October 10, 1906, on Stony Creek near Miller Buttes - 500 cubic feet per second - now the site of the South Diversion Dam.

October 11, 1906, on Little Stony Creek - 100,000 acre-feet annually - now the site of East Park Dam.

March 23, 1910, on Stony Creek - 10,000 miners inches - now the site of North Diversion Dam.

March 25, 1913, on Big Stony Creek - 20,000

-10-

miners’ inches - now the site of the Feed Canal Diversion Dam.

(a) That in conveying the water stored in East Park Reservoir to the South and North diversion dams of the Orland project plaintiff has the right to and does make use of the natural channels of Little Stony Creek and Stony Creek, and is therefore compelled to carry, and has the right to so carry, such stored water past and by the ditches and diversions of said defendants and each of the same; that each and every of said defendants, although repeatedly and vigilantly warned and noticed verbally and in writing, of their lack of right in that regard and of the necessity that such stored water be conserved and conveyed undiminished (save by losses

-19-

from seepage and evaporation) to the Orland project for the reclamation and irrigation of the lands therein, and although the lands of said defendants are entirely outside of said Orland project and none of them or of said defendants have in any manner or amount contributed to the cost of the storage or other works of said project, each year since the construction of said works have wrongfully and without warrant of law diverted large amounts of said stored water through their ditches and upon their said lands, and by the use and excessive use of said water upon said lands, and by allowing the same to waste into sloughs and depressions and to evaporate and seep away, have wrongfully and unlawfully prevented plaintiff from conveying a large portion and amount of the water so released from storage to the diversion works of said project and to the lands thereof, causing great loss and damage to plaintiff and to the above described owners of lands and water users within said project.

(b) That it has been the hope of plaintiff, and every possible effort has been made to that end, that the defendants would be persuaded to desist from their said wrongful and unlawful diversions of such stored water, and the plaintiff has heretofore refrained from subjecting said defendants to the expense of litigation in that regard, and has attempted during the years when the irrigated area upon the Orland project was not so large as now to get along with such of said stored water as could be passed by the diversion points of de£endants, and to thus in part measure at least account for the losses which were occasioned by the illegal diversions by defendants; that the situation however became much aggravated during the last irrigation season and would have been entirely disastrous but for the fairly large precipitation within the Stony Creek watershed; that the irrigated area of the Orland project has been extended very rapidly during the last few years, increasing from 9400 acres in 1916 to 14450 acres at the end of 1917, and again increasing this year to approximately 17,000 acres; that this increased area makes a greatly magnified demand upon the water stored for said project, and unless the same can be conserved for its use and conveyed from the East Park reservoir past the ditches and diversions of defendanta to the South and North diversion dams for said project, plaintiff and those under the Orland project with whom it has contracted to supply water as aforesaid will suffer irreparable loss and damage.

(c) That the precipitation within the stony Creek watershed during the winter just passed has been the least and lowest known in many years, and plaintiff has therefore been unable to more than partially fill the East Park reservoir; that this condition has further caused the natural flow of Stony Creek and its tributaries to decrease so rapidly as to make it necessary for plaintiff to begin drafts from said East Park reservoir much earlier in the irrigation season than in previous years, to-wit: on the 3rd day of May last, again causing a serious subtraction from the already depleted water supply available for said project; that on account of the foregoing conditions and circumstances, and in order, in so far as at all feasible and possible, to conserve the available storage for later use in the hot months of the summer when water is even more vitally necessary for the preservation and maturing of crops, plaintiff has been compelled already during the present season to prorate the amount of water delivered to the lands in said project so as to furnish such lands only a partial and insufficient supply.

-20-

(d) That of the water which plaintiff was able, during the period of higher flow in Stony Creek and its tributaries, to divert, segregate and store in the East Park Reservoir there remains only 38000 acre feet, which three weeks hence will not amount to more than 32,000 acre feet; that on the 17,000 acres of land within the Orland project which are now being irrigated from the works thereof, there are being raised and matured by means of said irrigation crops of the value of more than one million dollars, including some thousands acres of citrus and other fruits and many other thousands of acres of forage and other crops of equivalent or greater value; that the irrigation of these lands and crops must be accomplished for the balance of the irrigation season from the water that is now remaining in the East Park Reservoir as aforesaid, only fifty per cent of which, on account of necessary and legitimate losses in transmission and from evaporation from the reservoir surface, can be depended upon for application to said lands; that this water is much less than sufficient to mature all of said crops, but if it can be conveyed to said lands, from time to time as needed, from said East Park Reservoir through and by the channels of Little Stony and Stony Creeks without loss or subtraction therefrom, saving usual losses by seepage and evaporation, it can by careful economies and a just prorating of the supply be made to furnish a partial irrigation supply to nearly all of said lands, and to save and bring to maturity a large portion of said crops; that the said remaining water in said reservoir belongs to plaintiff for such use and purpose, and plaintiff has the legal and equitable right to convey same from said reservoir to said South and North diversion dams for use on said lands when same is needed therefor by means of the natural channels of Little Stony and Stony Creeks past the ditches and diversion points of defendants, who in turn have no right whatsoever to any of said water or to divert or use the same.

(e) That the natural flow of Little Stony Creek, and of such small tributaries as it has, so decreased as to become practically nothing on the last day of May, and has remained and will remain so since said date and up to the end of the present irrigation season, and that therefore no water has been flowing in said Little Stony Creek save that released from storage in East Park Reservoir; that since said last named date defendants Wakefield and Ralston as to the one of their places described in paragraph X hereof, although warned and noticed as aforesaid, have wrongfully and unlawfully and continuously diverted such stored water from said Little Stony Creek and used the same upon their said lands, and caused the same to waste, evaporate and seep away and become lost, the diversions of said defendants in this instance having averaged during said period at least 3 cubic feet per second; that all of said defendants in aggregate throughout the present irrigation season have diverted from LIttle Stony and Stony Creeks and used upon their said lands and allowed to waste, evaporate, seep away and to become lost as aforesaid approximately 30 cabic feet of water per second; that the natural flow in Stony Creek just above the highest diversion of defendants now amounts to about 45 cubic feet per second, but is decreasing and falling very rapidly, and within not more than three weeks hence, and very probably within a less time, will not amount to more than about 10 cubic feet per second and will either continue at that figure or grow even less during the remainder of the current irrigation season; that said defendants and every of them have in previous years diverted and do now threaten to and will in fact, unless restrained and enjoined by the order of this court, throughout the current irrigation season continue to divert from the

-21-

channels of said Stony Creek and Little Stony Creek as much water as they are now diverting, irrespective of the fact that the natural flow of Stony Creek will soon decrease as aforesaid to about 10 cubic feet or less per second, that is to say, that defendants threaten to and during the irrigation season now current will in fact, unless restrained and enjoined by the order of this court, wrongfully and unlawfully divert and use and cause to waste away and become lost such amount of the stored water released from said East Park Reservoir and conveyed down the channels of Little Stony Creek and Stony Creek for the purposes aforesaid as will cause their total diversions to amount to 30 cubic feet per second, taking from such stored supply such excess over the natural flow in said creeks as will make up the difference between such natural flow and the said 30 cubic feet per second; that such wrongful and unlawful diversions by defendants from said stored supply within the next three weeks or lesser period as aforesaid will gradually increase until they are diverting and using and consuming upon their lands and causing to be wasted and wholly lost at least 20 cubic feet per second of such stored water, and that defendants threaten to and will in fact unless restrained and enjoined by the order of this court continue such diversions from the stored supply in the amounts and to the extent aforesaid throughout the remainder of the present irrigation season, and by that means cause to become lost from the project supply more than 5600 acre-feet of water, which is more than 33 per cent of the supply that will be available in said season during that time for the irrigation of said project, considering necessary and legitimate losses in said reservoir and in transmission to the lands of said project, as aforesaid; that unless defendants are restrained and enjoined by the order of this court from so diverting said water as aforesaid the crops now growing and standing on some thousands of acres of the lands of said project will be entirely deprived of a water supply and become a total loss, and in light of the facts and circumstances hereinabove alleged as to the necessity for conserving and prorating the insufficient supply available in said reservoir, will cause the crops on the greater portion if not all of the balance of the irrigated area on said project to be diminished, stunted and withered, all to the irreparable damage and injury of plaintiff and of the water users and land owners under said project with whom plaintiff has contracted to deliver a water supply for the irrigation of their lands.

(f) That it will be practicable and feasible, when the natural flow of Stony Creek decreases as aforesaid, to accurately measure said flow, and by the closing of the gates of the East Park dam for the time being to ascertain and measure the amount of said natural flow which each and all of said defendants is at that time diverting from the natural channel of Stony Creek in accord with their claims of right as they are now being made, and that under the direction of this court a water Commissioner duly appointed, for that purpose can readily make the measurements aforesaid, and, if the court so direct, measure the irrigated acreage of the several defendants and apportion the natural flow thereto by rotation or otherwise, to the end that when releases from storage again occur said Water Comisssioner may then under the direction and order of this court so regulate the ditches of defendants and each of them as to prevent all wrongful and unlawful diversions of such stored water as the same reaches the diversion points and ditches of defendants, so that said stored water may be conveyed down the natural channels of Little Stony and Stony Creeks to the South and North diversion dams of the Orland project without subtraction therefrom or loss thereof, except such losses as may occur in transmission from

-22-

seepage and evaporation, which in turn can be readily estimated and measured by said Commissioner.