THE STONY CREEK WATER WARS
Glenn County - Tehama County - Colusa County , California.
(c) 2009, Mike Barkley
Answer of James Mills Orchard Corporation
[A transcription of the document on file in the Angle Archives
Important because they were the predominant user of downstream underflow.
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 EQUITY NO. 30
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION
OF THE
DISTRICT COURT
OF THE
UNITED STATES
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND DIVISION.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
H.C. ANGLE, ET AL.,
Defendants,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT JAMES MILLS
ORCHARD CORPORATION.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FILED
At ____ o'clock and ____ Min ____ M
SEP 25 1922
W.B. Maling, Clerk
By Thomas J. Franklin, Deputy Clerk
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[end of cover]
IN THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND DIVISION
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
H.C. ANGLE, ET AL.,
Defendants.
IN EQUITY No. 30
ANSWER OF DEFENDANT
JAMES MILLS ORCHARD CORPORATION
Comes now the above named defendant, James Mills Orchard Corporation, and for
answer to the amended complaint of plaintiff herein alleges and sets forth:
I.
That defendant is a corporation duly organized and existing under and by
virtue of the laws of the State of New York, and has conformed to all of
the laws of the State of California governing upon corporations.
II,
That the defendant is now and for many years immediately prior to the
commencement of this action through itself and its predecessors in interest
has been and is now the owner of and in possession of by right and title
derived from the United States Government by continuous chain of title of
those certain lots, pieces and parcels of land situated in the County of
Glenn, State of California, and more particularly described as follows,
to-wit:
The south half of Lots 1094 to 1097 inclusive,
The south west quarter of Lot 1112
Lots 1113 to 1117 inclusive
The north half and the south east quarter of Lot 1129
Lots 1130 to 1140 inclusive
Lots 1141 to 1150 inclusive
Lots 1166 to 1178 inclusive
All said Lots being part of Division No. 2 of the Hamilton Unit of the
Sacramento Valley Irrigation Project according to the Map of same filed for
record in the office of the Recorder of the County of Glenn, State of
California,
-1-
III.
That said Stony Creek referred to in the said complaint is a natural stream
and water course arising in the Mountains west of the lands of defendent,
and said creek and waterway thence naturally flows and has flowed from time
immemorial to, on, over and under and across the lands of defendant and
leaves the foothills of the Coast Range of Mountains at a point a few
miles northwest of the town of Orland, in the said County of Glenn, State
of California, at a point known as Millers Buttes, from said last mentioned
point said creek and waterway flows in a general easterly direction and
finally devouching [sic] into the Sacramento River, and said creek and the
waters of said creek at this time passes over, through, on, under and along
the lands of the defendant as above described; That each and all of the
above described lands have at all times since their acquirement by the
defendant and the original predecessors in interest have been and are now
riparian to the said stream and its tributaries and the waters thereof.
IV.
That during the past geologic ages Stony Creek has built up a well defined
cone, and that under the surface of the lands of defendant may be found
numerous gravel stratas and channels, at variable depths and all
interconnected, and that said channels are not only connected with each
other but they are also connected at numerous points with the present
surface and underground channel of Stony Creek, and that all of said
channels have a common source, whlch said common source is below the point
of storage and diversion adopted by plaintiff, and above the lands of
defendant.
V.
That the present bed of Stony Creek is a wide shifting
-2-
bed of loose pervious and coarse gravel and that at all points above and
adjacent to the lands of defendant it will vary in width from a minimum of
one thousand feet to a maximum of over five thousand feet; That the material
which makes up said stream bed is of such an excessively coarse nature that it
absorbs large quantities of water during the time when a surface flow exists
in said stream and that the water so absorbed into said stream bed flows and
percolates into the numerous underground gravel stratas and channels above
referred to, and which flow upon, over, along and under the lands of
defendant: That the amount of water so absorbed is variable and depends upon
the surface of water, the surface of gravel exposed to such water, the depth
of water over such gravels and the duration of the flow; and defendant
claims that a large portion of said flow does percolate as above described
and does not flow on the surface of said stream to its junction with the said
Sacramento River; That of the waters which are absorbed into the gravels as
above described, some are lost by evaporation, and that the balance tend
to continue their flow in said underground channels, and ultimately after
passing along, over and under the lands of defendant, reach the ocean. That
unless said underground channels are annually replenished there will be
nothing to sustain the supply of water now existing and passing along, over
and under the said lands of defendant, and that as a consequence in a few
years said underground channels will be depleted and dry, and defendant
further alleges that all of said water so described is necessary for the
proper irrigation of its lands.
VI.
That the lands of defendant are fertile and not only require water now
flowing in said channels for the proper irrigation of its lands, but an
additional suppiy of water from said
-3-
surface and underground flow to be applied to its said land for proper
irrigation in order to make said lands productive; That beginning with
the year 1912 the defendant has greatly improved its lands and large
acreage thereof by planting thereon a large number of trees of various
kinds, both deciduous and citrus, as well as other crops requiring water
to be applied artifically [sic]. That to supply such needed water the
defendant has expended large amounts of money in the boring and sinking of
numerous wells, and the installation therein of suitable pumps and
equipment with which to operate said pumps for the irrigation of said lands
from the surface and underground flow of said Stony Creek, and, also, in
the construction of many miles of concrete pipe for the distribution of
said water to said lands, and in the construction of many miles of power
lines to enable power to be delivered to said pumps for said irrigation;
That said land is now all being irrigated from the surface and underground
flow of water of said stream, and has at all times since the year 1912 been
so irrigated; That the result of the use of said water for said irrigation
has been to increase greatly the yields of crops of all kinds on said lands,
and that as a further result of said irrigation the value of said lands and
crops grown thereon have, and will be, greatly increased, and will still
increase unless said supply of water is depleted, and produce valuable
crops of all kinds,
VII.
That the wells so bored on defendant's lands are connected with and are
supplied through the surface and underground channels above referred to,
and are entirely dependent upon them; That the inevitable result of the
operations of said piaintiff in storing flood waters and diverting from
said stream the natural flow thereof will be that the gravel stratas
underlying the lands of
-4-
defendant will be deprived of their usual and necessary supply of water
for the irrigation of said lands, and as a further result the wells of
defendant will not yield sufficient water for the proper or any irrigation
of defendants’ lands described herein, and the trees and other crops now
planted, and to be planted, on the defendants lands will no longer produce
a full or any crop of fruit and may wither away and die.
VIII.
That the defendant as owner of the lands above described is entitled to a
reasonable use of the surface and underground flow of said Stony Creek,
and the waters thereof, and is entitled to have such flow continue on, over,
across and under the above described lands, and hereby claims the right by
virtue of such ownership and riparian proprietorship, to have an undiminished
flow over, by, across and under said lands; That he also claims the right
to make use of said surface and underground waters for the purpose of
irrigating said lands and for all other reasonable and domestic purposes.
IX.
Defendant also claims that by virtue of ownership of lands having an
underground water bearing stratum which is supplied by the flood waters
and other waters of said Stony Creek, he has a primary right to the full
surface and underground flow of said stream in order to bring such
underground water bearing strata up to their full capacity, to the end that
a full and complete irrigation of said lands may be accomplished
X.
That the rights of plaintiff and all others to the flow of water in said
Stony Creek, either flowing on the surface or under the bed of said Stony
Creek, and to the storage of flood waters thereon, is subsequent to and
subordinate to the rights of this
-5-
defendant as the riparian proprietor of said lands described herein, to use
the same and apply the same to the irrigation of the above described lands
and for domestic and other uses; That the rights of plaintiff to store
the flood, or any waters, of said stream or to use said stream as a channel
for carrying its water from its storage works so constructed to points of
diversion as aforesaid, and thereupon distributing it to other lands than
that of defendant, are also subordinate to the rights of said defendant as
a landowner having an underground gravel stratum supplied directly or
indirectly by flood or other waters from said Stony Creek,
WHEREFORE defendant prays that plaintiff take nothing as against this
defendant; that the rights of said defendant to the waters of Stony Creek,
either surface or underground, and its tributaries, be determined by this
Court, and that it be adjudged and decreed that as between the plaintiff
and defendant the said defendant have the right to all underground and
surface water of said creek necessary and in sufficient quantities for the
proper irrigation of this land, and a sufficient supply of flood water
to annually replenish said underground stratas, and for costs incurred in
this action, and for such other and further relief as to this Court may
seem proper.
/s/ James Mills Orchard Corporation
---------------------------------------
Defendant.
/s/ Frank Freeman [both signatures in Mr. Freeman's hand]
-----------------------------
Attorney for Defendant
-6-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Return to Stony Creek Water Wars.
--Mike Barkley, 161 N. Sheridan Ave. #1, Manteca, CA 95336 (H) 209/823-4817
mjbarkl@inreach.com