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

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

Important because these affidavits were the first sworn response to Reclamation's suit, and Judge Van Fleet's ignoring them, as in not even reading them before issuing his injunction, set the tone for the rest of the litigation, as in the Court was there to support the government, not justice or equity. This affidavit testifies to East Park Dam severing the year-round flow and underflow relied upon by the upstream irrigators.

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:]

No. 30 Eq

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES IN AND FOR THE
NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIF.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The United States of America
Plaintiff
vs.
H.C. Angle, A.M. Anderson, et als.
Defendants - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Affidavit of Fred Strong [sic]

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

FILED
At ____ o'clock and ____ Min ____ M
JUN 11 1918
Walter B. Maling, Clerk
By /s/ Thomas J. Franklin
Deputy Clerk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CLAUDE F. PURKITT
Attorney for_______________
[end of cover]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
IN AND FOR THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF
THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.


THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

PLAINTIFF,

vs.

H.C. ANGLE, A.M. ANDERSON, A.C. BAYLEY, L. BEDFORD, JOHN BEDFORD, R.E. BLEVINS, I.L. FEIGHTNER, W.W. GATLIFF, IRA GREEN, AUG. GOLLNICK, LEONARD GOLLNICK, JAMES HARMON, REUBEN HARTMAN, VOLNEY HAYTON, C.A. HINELINE, CHAS. JAEGER, JOHN JOHANNSEN, JOHN JOHANNSEN, JR., J.E. KNIGHT, J.E. MALLON, G.W. MARKHAM, PRESTON MORRIS, WM. NIESEN, JAMES O'BRIEN, S.A. TALSTON [sic], RAY SHIVELY, E.E. SMITH, JOHN H. SOETH, GEO. SOETH, FRED, E. STRAWN [sic], A.J. STRIPLETT [sic], ABE L. TRIPLETT, FRANK TROXEL, F.W. TROXEL, LLOYD TROXEL, I.E. TRUE, J. VAN SCYOC, A.P. WAKEFIELD,

DEFENDANTS.

AFFIDAVIT OF
Fred Strawn
ON HEARING PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION AND APPOINTMENT
AND AUTHORIZATON OF
WATER COMMISSIONER DURING
PENDENCY OF CAUSE.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF GLENN ) SS

FRED STRAWN, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is one of the defendants in the above entitled action, that he is the owner in fee simple of 65 acres of land in Section 34, Township 19 North, Range 6 West, M.D.B & M. and has under irrigation about 25 acres, that affiant operates his water through a ditch in which he has a joint interest of joint users of Earl True and John Johannsen.

That affiant known of his own knowledge that water of Stony Creek has been flowing through John Johannsens ditch for about 33 years. That during all that time and each year affiant knows that the water has flowed through said ditch and unto the lands which affiant now owns.

1.

That affiant owns said land in fee simple and his land is reparian [sic] to and joins the main channel of Stoney Creek; in fact said Stoney Creek runs through said [sic] and part thereof is on the east side of the said Creek; that affiant has owned said land for five years last past and has each year used the water for irrigation purposes thereon and that his predecessors each year since the construction of said John Johannsen ditch has each year used the water on the land now irrigated and owned by affiant; that the water now being used by affiant for the irrigation of said lands is of no greater quantity than was used by affiant's predecessors on said land prior to the construction of plaintiff's reservoir and dam; that affiant states that said land is valuable for the production of crops by constant application of water thereto and to remove the water therefrom the same is of little value to him; that said land is under laid with bed rock near the surface and dries out very quickly, and by reason thereof if this Honorable Court should deprive this affiant of water the land would be lost to him and affiant's crops thereon would become dead and non-productive; that affiant has leased said lands to one James O'Brien who has a large number of live stock thereon and is conducting a dairy and depends upon alfalfa production on the ground irrigated from water conducted through said ditch for his feed; that if said water is shut off affiant would lose his income from said land and together with that damage and the damage of the loss of the land, would be great and irreparable to affiant. Affiant has lived on said land and near Stony Creek all his life and is more or less familiar with the lands irrigated and that prior to the construction of said East Park Dam by plaintiff little Stoney Creek did not at any time to the knowledge of the affiant dry up before the latter part of July and then only in places where there was a deep bed of gravel. That all of said water

2.

coming down through Little Stoney Creek in the summer season that was in said creek ultimately found its way into the channel of Big Stony Creek in August and September [sic, run on] little Stony Creek would dry on the surface of the bed of the creek but in other places or portions of said Stoney Creek where the bed rock was near the surface and during the time that said plaintiff was constructing said East Park Dam it was necessary to convey the water around above the footing of the Dam, while the footings were being put in across Little Stoney Creek in a flume so as to allow the concrete to set, and that said flume carried quite a volume of water during the entire summer; affiant further states that by reason of Plaintiff's dam being constructed at East Park that it prevents all the water of Little Stoney Creek that in the state of nature would naturally run and find its way into the bed of Big Stoney Creek, from entering Big Stoney Creek except in the form of storage water, and that by reason of plaintiff's dam the natural flow of Big Stoney Creek is diminished by whatever quantity of water naturally would flow into Big Stoney Creek from Little Stony Creek. Affiant has lived on Big Stoney Creek all his life and has never seen Big Stoney Creek dry or at a time when there was not sufficient water therein to water the lands of affiant and his neighbors.

WHEREFORE affiant prays that the injunction prayed for in plaintiff's complaint be denied and that no commissioner be appointed or that no cost be put upon affiant or his neighbors by reason of the appointment of said Commissioner, and affiant will ever pray.

/s/ Fred Strawn

Subscribed and sworn to
before me this 9th day of June, 1918.

/s/ Elma Knock

[stationery imprinted:]
CLAUDE F. PURKITT
ATTORNEY AT LAW
WILLOWS, CALIFORNIA

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

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