Fort Klamath Critical Habitat Landowners v. Woodcock

Under ORS 183.484, the circuit court reviews the record for substantial evidence to determine "whether the evidence would permit a reasonable person to make the determination that the agency made in a particular case."

Petitioners challenged an order from the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) on five grounds. They argued that the transfer should comply with the out-of-basin transfer provisions under ORS 537.801 to 537.809, which OWRD allegedly overlooked, and which could bar the transfer. They also claimed the approved temporary transfer would cause them harm. Additionally, petitioners contended the trial court wrongly dismissed their "character of use" argument as untimely and failed to address it on the merits. They argued the circuit court did not properly assess whether the transfer would lead to "waste," and finally, that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for the intervenor and OWRD, as the decision lacked substantial evidence. Under ORS 183.484, the circuit court reviews the record for substantial evidence to determine "whether the evidence would permit a reasonable person to make the determination that the agency made in a particular case." The Court found OWRD's approval of the temporary water transfer valid because the out-of-basin transfer provisions did not apply to temporary transfers under ORS 540.523. The Court also found that the transfer would not cause "injury," as an increase in water use within the limits of a valid water right does not legally harm other rights, even if the increase results from a transfer. Regarding the "character of use," the Court found no error, as irrigation under state law encompasses both agricultural and non-agricultural uses. Finally, it rejected petitioners' claims regarding injury, waste, and character of use changes and upheld all judgments. Affirmed.