THE STONY CREEK WATER WARS
Glenn County - Tehama County - Colusa County , California.
(c) 2009, Mike Barkley

Motion to Require Special Master to show cause why he should not return his report to the court

[A transcription of the document on file in the Angle Archives

Important because the shows the Government's efforts to force a decree in the Angle case before the California Supreme Court ruled on Herminghaus

In straight text without elaborate formatting. Any editorial comments by me are contained within brackets, "[]", which you may delete easily after downloading the "page source" to your own editing software if your browser allows source downloading. ]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[Blue cover:]


IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA, SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

MOTION FOR ORDER

FILED
____O'clock and____Mns____M
OCT 13 1925
WALTER B. MALING, Clerk
/s/ T?.M. Lampert
DEPUTY CLERK

HAROLD BAXTER
Special Assistant to the Attorney
General of the United States


220 Fleming Building, Phoenix, Arizona.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

MOTION FOR ORDER

Comes now the plaintiff by its undersigned attorney and moves the court for an order of citation requiring the Special Master in Chancery, duly appointed herein, to-wit: the Honorable George E. McCutchen, to appear and show cause why he should not return forthwith into the office of the clerk of the above named court his Master’s Report in form and in substance the same as the Report of Special Master hereto annexed and made part hereof, to the end that the same may be by said clerk entered in the Equity Docket, certifying to the court the reason for delay.

This Motion is based upon the pleadings and files of said cause, the laws of the United States, the Rules of Practice in Equity of this Court to-wit: paragraphs 60, 61, 62 and 66, and the affidavit of Harold Baxter, Special Assistant to the Attoney General, hereto annexed, and made a part hereof.

Dated October 10, 1925.

/s/ Harold Baxter
HAROLD BAXTER
------------------------------------
Special Assistant to the Attorney
General

[page break]
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

REPORT OF SPECIAL MASTER
IN CHANCERY

This cause having come on regularly to be heard upon the amended complaint of the Plaintiff and upon the Pleas and Answers of various defendants herein, and upon the default in appearing and answering of certain defendants, the Plaintiff appearing herein by Oliver P. Morton, Esq., John F. Truesdell, Esq. and Harold Baxter, Esq., as special assistants to The Attorney General, its solicitors and various defendants by their respective counsel, before the Honorable George E. McCutchen, the duly appointed, qualified and acting Special Master in Chancery and the said Special Master having examined the record, having heard the evidence and the proofs, and having duly considered the same and being fully advised in the premises, herewith submits to the court his report and his recommendations thereon, finding the following facts and making the following conclusions of law:

FINDINGS OF FACT


This is an equity suit by the plaintiff, The UnIted States of America, instituted by direction of the Attorney General to determine and adjudicate rights to the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries to protect the storage and diversion rights of the Orland Project, constructed and operated under the provisions of the Reclamation Act of June 17, 1902, (32 Stat.388) and Acts of Congress amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, for the following purposes, among others, to-wit: generating

-1-


power and electricity, storage, supplying the people of cities and towns, irrigation, domestic and other purposes; that the lands designated by the Secretary of the Interior as entitled to the benefits of the said Project, aggregating 20,755 acres, more or less, and being located and situate in Glenn County in said district depend upon said Project for their supply of water for said purposes. Original complaint to enjoin certain of the defendants herein from unlawfully diverting stored waters of said project was filed in this court on May 28, 1918, and application for summary relief was heard by the court on June 10, 1918, at which time a preliminary injunction was duly granted to plaintiff and a Water Commissioner was duly appointed by the Court, with powers and duties to control said water supply. Thereafter and on the 3rd day of April, 1919, an amended complaint was filed by plaintiff and thereafter and on to-wit: October 4, 1919, April 28, 1921 and March 31, 1922, orders were duly made and entered by the court, by the service of which and by voluntary appearance, the following named parties defendant have been duly served with process or voluntarily appeared or answered as defendants in said cause, to-wit: John M. Adams, John Francis Ahern, A. Alexander, Chas. Alexander, H.C. Angle, A.M. Anderson, V.V. Apperson, administrator of the estate of John O. Apperson, deceased, T.H. Atkins, J.E. Ayer, F. Bagetela, J.L. Baird, Bank of Willows, a corporation, C.W. Barker, Elizabeth M. Barker, Frank M. Barker, E.M. Bartholomew, A.C. Bayley, John Bedford, L. Bedford, M.G. Bedford, R.T. Bedford, Peter V. Berkey, D.V. Besser, A.R. Bickford, E.F. Bickford, O.F. Bickford, Joseph M. Billiou, Leona S. Billiou, Richard J. Billiou, Thomas Bishop Company, Glenn H. Blake, R.E. Blevins, W.W. Boardman, Samuel A. Boles, Chas. Bond, Dave Bond, Immer Bond, John Bond, Martin Bond, G.A. Bradley, I.W. Bradley, Harry N. Brittan, J.L. Brittan, James O. Brittan, Alex Brown, L.E. Brownell, Mrs. L.R. Brownell, R.H. Brownell, I.L. Brownell, Morrison E. Bryan, Celia G. Burnham, E.D. Burnham, Aura C. Burrows, Charlotte T. Burrows, I.A. Burrows, E.T. Butler, Chas. Butler, H.A. Buttler, Butte

-2-


County Savings Bank, a corporation, James Byers, Lilly Hall Cameron, M. Carlton, administrator of the estate of Annie Shaddock, deceased, F.M. Carroll, Elizabeth D. Case, Julia E. Casper, P.S. Castleman, John Cavalier, Jr., Central Pacific Ry. Company, a corporation, D.S. Chambers, J.J. Chambers, Guiseppe Chasseur, Leontine Chasseur, Amos B. Chester, Bert C. Chester, Kate M. Ciley, J.L. Ciley, Geo. Clark, Nora Clark, Willard Clark, A.W. Cleek, Margaret S. Coley, Chas. Collins, A. Conklin, M.L. Conklin, Wells Conklin, Conklin Bros., Mary E. Cook, Cook Springs Mineral Water Company, a corporation, W.B. Cooper, G.L. Crawford, Fred E. Crook, John Crossett, C.O. Crum, L.M. Culver, C. Cushman, F.N. Cushman, J.C Cushman, H.S. Cushman, L.R. Cushman, L.V. Cushman, Edward Davis, Myrtle T. Davis, Mary E. Decker, J. Devorst, Walter Dickson, J. Diefenbach, H.B. Dixon, Isaac M. Dixon, Wm. Dodd, Mollie Dodd, C.L. Donohue Company, Thos. Dougall, Jas. E. Drew, J.H. Driscoll, J.F. Durham, J. Homer Durham, M.L. Dimmick, E.B. & A.L. Stone Company, a corporation, J.N. Eastby, Jas. W. Edwards, J.L. Edwards, J.T. Edwards, W.D. Egilbert [sic], C.H. Ehorn, Geo. C. Ellis, John C. Ellis, Melinda Ellis, Virginia Ellis, Henry Engraham, Eliza J. Engraham, S.A. Ervin, Esperanza Land Corporation, a corporation, Thos. Fairlee, R.F. Farris, Eugene Fately, I.L. Flightner, R.A. Fellows, Dora A. Fender, Johnson Fender, John S. Finnell, Simpson Finnell, Zella C. Finnell, Finnell Land Company, a corporation, Justin Firmignac, John Fitzpatrick, J.A. Flanagan, Joseph J. Flanagan, Francis D. Flanagan, Anna Flanagan, Geo. W. Fletcher, John T. Flood, L.H. Flood, L.V. Flood, J.L. Flood, W.F. Forman, Joel Ford, W.J. Foutch, Fout Springs Water Company, a corporation, Freedman Bros., George R. Freeman, administrator of the estate of W.H. Markham, deceased, M. Friday, Sarah Friday, Fruto Land & Improvement Company, a corporation, N.H. Garrison, W.W. Gatliff, Stella GIbbons, Geo. R. Gillaspy, Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District, a corporation, Anna B. Glenn, C.H. Glenn, W.A. Glenn, M. Golden, Alvin Gollnick, Aug. Gollnick, Leonard W. Gollnick, P.A. Gordon, D.E. Goulding, F.A. Graves, John H. Graves, L.B.

-3-


Graves, W.R. Graves, Carl Green, P.H. Green, S.N. Green, W.A. Greenwood, C.W. Griffin, E.R. Griffith, W.H. Griffith, Geo. M. Hall, Gertrude M. Hall, Chas. M. Hall, J.J. Hall, W.R. Hall, Mrs. H. Hamilton, Oswald Handlos, John Harbison, J.L. Hardin, R.M. Hardin, Ed. Harkness, G.B. Harlin, W.F. Harlin, James Harmon, Reuben Hartman, H.C. Haskell, Volney Hayton, M.A. Hayward, K.G. Heard, Henderson-Longton Company, a corporation, W.G. Henneke, Frank Hickok, Callie E. Hightower, F.C. Hill, S.A. Hineline, A. Hochheimer, Hochheimar & Company, a corporation, Annie Hoever, G.E. Hook, Josephine A. Holt, F. Houghton Company, a corporation, F. Houghton, H.H. Houston, administrator of the estate of Lucy Houston, deceased, J.W. Howell, L. Huffmaster, Louisa M. Hulen, John Hull, Edgar Hunter, Ellen Hunter, administratrix of the estate of Genevieve H. Brown, deceased, Byron Ivory, Chas. Jaeger, James Mills Orchard Company, a corporation, C.E. Jameson, Robert Jameson, John Johansen, John A. Johanasen, Wiebeke Johansen, P.A. Jones, A.Z. Jones, R.T. Jones, Lee Julian, Susan A. Julian, Wm. Julian, E.C. Kaerth, Andrew Kaiser, William Kaiser, M.V. Kalloch, Kate Karrier, G.W. Keller, H.R. Keller, R.P. Kennedy, J.R. Kennedy, F.M. Kesselring, Annie M. Kesselring, Lucy Kimel, F.M. Kirkpatrick, J.L. Kirkpatrick, Margaret Kirkpatrick, R L. Kirkpatrick, H.D. Knight, J.E. Knight, Alex Kraft, Wm. Kraus, F.W. Laughlin, Ed. Franklin Laux, Fred Laux, Jr., Katherine Laux, J.J. Lea, Geo. D. Lewis, Olive Lewis, Geo. W. Lewis, Frank W. Lewis, A.E. Lindstrum, C.W. Lovelace, Wm. J. Lovelady, T.F. Lovelady, Annie Evans Lovelady, Alice M. Lovelady, C.A. Lucas, Ellen Lucas, J.P. Lucas, Roy Lucas, Zacharias Luce, Della Ludlow, Oscar Lundgreen, Mary Lyons, Lillie Lyons, William Lyons, James McCall, Mary J. McCune, Edith McGahan, Edith McGahan, administratrix of the estate of R.L. Walkup, deceased, Edith MoGahan, administratrix of the estate of W.A. Morris, deceased, Mrs. I.W. McGahan, J.N. Mahan, Pearl Makinney, J.F. Mallon, M. Malonson, E.B. Mann, L.E. Mann, J.H. Manson, Mrs. J.S. Manson, Linda Manson, administratrix of the estate of J.H. Manson, deceased, D.A. Markham, G.W. Markham, W.H. Markham, Edith C. Martin, G.L.

-4-


Mason, D.H. Masterson, Frank Masterson, James Masterson, Kendrick Masterson, James Mathews, H. Mayfield., I.E. Mecum, Mrs. M.J. Merriwether, Chris Mikkelson, Elizabeth Miller, Henry Milligan, Alvin C. Millsaps, Ann Millsaps, Byron Millsaps, Chas. Millsaps, Dora Millsaps, F.M. Millsaps, G.W. Millsaps, James Millsaps, John Millsaps, John H. Millsaps, administrator of the estate of A.J. Millsaps, deceased, John W. Millsaps, Joseph Millsaps, J.W. Millsaps, Trustee, Mary C. Millsaps, Orin L. Millsaps, Martin Mirande, J.C. Mogk, Montague & Faxon, Irma Moon, Pruda Moon, James M. Morris, John M. Morris, Preston Morris, T.W. Morris, W.A. Morris, Wm. Mott, Perry Mulford, America Hall Murdock, H.M. Nelson, J.A. Nelson, Salvina C. Nelson, Mary Ann Newton, P.M. Niesen, Wm. Niesen, J.D. Nordyke, Northern Electric Ry. Company, a corporation, J.M. Nye, D.J. Oaks, James O‘Brien, Mary O‘Leary, P. O’Leary, Tim O’Leary, Orland Land Company, a corporation, S.F. Paine, Albert Papst, Ida Papst, Olive Scearce Parsons, Chas. E. Pearson, Mathias Pedersen, E.C. Phelps, E.K. Piersol, S. Pinkerton, Chas. Powell, Mary Powell, Mrs. J.A. Price, A.L. Province, Elvira R. Province, Harvey E. Province, Mary E. Province, C.B. Purington, Charlotte R. Raglan, S.A. Ralston, H.G. Rawlins, D.P. Ray, George Ray, Elizabeth J. Rees, John S. Rees, Eugene K. Reynolds, administrator of the estate of Isidore Reynolds, deceased, Isabel E. Reynolds, Ida Leona Rice, Elisha Rich, Charles H. Ridley, Harrison B. Riley, I.L. Robertson, James Roden, Walter Roden, Eliz. J. Rogers, Rosedale Realty Company, a corporation, M. Rosenberg, Maurice Rosenthal, Wm. Roser, Kate Rowecroft, Robt. Rowecroft, Ruby King Mineral Paint Company, a corporation, Sacramento Valley Irrigation Company, a corporation, Sacramento Valley Sugar Company, a corporation, Sacramento Valley West Side Canal Company, a corporation, Minnie L. Sadler, J.S. Sale, W.J. Salisbury, Carrie Sanford, S. Savio, James W. Sawyer, Mary J. Scearce, W.E. Scearce, Barbara Schmitzer, B.N. Scribnor Company, a corporation, J.A. Scribner, J.A. Scribner, administrator of the estate of G.W. Lantz, deceased, Maude C. Sehorn, James Seros, Rose Servel, administratrix of the

-5-


estate of Fred Servel, deceased, A.M. Sharp, Robert Sharp, Clarissa Shaw, Jennie T. Shelton, Ray Shively, Bertha A. Shults, E.C. Shults, Leland Shults, Alma Silver, Elmer Silver, J.F. Silver, S.M. Silver, C.L. Simpson, Z.E. Simpson, Isaac Skidmore, E.E Smith, F. & A.M. Snow Mountain Lodge, C.T. Soeth, Geo. Soeth, John H. Soeth, W.E. Squires, Henry Steinbach, Henriette Steinegger, H.R. Stewart, John Stice, Geo. C. Stites, J.F. Stites, Rufus G. Stites, W.H. Stites, Stonyford Catholic Church, a corporation, Stonyford Dunkard Church, a corporation, J.A. Stout, Stovall-Wilcoxson, a corporation, Fred E. Strawn, C.E. Studybaker, Superior California Farm Lands Company, a corporation, B.H. Sutliff, Ellis A. Sutliff, Emily Sutliff, G.W. Sutliff, Jos. M. Tanson, M.A. Tanson, F.T. Taylor, Geo. N. Taylor, Jessie Taylor, administratrix of the estate of W.S. Taylor, deceased, J.F. Taylor, Paul Teihl, Chas. A. Templeton, J.G. Tenney, J. Thomas, J.A. Topping, C.H. Totman, George Trank, A.J. Triplett, Abe L. Triplett, Eliza Troxel, F.W. Troxel, Jessie E. Troxel, Lloyd Troxel, I.E. True, E.A. Tryon, C.E. Turner, Matt Urjevich, A.P. Valine, Geo. Vanderford, Amelia G. Van Syckle, Amelia G. Van G. Van Syckle, adminlstratrix of the estate of Henry H. Van Syckle, deceased, J. Van Scyoc, A.P. Wakefield, Jesse Walcott, Arthur Walkup, Guy Ward, Margurita Williams Welch, Roy Welch, F.J. Wells, A.T. Welton, Ida M. Welton, Henry Werth, May E. Werth, Frank S. West, Katie West, D.J. Westapher, Emma Westapher, Geo. Westapher, A.J. Westcamp, Frank Whalley, Chas. E. White, Oliver P. Wiggins, A.E. Williams, J.H. Williams, Frank Wilson, administrator of the estate of S. Wilson, deceased, Mary E. Wise, F.C. Wood, G.W. Wood, R.H. Yearnshaw.

That of the above named defendants there have appeared and answered in this cause, personally, or by their respectIve solicitors all of those persons named in columns headed "claimant" in the "Schedule of water rights in Stony Creek Watershed", hereto annexed, their respective solicitors being named in the columns headed "solicitor" immediately following the names of said

-6-


claimants; that all persons herein named as owners, grantors and successors in interest have been duly made parties defendant to this cause and that all persons herein named as grantees or successors in interest have been duly substituted for their respective predecessors with all the rights of their respective grantors and predecessors.

That, pursuant to the said Reclamation law, the plaintiff has constructed and completed and is operating and maintaining the said Orland Project in Glenn County, Tehama County and Colusa County in the said State of California and within the district, for furnishing water for irrigation and other purposes to 20,755 acres of irrigable lands in Townships 21 North, Ranges 2 and 3 West; 22 North, Ranges 2 3 and 4 West and 23 North, Ranges 3 and 4 West of the Mount Diablo Base and Meridian; that the said lands and all thereof are subject to reclamation and irrigation under said Reclamation Law and before their reclamation and Irrigation the said lands were arid or semi-arid, in charactor and required such reclamation and irrigation in order to produce paying crops; that the said lands have been reclaimed and irrigated through and by means of the works of said project and are thus being made to produce valuable crops.

That Stony Creek, together with its tributaries, situate and located within the said District is the sole source of water supply and is used for the channel by means of which the waters stored in the works of the said Project are carried and flow to the said lands; that the plaintiff, after August 25, 1906, by the Secretary of the Interior, duly made and completed the necessary examinations and surveys of the said lands included within the said Orland Project, and on December 28, 1908, duly withdrew from entry, disposal or sale all public lands required in and necessary to the construction of said Project and its works and therefter determined that said Project was practicable and feasible and gave all notices required by law to be given of its intention to reserve and appropriate for the purpose of

-7-


said project and for beneficial use thereon waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries and duly reserved and appropriated such of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries not theretofore appropriated as might be beneficially used for the reclamation and irrigation of the said lands within said Orland Project, both natural and flood flow; that by reason of such appropriations made on October 10, 1906, for water of Stony Creek to the amount of 500 cubic feet per second, on October 11, 1906, for water of Little Stony Creek to the amount of 100,000 acre feet annually, on March 23, 1910, for water of Stony Creek to the amount of 10,000 miners inches and on March 25, 1913, for water of Big Stony Creek to the amount of 20,000 miners inches the plaintiff is the owner of such waters and of the usufructory right therein for direct irrigation and other purposes and for storage for use upon the lands of said Project.

That plaintiff in the year 1910 constructed and now operates and maintains on Little Stony Creek in Section 34, Township 18 North, Range 6 West of the Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, in said Colusa County a storage dam or reservoir for the storage of water in the basin of Little Stony creek, one of the tributaries of Stony Creek, in said Colusa County, which reservoir has a capacity of 51,000 acre feet covering an area in said Colusa County of approximately 1800 acres, known and designated as the East Park Reservoir being a part of the said Orland Project and works; that plaintiff in 1910 constructed and now operates and maintains a diversion dam on Big Stony Creek in Section 35, Township 18 North, Range 7 West of Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, in said Colusa County, together with a canal leading therefrom to the said East Park Reservoir, which canal was constructed in 1915, and has a capacity of 275 cubic feet of water per second, is seven miles in length and is known and designated as the East Park Feed Canal, being a part of said Orland Project and works; that the said East Park Feed Canal and Diversion Dam are part of the said Orland Project and works

-8-


and have been used, operated and maintained for the diversion and storage of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries.

That the plaintiff has constructed and now operat and maintains at lower points on Stony Creek and. above the irrigable lands of the said Project, at points about 41 and. 46 miles respectively from and below the said East Park Reservoir, two diversion dams known respectively as the South Diversion Dam and North Diversion Dam, the one being constructed in 1916 and situate in Section 29 Township 23 North, Range 4 West and the other constructed in 1913 and situate in Section 1, Township 22 North, Range 4 West of the Mount Diablo Base and Meridian in said Glenn and Tehama Counties, whereby the waters of said Stony Creek and its tributaries flow and are carried to the distributing canals and lands of said project for their reclamation and irrigation; that the said South and North Diversion dams and distributing canals connected therewith are part of the said Orland Project and works; that all of the said constructed works have been in continuous use and operation at all times since their construction for the purpose of diverting, storing and distributing the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries for the reclamation, cultivation, irrigation and reasonable use of the lands within the saId Project and by reason thereof the said lands have been and are being fully reclaimed and irrigated.

That the plaintiff, on May 21, 1909, acquired by purchase from the Stony Creek Irrigation Company, a corporation, all of the water rights and system and right of way then and there operated, owned or controlled on Stony Creek and its tributaries by said corporation subject to certain reservations and exceptions theretofore made in favor of the heirs of Laban Scearce and the heirs of A.L. Hall; that the property and rights so purchased include certain appropriations of water in Stony Creek theretofore made and instituted by plaintiff’s grantors as hereinafter set forth subject to the said reservations and exceptions to the heirs of Laban Scearce and the heirs of A.L. Hall as follows, to-wit:

-9-
(1) To the heirs of Laban Scearce, 125 miners inches from the beginning of each irrigation season to July 1, and for the balance of said irrigation season 75 miners inches of water for use upon the following described lands: 250 acres, lying and. being in the SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 33; SW 1/4 SW 1/4 SectIon 34 T. 23 North Range 4 West, and that portion of Section 3 T 22 N R 4 W, M.D.B. & M. lying between said Hall and Scearce ditch and the south or west bank of Stony Creek;

(2) To the heirs of A.L. Hall, 125 miners inches from the beginning of each irrigation season to July 1, and for the balance of said irrigation season 75 miners inches of water for use upon the following described lands: 235 acres lying and being in those portions of Sections 32, 33 and 34 T. 23 N, Range 4 West, M.D.B. & M. (excepting the SE 1/4 SE 1/4 of said Section 33 and SW 1/4 SW 1/4 said Section 34) lying between said Hall and Scearce ditch and the south or west bank of Stony Creek;
that the plaintiff caused the said water rights, canals, laterals irrigation system and all rights of way therefor from the date of said purchase to be incorporated within and made a part of the said Orland Project; that the plaintiff, on March 26, 1910, acquired by purchase from the Lemon Home Water Power & Light Company, a corporation, all of the water rights, system and right of way then and there operated, owned or controlled on Stony Creek and its tributaries by said corporation; that the property and rights so purchased include certain appropriations of water in Stony Creek theretofore made and instituted by plaintiff’s grantors as hereinafter set forth; that by reason of the aforesaid purchases and the acts of the plaintiff, the plaintiff is now the owner of rights and priorities in and to the use of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries as follows, to-wit:
(1) The right to divert and use 250 miners inches, under four inch pressure, of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries and from the natural flow thereof, through and by means of the South Diversion Dam and canal of the Orland Project, from the beginning of the irrigation season up to July lst of each year, and 150 miners inches under four inch pressure from July 1 of each year to the end of the said irrigation season, with a priority for said right of 1864;

(2) The right to divert and use 50 cubic feet per second of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries and from the natural flow thereof, through and by means of the South Diversion Dam and canal of the Orland Project, during each irrigation season, with a priority for said right of the date of January 27, 1888;

(3) The right to divert and use 7 cubic feet per second of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries and from the natural flow thereof, through and by means of the North Diversion Dam and canal of the Orland Project, during each

-10-


irrigation season, with a priority for said right of the date of May 4, 1897
That the plaintiff, by reservation and purchase has set aside and reserved for the use and benefit of the Indians thereon, their successors, and other Indians, that certain tract of land and the waters thereon, to-wit: The south half of the Southeast quarter of Section 15, Township 21 North, Range 6 West of the Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, in said County of Glenn, comprising 80 acres and known as the Grindstone Indian Reservation; that said reservation is traversed by Stony Creek and contains 15 acres of land which is irrigable therefrom and dependent upon the flow thereof for a water supply for its irrigation and for domestic and stock watering uses thereon; that said land is of little or no value without water and requires irrigation for the production of crops thereon; that plaintiff, as the owner of said lands and as trustee for the said Indians is entitled to divert and use for the aforesaid purposes during every month of each year sufficient water therefor to the extent of one cubic foot per second of the waters of Stony Creek, as hereinafter set forth.

That as a result of the said Orland Irrigation Project and of the intention of the plaintiff to reclaim and irrigate the said lands there has grown up a community of more than 3600 persons dependent thereon for a livelihood of which more than 700 are land owners and water users under said project, with whom plaintiff has entered into contracts as provided by said Reclamation Law by the terms of which plaintiff is required to furnish water for the irrigation of said lands to the aggregate of not less than 20,755 acres and the crops growing or to be grown thereon and under which the said water users are required to pay to plaintiff their proportionate part of the cost of said project and the irrigation works thereof, their said lands being charged with a lien therefor which cost and lien charges aggregate approximately $1,100,000; that the diversion and use of the water from the natural flow of Stony Creek and its tributaries is

-11-


necessary and proper for the said purposes.

That the irrigation works of said project, and all of them were constructed and water was reserved and appropriated therefor and has been and now is stored and carried in and by said works for a public use and purpose and that said construction, reservation and appropriation, carriage and storage, and the said public use and purpose for which these things have been done has been open and notorious and a matter of common knowledge to the water users and land owners in the said counties and either of then, particularly the defendants herein and no protest or objection thereto has ever been made by any of the said defendants or any other person, since the said construction was begun in the year 1908.

That the water shed of Stony Creek and its tributaries has an area of approximately 735 square miles upon which are precipitated the rains and occasional snows which cause and contribute to the flow of water therein, which flow varies from year to year according to the said precipitation, there being a flood period in the winter or early spring and a rapidly diminishing flow thereafter; that the average period of shortage of the natural flow extends from March 15 to October 15 of each year, during which period there is available for said purposes only the stored waters of said Project as hereinabove described; that the waters of Little Stony Creek are stored in said East Park Reservoir and the waters of Big Stony Creek are diverted therefrom through the East Park Feed Canal and stored in said reservoir at times in the year of larger flow in said tributaries of Stony Creek and generally when none of the waters thereof are being used for the irrigation of lands of the defendants; that the diversion and storage of said waters by plaintiff as aforesaid prevents the glutting and overflowing of such of the lands of defendants as are down stream from said reservoir and the diversion point of said East Park Feed Canal, and consequent injury and damage thereto to the extent of such storage.

-12-


That the defendants respectively have some right and claim to the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries by virtue of specific appropriations heretofore made by then respectively as hereinafter shown in claims numbered from one to ninety-four inclusive in the "Schedule of water rights in Stony Creek Watershed, defendants rights, sheet 1, sheet 2 and sheet 3", appended hereto,

[see link to .pdf exhibit of that Schedule at p. 18 below]

and said defendants have diverted and appropriated from Stony Creek and its tributaries and used for the necessary irrigation of their respective lands described in said schedule, water in the respective amounts and with the respective priorities as stated in the said schedule. As shown by the said schedule and columns therein each of the defendants named in the columns headed "claimant" directly or by his grantor or predecessor in interest on and continuing after the date in the columns headed "date of priority" has diverted and appropriated from a point of diversion as indicatad in the columns headed "point of diversion" from the stream named in the columns headed "stream" and through the ditch or ditches named in the columns headed "ditch", for the necessary irrigation of his lands described in the columns headed "land irrigated" water in the amount or amounts equivalent to those amounts stated in the columns headed "allowed at land" and "allowed at diversion", such water being sufficient to deliver to said lands after deducting the transportation loss as indicated in the column headed "conveyance loss" the amounts in flow and acre feet per season stated opposite the respective names of the defendants or their described lands and in the columns headed "Allowed at Diversion per season, total acre feet".

That on the 10th day of June, 1918, this court duly made and entered its order of preliminary injunction, restraining and enjoining certain defendants, and each and all of them, and all persons acting under their direction or control, their agents, attorneys, employees and servants and those in privity with them, during the pendency of this cause or until

-13-


the court should otherwise order, from in any manner diverting, using or wasting any of the water flowing in the channels of Little Stony Creek, or Stony Creek, which might thereafter be released into said channels by plaintiff from the East Park Reservoir of the Orland Project as the same was then or might thereafter be stored in said Reservoir, or from in any manner impeding or preventing said water or any part thereof from being conveyed down and by means of said channels of Little Stony Creek and Stony Creek to the South and North Diversion Dams of the Orland Project or from in any manner interfering therewith; that by the same order the court duly appointed E.T. Eriksen a Commissioner of this Court to be known as Water Conunissioner, and duly authorized, directed and empowered him, as such Commissioner to regulate the flow of water in the works of said Project to the end that the parties hereto should have a proper share thereof for their lands, without prejudice to any rights that might thereafter be established; that the said E.T. Eriksen duly qualified as such Commissioner and has at all times since said date fully performed his duties as such Water Commissioner.

That for the said 20,755 acres included within the said Orland Project there is required a total diversion of waters from Stony Creek and its tributaries 84,500 acre feet of water, the said lands requiring the diversion of 4.05 acre feet for their proper and economical irrigation and cultivation; that subject to prior appropriation and vested rights permitted and confirmed by the Act of Congress of July 26, 1866, the plaintiff is entitled and allowed to divert with a priority as hereinafter set forth in said Schedule of Water Rights in Stony Creek Watershed, Government’s Rights Sheet 5, appended hereto, 265 cubic feet per second of the natural flow of water of Stony Creek and its tributaries at South Diversion Dam together with all of the waters of Little Stony Creek, together with all of the water of Stony Creek and its tributaries during the months of

-14-


October, November, December, January and February of each year.

That the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District as successor in interest to the Central Canal and Irrigation Company is entitled to divert, store or otherwise use all of the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries, in excess of the said 265 cubic feet per second of the natural flow at said South Diversion Dam and the said stored waters hereinbefore apportioned to the plaintiff, subject to prior appropriation and vested rights permitted and confirmed by the said act of congress.

That certain defendants herein to-wit: as set forth in Sheet 4 of said Schedule, Riparian Rights, appended hereto, have made their respective claims for water from the natural flow of Stony Creek and its tributaries which claims are based upon their so-called Riparian Rights, as therein set forth; That none of these said defendants have ever applied to a beneficial use any of the waters of Stony Creek or its tributaries and the said lands enumerated in said Sheet 4 of said Schedule, are not irrigable from the natural flow of said Stony Creek or its tributaries except as shown in said Sheets 1, 2 and 3 of said Schedule, Defendants Rights; that except as shown in said schedule the lands of said riparian claimants are not physically or economically capable of irrigation from said Stony Creek and its tributaries through the existing ditch or ditches or otherwise; that if the said riparian claimants were to divert water from said stream in the amount of their claims such diversions and either of them would result in the losses due to evaporation, absorption and percolation thereby causing injury to the land owners below them and a deprivation of their lawful rights; that except as shown in the said schedule of defendants’ rights, and indicated upon sheets 1, 2 and 3 thereof no beneficial or economic use of the waters of said stream can be made or has been made upon or in the irrigation of the lands of said riparian claimants during any other time of year than the irrigation season hereinabove referred to and the natural

-15-


flow of said stream during said irrigation season has been fully appropriated and used by the plaintiff and defendants herein on their irrigated lands while the said riparian claimants have made no demand or claim for and no use of said waters upon any of their said unirrigated lands; that the said riparian claimants have established no right under any law of the State of California or of the United States to use water from said Stony Creek and its tributaries for irrigation or otherwise except as shown in the said schedule; that the said riparian claimants have established no title to any reservations of water rights except as shown in the said schedule of riparian claims sheet 4; that the said lands of the said riparian claimants as shown in said sohedule of riparian claims sheet 4 are not riparian to the said Stony Creek or its tributaries and have established no right to have any water flow by or over said land for irrigation or otherwise except as shown by appropriations as set forth in said schedule of defendants’ water rights sheets 1, 2 and 3; that the rights of the plaintiff as herein described, and the diversion and storage of water from Stony Creek and its tributaries pursuant to said rights and by and through said project structures and system, and the application to beneficial use of the water thus diverted and stored for the irrigation of the lands of said Orland Project at all times and places have been continuously exercised, done and accomplished against and adversely to said riparian claimants and the rights claimed by them, and in deprivation of the diversion to and use of water thereunder or otherwise, on the lands alleged to be owned by them ever since the construction of said project works and long prior to the commencement of this suit, and during all of said period plaintiff has been in actual occupation, use and enjoyment of said water and its said rights, openly, notoriously and peaceably and not clandestinely nor adversely nor in hostility to the rights claimed by said riparian claimants, and that such diversions and storage and application of waters to beneficial use have been under claim of right and title exclusive of any

-16-


other right and as plaintiffs only, and with notice to and knowledge of the said riparlan claimants, defendants herein, and the grantors and predecessors in interest thereof, and uninterruptedly and continuously as a part of the operation of said Orland Project, and of the diversion and storage of waters from Stony Creek and its tributaries; that the irrigation works of the Orland Project hereinabove described were each and all constructed, and water has been reserved and appropriated and is now being stored and carried in said structures for the public use and purpose, and the diversion, carriage and storage of water by means of said structures and the said public use and purpose for which these things have been done have been notorious and a matter of common knowledge in the neighborhood of the said lands of said riparian claimants and have been known to each and all of the above named defendants herein who have made no protest nor objection and who have not attempted directly or indirectly to restrain and prevent the same and said riparian claimants have acquiesced therein and recognized the necessity therefor and the advantages thereof as well as the validity of the rights of the United States therein; that except as shown in said schedule of defendant's rights sheet 1, 2 and 3 the said riparian claimants named on sheet 4 of said schedule have not used or applied the waters of Stony Creek or its tributaries to any beneficial purpose upon their said lands as set forth in said sheet 4, riparian claimants, on or before the 16th day of June, A.D. 1923, nor on or before the 11th day of August, A.D. 1923.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


Upon the foregoing Findings of Fact I make the following Conclusions of Law:

That the defendants named in columns headed "claimant" upon sheets 1, 2 and 3 entitled "Schedule of Water Rights Stony Creek Watershed, Defendants' Rights" and the plaintiff as named in the column headed "claimant" upon sheet 5 entitled "Schedule of Water Rights in Stony Creek Watershed, Government rights"

-17-


appended hereto, and their grantors and predecessors in interest, have diverted, appropriated and put to beneficial use, for generating electricity and power, storage, supplying the people of cities and towns, irrigation, domestic and other purposes, and have become entitled to the usufruct in and to divert and use, the waters of Stony Creek and its tributaries, for the purposes and in the respective amounts and under the respective rights and priorities as in said sheets 1, 2, 3 and 5 stated and allowed; and that the said defendants and plaintiff are entitled to a decree of this court confirming and establishing their respective rights and priorities as set forth in said schedule, and that the said riparian claims as set forth in sheet 4 of said schedule be disallowed.

Dated at Sacramento, California, this_____ day of A.D. 1925.


--------------------------------------
Special Master in Chancery

SCHEDULE OF WATER RIGHTS IN STONY CREEK WATERSHED, Sheets 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 [ referenced above - these are large blueprint sheets, difficult to photocopy, more difficult to scan; each sheet is scanned in 4 pieces in order: upper left, upper right, lower left, lower right. See the original in the court file for a more legible copy. ]

-18-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[Blue cover:]


IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION FOR ORDER


FILED
____O'clock ?____?____M
OCT 13 1925
WALTER B. MALING, Clerk
/s/ ?.M. Lampert
DEPUTY CLERK

HAROLD BAXTER
Special Assistant to the Attorney
General of the United States


220 Fleming Building, Phoenix, Arizona.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

AFFIDAVIT IN SUJPPORT OF
MOTION FOR ORDER

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, )

STATE OF ARIZONA, ) ss.

County of Maricopa, )

Harold Baxter, being duly sworn on oath deposes and says: that he is now and has been since the 1st day of March, A.D. l925, the duly appointed, qualified and acting Special Assistant to the Attorney General attorney for the plaintiff in the above entitled cause; that he is informed and believes and upon such information and belief, states as follows, to-wit: that on the 24th day of June, 1922, this matter duly came on to be heard upon the setting down of cause for trial and related matters whereupon the Honorable William C. Van Fleet, Judge, duly made and entered an order of reference herein, referring this cause to Geo. E. McCutchen, Esq., of Sacramento, California, as master pro hac vice, and ordering inter alia that the said master hear the testimony and evidence, receive the proofs herein and duly and promptly make his report thereon to this court, in the form of findings of fact and conclusions of law; that pursuant to said order the said Master duly held hearings in said cause at Willows, Glenn County, California, beginning the 12th day of October, A.D. 1922, and continuing thereafter at intervals until the 28th day of August, A.D. 1924, whereupon said master duly ordered the hearings closed, subject to any applications to reopen the matter for the taking of further testimony; that no such further application has been made by any party to this cause; that under the rules of practice in equity governing this court it is the duty of the

-1-


master to proceed with all reasonable diligence in this reference, and with the least practicable delay (Rule 60) and to return his report into the Clerk's office (Rule 66); that no such report has been by the Master returned into the Clerk's office although more than thirteen (13) months have expired since the said hearings were closed as aforesaid; that there is hereto annexed a copy of a Master's Report, heretofore prepared by affiant, which in substance and in form is appropriate to be filed in this cause by said master; that any further delay in the filing of the Master's Report will result in expense hindrance and annoyance to the parties hereto.


/s/ Harold Baxter
HAROLD BAXTER
----------------------------------

Subscribed and sworn before me at Phoenix, Maricopa County, Arizona, this 9th day of October, A.D. 1925


/s/ Allan C. Elder
ALLAN C. ELDER
----------------------------------
Notary Public in and for
Maricopa County, Arizona
(SEAL)

My commission expires Jan 23, 1928

-2-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[Blue cover:]


IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

NOTICE OF MOTION


FILED
____O'clock ?____?____M
OCT 13 1925
WALTER B. MALING, Clerk
/s/ ?.M. Lampert
DEPUTY CLERK

HAROLD BAXTER
Special Assistant to the Attorney
General of the United States


220 Fleming Building, Phoenix, Arizona.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA SECOND DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

-v-

H.C. ANGLE, et al.,

Defendants.

In Equity No. 30

NOTICE OF MOTION

To the Honorable George S. McCutchen, Special Master in Chancery, Sacramento, Califonia, and to Attorneys for Defendants to-wit:

    Messr’s. R.M. Rankin, Willows, California Brown & Albery Colusa " T.A. Farrell Sacramento " Geo. R. Freeman Willows " Durand [sic] F. Geis Willows " W.E. Johnson Orland " McCoy & Gans Red Bluff " Thos. Rudledge Colusa " C.L. Witten Safe Deposit Bldg., San Jose, California Richard Belcher, Marysville, California H.W. McGowan Willows " Howard Peirsol c/o E.K. Peirsol, Claremont, Los Angeles County, California and Hankins & Hankins, 818 Pacific Bldg., San Francisco, California and to Defendants Mrs. I.W. McGahan, Stonyford, via Sites, Colusa County, " Chas. Butler " " " " " " Elmer Silver Elk Creek, via Fruto, Glenn County " Minnie R. Sadler " " " " " " " E.B. Mann " " " " " " " and T.W. Morris " " " " " " "
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the plaintiff, The United States of America, by its undersigned attorney, will present, on Monday, the 2nd dey of November, A.D. 1925, at the hour of 10:00 o'clock in the forenoon of said day at the court room of said court, in the City of Sacramento, California, to said oourt for hearing, its Motion for Order, a copy of which is hereto annexed.

Dated this 10th day of October, A.D. 1925.


/s/ Harold Baxter
HAROLD BAXTER
-------------------------------
Special Assistant to the
Attorney General

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[Typed on the inside of blue cover]

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, )
STATE OF ARIZONA, ( ss.
County of Maricopa. )

AFFIDAVIT


Harold Baxter, being first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That he is the duly appointed, qualified and acting Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the United States and attorney for the plaintiff in this cause [substituted where?]; that on Saturday the 10th day of October, A.D. 1925, affiant deposited in the registered mails of the United States, at Phoenix, Arixona, envelopes duly addressed to the persons named in the within Notice of Motion as attorneys for defendants and defendants, respectively; that each of said envelopes was duly addressed to the said persons, postage franked and registree free [fee?] prepaid and contained copies of the Motion for Order, this Notice of Motion, Affidavit and unsigned Report of Special Master in Chancery thereto annexed, the originals of which are filed herewith in said cause numbered in Equity No. 30.


/s/ Harold Baxter
HAROLD BAXTER
-------------------------------

Subscribed and sworn to before me at Phoenix, Arizona, this 10th day of October, A.D. 1925.


/s/ Allan C. Elder
ALLAN C. ELDER
-------------------------------
Notary Public in and
For Maricopa County,
Arizona

SEAL

My commission expires Jan 23, 1928

[handwriten: And to Geo. E. McCutchen, Special Master in Chancery ????? Sacramento, ?????]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Return to Stony Creek Water Wars.

--Mike Barkley, 161 N. Sheridan Ave. #1, Manteca, CA 95336 (H) 209/823-4817
mjbarkl@inreach.com