OCR Text |
Show PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF DIFFUSED SURFACE WATERS 541 occasions during the summer months when there were heavy rains. Such periodic flow is not of such frequency or duration as to make it practicable to classify the slough as a watercourse. "Instead, it must be classified as a drainway for surface waters, that is, waters from melting snow or rain which flow on the surface of the earth but do not form part of a watercourse."25 Duration One of the outstanding characteristics of diffused surface waters is that their flows are short-lived.26 Diffused surface waters lose their character as such when they are gathered into a definite body of water flowing as a stream in a natural watercourse.27 As the California Supreme Court said, "Streams are usually formed by surface waters gathering together in one channel and flowing therein. The waters then lose their character as surface waters and become stream waters."28 The weight of authority in the West is undoubtedly to this effect. Certainly, it is a general rule, as exemplified by numerous cases.29 Comparably, upon entrance into a lake,30 or into a pond or other permanent body of water,31 such water ceases to be diffused surface water and becomes water of the lake or pond. Likewise, it has been held that diffused surface water loses its character as such when it feeds a well.32 This loss of character of diffused surface waters also occurs when these waters, instead of directly joining a surface stream or lake or pond, percolate into the ground.33 Diffused surface waters "may, without artificial aid, converge so as to form a defined channel and if they would naturally flow therein it would be 25 Weinberg v. Northern Alaska Dev. Corp., 384 Pac. (2d) 450 (Alaska 1963). 26Doney v. Beatty, 124 Mont. 41, 51, 220 Pac. (2d) 77, 82 (1950). 21 San Gabriel Valley Country Club v. County of Los Angeles, 182 Cal. 392, 398,188 Pac. 554 (1920);Everett v. Davis, 18 Cal. (2d) 389, 393,115 Pac. (2d) 821 (1941). "Mogle v.Moore, 16 Cal. (2d) 1,9, 104 Pac. (2d) 785 (1940). "See, e.g., Popham v. Holloron, 84 Mont. 442, 449-450, 275 Pac. 1099 (1929); County ofScotts Bluff v. Hartwig, 160 Nebr. 823, 828-829, 71 N.W. (2d) 507 (1955); Walla v. Oak Creek Township in Sounders County, 167 Nebr. 225, 228, 92 N.W. (2d) 542, 545 (1958); Jefferson v. Hicks, 23 Okla. 684, 692, 102 Pac. 79 (1909); Price v. Oregon R.R., 47 Oreg. 350, 358, 83 Pac. 843 (1906); compare Terry v. Heppner, 59 S. Dak. 317, 319, 239 N.W. 759 (1931); International & G. N.R.R. v. Reagan, 121 Tex. 233, 239-240, 49 S.W. (2d) 414 (1932); McKell v. Spanish Fork City, 6 Utah (2d) 92, 95, 305 Pac. (2d) 1097 (1957); Sund v. Keating, 43 Wash. (2d) 36, 42, 259 Pac. (2d) 1113 (1953); Wyoming v. Hiber, 48 Wyo. 172, 181, 44 Pac. (2d) 1005 (1935). 30Block v. Franzen, 163 Nebr. 270, 277, 79 N.W. (2d) 446 (1956); Wyoming v. Hiber, 48 Wyo. 172, 181,44 Pac. (2d) 1005 (1935). 3XFroemke v. Parker, 41 N. Dak. 408, 415, 171 N.W. 284 (1919); Anderson v. Drake, 24 S. Dak. 216, 223, 123 N.W. 673 (1909); Wyoming v. Hiber, 48 Wyo. 172,181, 44 Pac. (2d) 1005 (1935). 33Anderson v. Drake, 24 S. Dak. 216, 223,123 N.W. 673 (1909). "Everett v. Davis, 18 Cal. (2d) 389, 393, 115 Pac. (2d) 821 (1941); Sun Underwriters Ins. Co. ofN. Y. v. Bunkley, 233 S.W. (2d) 153, 155 (Tex. Civ. App. 1950, error refused). |