi l y h ar m, a nd in c lud e s, but is not limit e d to, m a king loud nois e s or oth er wise c o n fr onting t h e wolf ( or wolv e s ) . (7) “ Non - l e t h a l inju r ious h ara ssm e nt” m ea ns s c a r ing o f f a wolf ( or wolv e s) older than six months without killing but with some inju r y to the wol f . (8) “ Oth e r wol f- liv e sto c k c on f li c t ” m ea ns t e stin g , c h a sin g , o r oth er wi s e dis r upting liv e sto c k . (9) “Take”, as defined by Oregon law (ORS 496.004(16)), means to kill or obtain possession or control of any wildlife. (10) “ W o r king d o g s” m e a ns g u ar d i ng d o g s a nd h er di n g d o gs used to actively aid in the herding or protection of livestock. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162, 498.012 & 498.014 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162, 498.012, 498.002, 498.006 & 498.014 History: DFW 76-2019, adopt filed 06/17/2019, effective 06/17/2019
635-110-0030 Harassment and Take of Wolves During Phase III (Management) NOTE: As of June 7, 2019, the portions of th e se r ul e s regarding harassment and take of wolves a r e p re-e mpt e d in a po r tion of O r e g on b y the e nd a n g e r ed st a tus of the g r a y wolf u n d e r the f e d e r a l End a n g e r e d S p ec i e s A c t. I n the p o r tion of O r e g on w h er e f e d eral p r ot ec tions ar e re d u ce d t o a l e v e l b e low th a t of O r e g on l a w, th e se r ul e s g o v er n h a r a ssm e nt a nd t a k e of wolv e s in O r e g on. ( 1) This r ule d e s cr ib e s t h e t y p e s of h a r a ssm e nt a n d t a ke of wolv e s du r i n g P h a se II I of t h e O r e g on W olf C ons er v a tion a nd M a n a g e m e nt P l a n. ( 2) Non - inju r ious h a r a s s m e nt of wolv e s is a llow e d und e r the s a me c onditions a s in P h a se I ( OAR 635 - 110 - 0010 ( 2 ) ), except that the harassment does not have to be reported to the Department . ( 3) Non - l e th a l inju r ious h ara ssm e nt is a llow e d u n d e r the s a me c onditions a s in P h a se I I ( OAR 635- 110 - 0020 ( 3 )) , e x ce pt th a t wolf d e p re d a tion on liv e sto c k or oth e r wol f - liv e sto c k c on f li c t m a y be c on f i r m e d b y e ith e r the Department or W il d li f e S er vi ce s. ( 4) R e lo ca tion of wol v e s will be c onsid ere d un d e r the s a me c i r c umst a n ce s a s in P h a se I ( OAR 635- 110 - 0010 ( 4 )) . ( 5) L e th a l t a k e of wolv e s in the ac t of biting, wounding, killing or chasing li v e sto c k or working dogs is a llow e d und e r t he s a me c onditions a s f or P h a se I I ( O AR 635 - 110 - 0020 ( 5 )) ( 6) L e th a l t a k e of wolv e s to d ea l with c h r onic d e p re d a tion is a llow e d un d e r the s a me c onditions a s f or P h a se I I ( OAR 635 - 1 10 - 0020 ( 6 )) , e x ce pt wolf d e p re d a tion on liv e sto c k m a y b e c on f i r m e d b y e ith e r the Department or W ildli f e S er vi ce s. ( 7) The C ommission may a utho r i z e c ont r oll e d t a ke of wolv e s b y sp ec i a l p e r mit in specified areas to a d d r e ss long term, recurring wol f- liv e sto c k c on f li c t, u n g ul a te po p ul a tion objectives, or herd management goals. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162, 498.012 & 498.014 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162, 498.002, 498.006, 498.012 & 498.014 History: DFW 76-2019, amend filed 06/17/2019, effective 06/17/2019 DFW 2-2014, f. & cert. ef. 1-14-14 DFW 144-2010, f. & cert. ef. 10-11-10 DFW 12-2005, f. & cert. ef. 3-9-05
635-120-0001 Bighorn Sheep and Rocky Mountain Goat Management Plan Content and Purpose The document entitled "Oregon’s Bighorn Sheep and Rocky Mountain Goat Management Plan" dated December 2003 is incorporated by reference into these rules. Copies of the Plan are available through the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. This document provides program direction, identifies objectives and strategies to fulfill management, research, habitat and status survey needs. It is also intended as an informational document to assist resource management agencies with their wildlife programs. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162 & 497.112 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162 & 497.112 History: DFW 14-2004, f. & cert. ef. 3-5-04 FWC 25-1992, f. 4-17-92, cert. ef. 4-21-92 FWC 74-1986, f. & ef. 11-20-86
635-120-0005 Program Objectives Text available via filing PDF that is stored in ORMS Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162 & 497.112 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146, 496.162 & 497.112 History: DFW 14-2004, f. & cert. ef. 3-5-04 FWC 25-1992, f. 4-17-92, cert. ef. 4-21-92 FWC 74-1986, f. & ef. 11-20-86
635-120-0010 Plan Implementation Text available via filing PDF that is stored in ORMS Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496 History: DFW 14-2004, f. & cert. ef. 3-5-04 FWC 74-1986, f. & ef. 11-20-86
635-120-0015 Authority of the Director Text available via filing PDF that is stored in ORMS Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496 History: DFW 14-2004, f. & cert. ef. 3-5-04 FWC 74-1986, f. & ef. 11-20-86
635-130-0000 Migratory Game Bird Management Plan Content and Purpose The Commission adopted the Migratory Game Bird Management Plan on October 20, 1993. This document provides program direction to the Department and identifies objectives and strategies to fulfill management, research, habitat, and status survey needs. It also serves as an informational document to assist other resource management agencies with their wildlife programs, and to network governmental and private programs dealing with migratory game bird management in Oregon. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 67-1993, f. & cert. ef. 10-26-93
635-130-0010 Program Mission It is the mission of the Migratory Game Bird Management Plan to conserve, enhance, and restore populations and habitats of native migratory game birds and associated species at prescribed levels (as determined by national, state, and Pacific Flyway plans) throughout their natural geographic ranges in Oregon and the Pacific Flyway (Flyway) in order to contribute to Oregon’s wildlife diversity as well as the enjoyment of those resources. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 67-1993, f. & cert. ef. 10-26-93
635-130-0020 Program Policies In order to implement the Migratory Game Bird Management Plan, the Director is authorized to enter into agreements with governmental and private entities for the purposes of fulfilling the mission and policies of this plan. It is the policy of the Commission to: (1) Share the management responsibilities for migratory game birds with the federal government, primarily through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Commission recognizes the authority and role of the federal government as provided by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and its amendments; however, it encourages the Department to cooperate in Flyway Management Programs such as biological surveys, habitat development and acquisition, research, species planning, and the establishment of funding sources to maintain prescribed management programs; (2) Direct the Wildlife Division, through its Game Bird Program, to represent the state at all Flyway meetings and to implement Flyway management concepts and programs throughout the state. The Commission recognizes the Pacific Flyway Council and its technical committees as the primary decision-making bodies for the management of migratory game birds in the Flyway states, including Oregon. Because of the dynamics of these bird populations and due to shared interests in this international resource, the Commission recognizes the need for an ecosystem approach to migratory game bird management through Flyway programs; (3) Direct the Department to furnish assistance for an interim period of seven days in the absence of immediate corrective actions on the part of responsible federal agencies in the case of recurring damage to private property. The Commission recognizes the U.S. Department of Agriculture has primary responsibility for the control of damage to private property caused by migratory game birds; therefore, the Department will, upon initial receipt of a damage complaint, notify the appropriate federal agency of the situation to request their action on the problem; and (4) Prohibit the release of captive-reared waterfowl within the state for any purposes other than authorized dog training. Statutory/Other Authority: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 Statutes/Other Implemented: ORS 496.012, 496.138, 496.146 & 496.162 History: FWC 67-1993, f. & cert. ef. 10-26-93