IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

______________________________________

                                                                                     )                      

KLAMATH IRRIGATION DISTRICT et al.,               )

 )

Plaintiffs,                                                         )          

 )         No. 01-591L

v.                                                                      )                                                                                                                                                             )         Judge Diane Gilbert Sypolt

UNITED STATES,                                                     )

 )        

Defendant.                                                      )

______________________________________)

                                            DECLARATION OF EARL DANOSKY

            I, Earl Danosky, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, declare:  

            1. I am now and have been since 1979, Manager of Tulelake Irrigation District (TID). I have worked at TID for the past 31 years.  I have firsthand knowledge of the operations of TID and, generally, with the Klamath Reclamation Project (Klamath Project).  My responsibilities include overseeing all irrigation and drainage functions of TID, supervising all of its employees, and reporting to and advising TID’s Board of Directors.  I am also the custodian of TID’s records.   

            2. TID is a California irrigation district formed and existing under the California Irrigation District Law, California Water Code, §§ 20510-29978.  Under California law, TID was established by and represents landowners and water users on approximately 68,000 acres in Siskiyou and Modoc Counties , California . TID operates and maintains numerous facilities for the delivery of water and drainage of lands within TID. 

            3.   Some lands within TID were under irrigation prior to the authorization of the Klamath Project.  Most of this land was served through a canal known as the Adams Canal .  After authorization of the Klamath Project, the landowners entered into agreements with the United States , conveying various properties and rights of way in exchange for a perpetual delivery of water from the Klamath Project through the Adams Canal , which was incorporated into the Klamath Project as the D Canal.  These lands generally followed the same process as those private landowners of Klamath Irrigation District (KID).

            4.  The majority of acres served by TID, in excess of 40,000 acres, are lands that were homesteaded.  Public lands were first opened to homesteading in 1922.  Land that had been owned by California was granted to the United States for disposition under the Reclamation and Homesteading laws by State legislation adopted in 1905.  Homesteaders were required to make improvements to land and grow crops prior to receiving patents. They filed affidavits concerning compliance with homestead laws and documents labeled “Application for Permanent Water Right.”  In the applications, the homesteaders promised to repay a portion of the cost of construction of the Klamath Project, and also gave a lien on their properties.  I have examined the records of the settlement of all homesteaded lands now within TID, including the lands patented under the Reclamation Act.   Those patents generally say:

The United States of America, in consideration of the premises, and in conformity with the several Acts of Congress . . . has given and granted . . . unto the said [name of grantee]  . . . the tract above described, together with the right to the use of water from the Klamath Reclamation Project as an appurtenance to the irrigable lands in said tract . . . .

United States Patent (Plfs.’ Mot. for Summ. J. App. at ___( July 21, 2003 )).

            5. TID was formed in 1952, after nearly all the lands now in TID had been homesteaded and irrigated.  In 1956, TID entered into a contract with Reclamation, taking over obligations to deliver Klamath Project water through facilities that had been previously operated by Reclamation. See 1956 TID Contract (Pls.’ Amended Compl. App. at Ex. 2, pp. 50 ( Mar. 24, 2003 )).  TID also assumed the obligation to repay construction costs of the Klamath Project.  TID levied assessments against landowners to repay construction costs, consistent with their original agreements to repay.  The costs were completely repaid to Reclamation in 1996.  TID also charges landowners for the operation and maintenance of Klamath Project facilities.

            6. In addition to the homesteaded lands, water is also delivered to other landowners who had made contracts with United States prior to the formation of TID.  Landowners under contracts known as Warren Act contracts had also agreed to repay the costs of Klamath Project works, and TID collected funds from those parties.  TID also makes annual contracts for delivery of “surplus” water under Article 19 of the TID Contract.  Those landowners pay for water delivery and have continuously used water delivered through Klamath Project facilities.

            7. Due to the design of the Klamath Project, TID also actually makes delivery of water to some lands within the KID. Similarly, KID delivers water to a part of the land in TID.  Those inter-District deliveries are established by various agreements.  In general, however, the great majority of land in TID is served by TID. 

            8. TID also delivers water to lands within the Westside Improvement District within TID.  In 1936, the United States entered into a contract to deliver water to Colonial Realty Company, which lands are now owned by individual farmers and comprise the Westside Improvement District.  As part of its takeover of the operation of Klamath Project works, TID delivers water to those lands.

            9.  I have read the Second Declaration of David A. Solem filed in this matter.  See Plfs.’ Mot. for Summ. J. App. at ___ ( July 21, 2003 )). It is accurate with respect to historical water deliveries in the Klamath Project and the events of 2001.  In TID, a large number of landowners received no water in 2001.  TID received a small amount of water from the Upper Klamath Lake in 2001 and some proportionate amount of the 30-day release in July and August, too late in the growing season to be of any use to the water users.

                10. Due to the Bureau of Reclamation’s decision to deliver zero water in 2001, many water users suffered devastating losses.   Numerous water users were unable to plant any crops in 2001, resulting in a complete loss of income from their land.  While some landowners were able to plant “cover crops” used to prevent soil erosion, due to the lack of water even these crops were not productive.  Moreover, some landowners were unable to pay their mortgages and as a result of lost their land.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.                 

Executed on July ___, 2003                                     ___________________________

Earl Danosky, President

Tulelake Irrigation District