THE STONY CREEK WATER WARS - The Stony Creek Underflow, 6,700,000 acre-feet of fresh water wasted by the Orland Project?

THE STONY CREEK WATER WARS
Glenn County - Tehama County - Colusa County , California.
(c) 2001, Mike Barkley
The Stony Creek Underflow, 6,700,000 acre-feet of fresh water wasted by the Orland Project?

[this compilation is in progress]

Underflow included in the Decree?

1906 Reclamation memoranda recognition of underground flows.
[Briefs of James Mills Orchards/Esperanza Land]
Decree, pp. 170-171, wherein the Glenn-Colusa Stipulation includes "...the natural flow, both surface and underground, of said Stony Creek..."
Deference by the Colusa County Superior Court to the SWRCB determination that all Stonyford subsurface waters are part of the underflow, at least as far as "new alluvium" underflows are concerned. "Old alluvium" flows were not necessarily so adjudged because the flows were so small as to be irrelevant; Colusa County Superior Court Opinion filed Apr 28, 1981, case No. 14932, "County of Colusa, etc., v. Westcamp, et al.", for condemnation of land for the Stonyford municipal water supply; Subsequent U.S. District Court action has covered some 20 years of back and forth claims and accusations although Colusa County and United States Forest Service contracted with Reclamation to ensure some claim to the water during the irrigation season, while SWRCB granted an appropriation for other times, see SWRCB defense of their jurisdiction elsewhere.

Comments in various Stony Creek Channelization plans:

[Bureau of Reclamation Plan]
[Glenn County General Plan Amendment]

"Known and definite channels" question, California Water Code Section 1200 and the availability for appropriation of underflows -- the Stony Creek underflow channel is "known and definite" in all places above Black Butte per the arguments expressed in the SWRCB comments quoted in the Stonyford municipal water supply case, including in Colusa County Superior Court and U.S. District Court. As for below Black Butte, at least the upper end of that channel is "known and definite", leaving the only question being at what point is it sufficiently diffused to not be "known and definite" - would that be the point at which the flow exits from Stony Creek Fan alluvium or at least the distinctive Stony Creek gravel deposits?

With the 1906 memoranda, and the 1977 approval of funding for 42 OUWUA wells, is this underflow properly chargeable to the Orland Project, and thus is the Project chargeable with wasting 6,700,000 acre-feet of water while upstream riparians suffer in thirst?

Other waste?

GCID Canals not lined?
Rainbow Diversion Canal not lined?
Many many acres of tule marsh at the upstream end of East Park Reservoir?

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

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