PROTEST to the California State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights regarding

Similar documents
Case 2:80-cv LKK Document Filed 12/21/2009 Page 1 of 97

A Practitioner s Guide to Instream Flow Transactions in California

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

State Water Resources Control Board

Biological Opinions for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta: A Case Law Summary

Conservation Congress v. U.S. Forest Service

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AMONG THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, CITY OF ELK GROVE AND THE WILTON RANCHERIA

RECLAMATION PROJECTS AUTHORIZATION AND ADJUSTMENT ACT OF 1992

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

Supreme Court of the United States

COURT USE ONLY. Decree: Order. DATE FILED: September 13, :12 PM CASE NUMBER: 2012CW191

Water Law Senior College Jonathan Carlson

ATTACHMENET 1 FOURTH AMENDED AND RESTATED SITES PROJECT AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT

In the Supreme Court of the United States

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE RELICENSING OF THE PELTON ROUND BUTTE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NO AMONG

Subject: Opinion on Whether Trinity River Record of Decision is a Rule

IMPLEMENTING AGREEMENT. for the COACHELLA VALLEY MULTIPLE SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN/ NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN.

Vague and Ambiguous. The terms market and marketing are not defined.as such, the

Case 1:06-cv OWW-NEW Document 150 Filed 06/15/2007 Page 1 of 40 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Assembly Bill No. 243 CHAPTER 688

(2) MAP. The term Map means the map entitled Proposed Pine Forest Wilderness Area and dated October 28, 2013.

The Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside Ordains as Follows:

In The Supreme Court of the United States

STORM DRAINAGE WORKS APPROVAL POLICY

Article 2These Regulations apply to the residents-resettlement for the Three Gorges Project construction.

CHRONOLOGY OF SIGNIFICANT WATER EVENTS FO R TH E M O N TEREY PEN I N SU LA

Letter - G3 Page

The Aamodt case is a complex, long-running adjudication of water

SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN IN NEW MEXICO NAVAJO NATION WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

District Court, Water Division 1, State of Colorado The Honorable Todd Taylor Case No.: 15CW3026

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

David Nickum Executive Director Colorado Trout Unlimited

New Mexico Water Law Case Capsules 2-1

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. June 1, 2009

CASE NO. 01CW1 TOM SMITH, P. O.

DECEMBER 13, 2005 GREAT LAKES ST. LAWRENCE RIVER BASIN SUSTAINABLE WATER RESOURCES AGREEMENT

Environmental Defense Fund, Inc., et al. v. East Bay Municipal Utility District et al. Supreme Court of California.

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. Among

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF ARIZONA

L. Regulation of surface water transfers. (a) Certificate Required. No person, without first obtaining a certificate from the Commission,

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Resource Agency Procedures for Conditions and Prescriptions in Hydropower

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE

One Hundred Fourteenth Congress of the United States of America

Charter Township of Orion

CUSHMAN PROJECT FERC Project No Settlement Agreement for the Cushman Project

County of Sonoma Agenda Item Summary Report

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY & WOTUS RULES UPDATES. Henry s Fork Watershed Council Jerry R. Rigby Rigby, Andrus & Rigby Law, PLLC

Columbia River Treaty Review

A SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA HAYWARD DIVISION. Karuk Tribe of California; and Leaf Hillman, ) ) ) Plaintiffs,

Thomas Christensen, Riparian Projects Coordinator. Enclosed is the meeting packet for the next meeting of the Committee, which will be held on:

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN RIO GRANDE SILVERY MINNOW

Citizen s Guide to the Permitting and Approval Process for Land Development in Pennsylvania

RULES AND REGULATIONS BEAUMONT BASIN WATERMASTER

Case 1:14-cv Document 1 Filed 01/31/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

RE: Oppose S. 112, S. 292, S. 293, S. 468, S. 655, S. 736, S. 855, and S. 1036

AGREEMENT FOR PURCHASE OF WATER FROM THE NORTH SAN JOAQUIN WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT BY THE CITY OF LODI

Dan Keppen, P.E. Executive Director

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY: The United States responses to interrogatories of the Cities of Aztec and Bloomfield

WYOMING S COMPACTS, TREATIES AND COURT DECREES

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA. Case No.

Arkansas River Compact Kansas-Colorado 1949 ARKANSAS RIVER COMPACT

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON SENATE BILL NO. 52

Storm Water Enforcement Response Plan Sewerage & Water Board of New Orleans Storm Water MS4 Permit Revised February 18, 2014

SUBCHAPTER A SUBCHAPTER B [RESERVED] SUBCHAPTER C ENDANGERED SPECIES EXEMPTION PROCESS

FIRST READING: SECOND READING: PUBLISHED: PASSED: TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF WASTEWATER BY LAND APPLICATION

III. SUMMARY OF TULE RIVER TRIBE'S HISTORIC AND FUTURE MONEY DAMAGES CLAIMS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES

NORTH MARIN WATER DISTRICT MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS July 17, 2018

DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION NO. 2, COLORADO

BEFORE THE REGIONAL FORESTER, USDA FOREST SERVICE, NORTHERN REGION, MISSOULA, MONTANA

302 CMR: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

No. 137, Original STATE OF MONTANA, STATE OF WYOMING. and. STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA Defendants.

In The Supreme Court of the United States

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA East County Board of Zoning Adjustments

Wetlands in the Courts: Recent Cases

ANTELOPE VALLEY WATERMASTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

ORDINANCE NO. An ordinance amending Section of the Los Angeles Municipal Code by amending the Zoning map.

RECLAMATION PROJECTS AUTHORIZATION AND ADJUSTMENT ACT OF 1992 TITLE XVIII -- GRAND CANYON PROTECTION SECTION SHORT TITLE.

In The Supreme Court of the United States

DOCKET NO. D DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMMISSION

Office of the General Counsel Monthly Activity Report June 2015

CHIPPEWA CREE TRIBE OF THE ROCKY BOY S RESERVATION INDIAN RESERVED WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT AND WATER SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 1999

Article 7. Department of Environmental Quality. Part 1. General Provisions.

BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR JOSEPHINE COUNTY

Rocky Mountain Regional Coordinating Committee

Case 2:17-cv JAM-EFB Document 1 Filed 10/31/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

33 USC 652. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see

Michael J. Van Zandt Partner

Mr. John W. Ellis President, Puget Sound Power and Light Company Puget Power Building. Bellevue, Washington 98009

WHEN RECORDED, PLEASE RETURN TO CITY OF MANTECA, 1001 W. CENTER ST. MANTECA, CA ATTENTION: JOANN TILTON, MMC CITY CLERK

Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. United States Forest Service

1. "Bear River" means the Bear River and its tributaries from its source in the Uinta Mountains to its mouth in Great Salt Lake;

GUNNISON COUNTY COLORADO NORTH FORK VALLEY COAL RESOURCE SPECIAL AREA REGULATIONS

NON-ATTORNEY S GUIDE TO COLORADO WATER COURTS

One Hundred Fifth Congress of the United States of America

ARNOLDSCHWARZENEGGER. Governor. STATE OF CALIFORNIA Fish and Game Commission

APPENDIX 4: "Template" Implementing Agreement

PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID) ADDITIONAL FINANCING Report No.: PIDA Project Name Parent Project Name. Region Country Sector(s) Theme(s)

Case Nos , , and UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Transcription:

Exhibit A - TABLE OF CONTENTS to PROTEST to the California State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights regarding USA Application 1, Permit, Protest filed October 1, 0 FORMS Protest - (Petitions) Based on Injury to Vested Rights Protest - (Petitions) Based on Environmental or Public Interest Considerations SUPPLEMENT - Supplement to Water Rights and Environmental Protest against Extension of Time for Bureau of Reclamation's (USA's) Application 1, Permit 1; Contents: I. Preliminaries, p. 1 A. [protestant's identification], p. 1 B. [protestant's affiliations and interests], p. 1 C. [extension of time is appropriate], p. 1 D. [requirements of Reg. 0], p. 1 E. [protestant's address, Angle rights, Angle Decree], p. 1 F. [protestant's SWRCB applications/licenses/permits], p. G. [protestant's usage of Decreed water and license & permit water], p. H. [regulation should not apply to this watershed], p. I. [USA's total project on this watershed], p. J. [request for hearing], p. II. Jurisdiction/Contrary to Law, p. A. [no SWRCB jurisdiction over Decreed surface flows; SWRCB jurisdiction over all non-decreed and non-surface flows], p. B. [protestant's on-line index of the Angle case], p. C. [Decree covers all USA, not just Reclamation], p. D. [Decree written by USA applied most strictly against USA], p. 0/0/ Exhibit A in Support of Petition 1 SWRCB Ap 1 Protest

1. [Decree, Para XV. p. : no diversions except as provided]. [Decree, Para XV. p. : diversions outside the season, against right limits]. [Decree, Para XV. p. : amounts or rates apply to entire calendar year]. [Decree, Para XV. p. : if allowed by water master, larger head for shorter periods]. [Decree, Para XV. p. : change point of diversion and places, means, manner or purpose of the use]. [Decree, Para XV. p. : rights in excess of decreed may not be claimed by parties, etc.]. [Decree, Para XV. p. : restrained from interfering with superior rights] E. [phrases show Decree binds all lands in the Decree and all persons named in the Decree and their successors and assigns], p. F. [errors in land descriptions in the Decree irrelevant], p. G. [Decree eliminates any other USA reserved right, including forestry right], p. H. [United States District Court has exclusive jurisdiction over surface flowing waters within watershed; SWRCB lacks jurisdiction], p. I. [SWRCB must stop handling disputes to surface water in the watershed], p. J. [attached Exhibit C, in progress, complex Decree limits; USA has taken more water than allowed in nearly every year since 0; watermaster reported spillage & waste until reports stopped after ; watermaster reports to the court of USA selling water to non-project users; lack of SWRCB jurisdiction over Black Butte, half of Stony Gorge, all other USA filings and petitions and diversions, stock ponds, etc.], p. K. [Decree loopholes in favor of USA, limited to storage], p. 1. [excess during initial reclamation]. [ other types of excess, 1 system-wide, parcel-by-parcel] L. [claims under loopholes must be overt, specific and public; unproven excess a crime under California Water Code ; USA entitlement limited to acreage actually irrigated; Decree allowed.0 a-f per acre at point of diversion, USA has taken far more than that], p. M. [unpermitted Intertie, Lateral 0 to Tehama-Colusa Canal] p. 0/0/ Exhibit A in Support of Petition SWRCB Ap 1 Protest

N. FRAUD ON THE COURT, p. 1-. [sequence of the fraud] pp. - O. UNDERFLOW, p. 1. [Angle Decree scrupulously excludes underflow, governs surface flow only], p. [extensive underflow testimony in the Angle record, p. ]. [Angle Decree excludes underflow], p.. [water master behavior as if Angle Decree included underflow], p.. [THE COLUSA COUNTY/STONYFORD WATER SUPPLY CASE, SWRCB Ap. & WR- & 0- extended reach of the Angle Decree ], p. a. UNDEFLOW - [extended reach to cover underflow], p. b. [allowed contest over Decreed claims with the SWRCB without jurisdiction], p. c. [interfered with Angle right to move points of diversion & use without jurisdiction], p. d. [promoted contract between Colusa County and Reclamation for Black Butte water, without jurisdiction], p. e. ELDERBERRIES - [by extension, interfered with protestant's elderberry and habitat restoration project], p. III. PUBLIC INTEREST, p. A. FULLY APPROPRIATED, p. 1. [SWRCB D /Ap no jurisdiction], p.. [SWRCB D 10/Ap 1 no jurisdiction], p.. [Decree limits currently,0. acre-feet for entire watershed so "fully appropriated" is erroneous; Judge Levi's nullification of GCID right in USDC ED case 1-; SWRCB (a)(1)(c)() $,000 fee for application in a fully approrpiated stream is punitive], p. B. COUNTIES OF ORIGIN/AREAS OF ORIGIN, p. 1. [upstream communities have suffered from USA's overall project; Newville], p.. [Elk Creek; Grindstone Rancheria; Stonyford], p.. [Fouts Springs], p. 0/0/ Exhibit A in Support of Petition SWRCB Ap 1 Protest

. [Century Ranch], p.. [Fouts Springs Youth Facility Environmental Assessment, Decree damaged upstream economy], p.. [USA overall project inconsistent with SWRCB watershed protection, county of origin, area of origin policies & duties], p. C. "AS AGAINST" & SWRCB REGULATION, p. 1. [as against], p.. [discriminatory enforcement by water master and U.S. District Court], p. a-ii. [ specific instances, citing specific files & boxes in the Angle Record, etc.], pp. -.[sic] [Decree shaded to favor its author, USA], p.. [selective enforcement chilled upstream uses and emboldened USA], p.. [USA takes more, SWRCB allows it], p.. [USA, OUWUA, GCID use SWRCB protest mechanism to enforce imbalance], p.. ["fully appropriated" designation punishes only the weak], p.. ["as against" claiming, especially by USA, prohibited by Decree], p. D. WASTE, p. 1. [California Water Code and others; California Constitution Article Section, Water Master reports of waste and spillage], p.. [Orland Project devolving into hobby farms], p. a-c. [some references to the devolvement], p. d. [hobby farm uses violate Reclamation policy], p. IV. ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC TRUST, p. A. CEQA, Guidelines, Discussions, NEPA, ESA, CESA, p. 1. [short fuse on filing protest requires winging this complex area of the law], p.. [short fuse limits research into anadromous fish references in the watershed], p.. [Angle Decree usurped SWRCB Public Trust within the watershed, but only for surface flow up to the Decree limits], p. 0/0/ Exhibit A in Support of Petition Civil No. S-0--LKK

. [California Public Resources Code 0, significant impacts, cumulative impacts, substantial adverse effects on human beings], p.. [same provisions in Guidelines 0], p.. [California Public Resources Code 00 feasible mitigations for significant impacts must be adopted], p.. [mitigations must be adopted, & under NEPA as well, EIR/EIS appropriate on cumulative project], p. B. ANADROMOUS FISH, p. 1. [Judge Purkitt quotes], p.. [CSPA cite], p.. [Clark,, CDFG Bulletin cite], p.. [NMFS two biological opinions], p.. [salmon dammed to extinction, water flow is still there upstream], p.. [salmon entering downstream, USA's barriers], p.. [listing of chinook], p.. [chinook and ESA and "take"], p. C. BALD EAGLES, p. D. OTHER PROTECTED SPECIES, p. E. INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES, p. F. SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS FOR WHICH FEASIBLE MITIGATIONS EXIST, p. 1. [feasible mitigations, recited as settlement terms, must be adopted] p.. [USA Fouts Springs EA admits the substantial adverse effects on human beings of USA's cumulative project] p.. [neglected upstream infrastructure a part of these impacts] G. SEISMIC WARNING, p. V. SETTLEMENT TERMS, p. 0/0/ Exhibit A in Support of Petition Civil No. S-0--LKK

A.,p. 1. [The Lower Stony Creek Plan, a failure] p.. [USA negotiates in bad faith; action required, then settlement] B. Settlement Terms/Mitigations, p. 1-. [settlement terms & mitigations] p. - VI. CONCLUSION VII. VERIFICATION EXHIBITS TO PROTEST: Exhibit A to Protest - Cases in the Erosion of Water Rights in the Stony Creek Watershed (Related Cases) Exhibit A-1 to Protest - List of Stony Creek watershed diversions in e-wrims, search first by stream, second by tributary, third by county, fourth by Mendocino National Forest, then by Decisions & Rulings - Count up to including Decisions & Water Right Opinions Exhibit A- to Protest - unique e-wrims forest/mendocino/blm in Glenn/Tehama/Colusa [counties] Exhibit B to Protest - Letter to Mr. Tom Tidwell, Chief, US Forest Service, regarding Forest Service violations of the Angle Decree Exhibit C to Protest - Diversion Limits in the Decree and Excess Diversions by Plaintiff United States of America (and Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District) [see Exhibit --- to this Motion Memorandum for an updated version] Exhibit D to Protest - Excerpts from the United States Forest Service, Mendocino National Forest, Fouts Springs Youth Facility Environmental Assessment - - - 0/0/ Exhibit A in Support of Petition Civil No. S-0--LKK