THE STONY CREEK WATER WARS
Glenn County - Tehama County - Colusa County , California.
(c) 2009, Mike Barkley
AFFIDAVIT OF A.L. TRIPLETT

[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.

Also important because he was a year-round irrigator until the Decree cut down his irrigation to the irrigation season only.

And important because it ties in with testimony throughout the transcripts regarding year-round flows in the head waters of Little Stony and tributaries and how the dam SEVERED THE UNDERFLOW that flowed throughout the time the dam was being constructed, all casting doubt on the 7% savings of water alleged by the Water Commissioner at p. 3253 of the transcript since there is no indication he offset the underflow of Little Stony to which the upstream irrigators were entitled before coming to his 7% "savings" figure. His true "savings" may have been less than zero.

These affidavits show signs of hasty preparation, which is understandable since their "very good neighors" were suddenly attacking their homes and livelihoods with a very short response time in a distant city court.

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
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The United States of America,

Plaintiff,

vs.

H.C. Angle, et al.,

Defendants.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

AFFIDAVIT OF A.L. Triplett

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 Defendants
[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. RALSTON, RAY SHIVELY, E.E. SMITH, JOHN H. SOETH, GEO. SOETH, FRED E. STRAWN, A.J. TRIPLETT, ABE L. TRIPLETT, FRANK TROXEL, F.W. TROXEL, LLOYD TROXEL, I.E. TRUE, J. VAN SCYOC, A.P. WAKEFIELD,

Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT OF
A.L. TRIPLETT

ON HEARING PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION AND APPOINT-
MENT AND AUTHORIZATON OF
WATER COMMISSIONER DURING
PENDENCY OF CAUSE.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF GLENN ) SS.

A.L. TRIPLETT, being first duly sworn, deposes and says, that he is the owner in fee simple of 480 acres of land contiguous and is ripariant to and adjoins Big Stony Creek. in Sections 2 and 3 of Township 18 North, Range 6 West, M.D.B. & M. That affiant has used irrigation water on said land personally for the past 9 years, that prior to that time affiant's predecessors irrigated said land by means of the same ditch. That said ditch is not now carrying any more water than the same carried before the construction of plaintiff's dam or reservoir. That on the land thus irrigated by affiant, affiant has large and valuable crops of alfalfa, beans, garden and clover, corn

1.

and vegetables, that affiant has about 80 acres of said land in alfalfa and conducts on said place a dairy, and averages annually a milking of 25 cows. In addition to said dairy affiant has 60 head of cattle, five head of horses and 40 head of hogs, and depends on the alfalfa produced by means of his irrigation for said feed for feeding his life [sic] stock. That said land is of a sandy gravely nature and water runs through it very rapidly. That affiant, because of the sandy condition of said land runs the water through said ditch winter and summer continuously and if the water is taken out of said ditch and off the land for a period of three days the crops show in patches and places where the gravel is thicker. That said lands would produce absolutely nothing if not irrigated.

That below the ditch and between the ditch and creek affiant has about 40 acres planted to clover and because of the shallow condition of the soil on top of bed rock the water perculates [sic] through the soil from the alfalfa, and subirrigates the clover. And in addition thereto affiant has 8 acres in beans, and unless constantly irrigated it withers up and dies and is totally lost. That affiant's said irrigation ditch is so constructed by means of a check gate therein that only a uniform amount of water can pas [sic] through and when the water increases in the ditch above the check gate it goes over a spillway along the West bank of the main channel of Stony Creek and back into the said main channel. This check gate is essential to the use of said ditch because if more water comes through or comes through in uneven quantity will brake [sic] the irrigation ditch thereby said check gate affiant knows that he is not actually using on the land any more water than he used prior to the construction of plaintiff's said reservoir.

2.

That affiant is informed and on information and belief states that said ditch he is now using has been in use for 35 or 40 years, irrigating the same land. That during the year 1908, one J.E. Knight was affiant's predecessor and owned said land, and during the time said J.E. Knight owned said land and in addition to the former user, for water thereon filed a water right on said Creek on the point where the water is diverted from the main Stony Creek into Affiant's ditch, a copy of said water right is attached hereto and marked "Exhibit A" and made a part thereof.

And affiant states that for two years prior to any storage water whatever being turned into Stony Creek or Little Stony Creek he used the water of Big Stony Creek and had plenty of water to irrigate his said land.

Affiangt further states and especially calls to the attention of this Honorable Court, this fact, that the construction of plaintiff's said reservoir and dam as aforesaid diminishes if anything the usual flow of water in Big Stony Creek because the East Park Dam is built across Little Stony Creek cuts through Stony Canyon [?]. That Little Stony Creek, now runs and empties into said reservoir a stream of water 20 feet wide and 9 inches deep, flowing at the rate of 9 inches per second. And, that it is not true that Little Stony goes dry, but for many years each, affiant known [sic] it to be a fact that during the construction of said East Park Dam and while they were putting in the footage of the dam in the months of August and September, the plaintiff in order to put in said footing was required to and did construct a flume around the rocks above the footing of said dam to take through said gorge the water then flowing in Little Stony Creek and said flume was about 3 feet wide and 2 feet high, carrying a stream of water

2. [sic]

flowing through it at least 10 inches in depth, and in addition thereto plaintiff had a 6 inch centrifugal pump operated by a gas engine pumping out of and away from said footings.

That this affiant noticed the water running through said fume [sic] at many times and at all times the water was running about the same amount.

That Little Stony Creek now empties into said reservoir and is now held back by means of said dam and would finds [sic] its way into and co-mingles with the waters of Big Stony Creek. That this year is an extremely dry year and notwithstanding the dry season said Little Stony Creek is now emptying into said dam the volume of water measured as herein described.

Affiant further states that if the injunction is issued by this Court as prayed for by plaintiffs bill of complaint this affiant would be reparably [sic] damaged, his crops would die and his land would become practically worthless and of no better than Creek Bottom waste and affiant would be compelled to sacrifice his stock and loose [sic] his crops now growing on the land.

Affiant prays, that the injunction be not issued, as prayed for in plaintiff's complaint, and that no commissioner be appointed, as prayed for in Plaintiff's bill of complaint.
And affiant will ever pray.

/s/ A.L. Triplett

Subscribed and sworn to before me )
this 9th day of June, 1918. )
/s/ Elma Knock
Notary Public in and for the County of Glenn, State of California.

[page break]

[EXHIBIT "A"]

NOTICE OF LOCATION OF WATER RIGHT

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with the provisions of the laws of the State of California respecting Water rights, the undersigned has appropriated and hereby appropriates, three hundred inches of water, measured under a four inch pressure, flowing in Stony Creek in the County of Glenn, State of California. That the purpose for which the undersigned claims said water is for irrigation purposes. That he intends to divert it from said Stony Creek at a point where said Stony Creek Crosses the South line of Sec. 2, Twp. 18, N. R. 6 W. M.D.B. & M. [commas as in original] under the North West corner of the steel bridge crossing Stony Creek at that point, (at which point a duplicate of this notice is posted) on the North side of the Westerly approach to said bridge, and to conduct said water in a North Westerly direction about one and one half miles to a point on the North line of the West one-half of the South East quarter of sec, 34 Twp 19, N. R. 6 W to furnish water for irrigation the land [sic] along the line of diversion of said ditch to wit:
the frac. East half of Sec. 3, the frac. West half of South West quarter of Sec. 2 in Twp/ 18 N. and the West half of the South East quarter of Sec. 34, Twp 19 N. all in N. R. 6 W. M.D.B.M.

That the means by which the undersigned intends to divert said water is by a ditch, six feet wide at top, three one half feet at bottom and two and one half feet deep.

J.E. Knight

Dated this 18th day of June 1908

Recorded at request of W H. Sale June 20 A.D. 1908 at 40 minutes past 9 O.clock [sic] A.M. in Book 2 Miscellaneous Records page 278 Records of Glenn County.

M. Go1den, County
Recorder

[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