OCR Text |
Show THE RIPARIAN RIGHT 79 the waters of navigable watercourses. But it has been so extended by most state courts that have decided the matter. See relevant court decisions below. The navigation servitude and public rights to which riparian rights may be subject, and the definitions of navigable waters for various purposes, have been discussed in chapter 4.401 Such matters are only briefly referred to in this subtopic and elsewhere in this chapter, notably under "Purpose of Use of Water-Attractive Surroundings and Recreation-Uses having tangible value- (3) Fishing and propagation of fish," below. California.-The riparian right attaches to navigable waters to the extent that their navigability is not interfered with. "The riparian owner on a non-tidal, navigable stream has all the rights of a riparian owner not inconsistent with the public easement."402 A district court of appeal expressed the belief that a lake is not excluded from the application of the constitutional amendment of 1928403 merely because it is navigable.404 The United States Supreme Court held that in the construction of the Central Valley Project, California, Congress elected to take any State-created rights, including riparian rights, on the San Joaquin River-navigable on the lower portion of its course-under its power of eminent domain for reclamation purposes, rather than under its dominant commerce power.405 Whether Congress could have taken them under its dominant commerce power was therefore immaterial. Riparian lands that had previously benefited from the annual inundations of the San Joaquin River, which ceased with construction of Friant Dam behind which the high floodfiows were im- pounded, were held to have valid riparian water rights under California law, for the deprivation of which compensation must be paid. Nebraska.- Although aspects of the question have been discussed, the question of riparian rights in navigable streams apparently has not been squarely decided by the Nebraska Supreme Court.406 401 See especially "Water Rights in Navigable Waterways-Riparian Rights," "Uses of Navigable Water," "Classification of Navigable Waters," and "Determinations of Navigability for Commerce Power and Bed Title Purposes." M3Heilbron v. Fowler Switch Canal Co., 75 Cal. 426, 432-433, 17 Pac. 535 (1888). The fact that the San Joaquin River between two indicated points is navigable "does not affect riparian rights."Miller & Lux v. San Joaquin Light & Power Corp., 120 Cal. App. 589, 612, 8 Pac. (2d) 560 (1932, hearing denied by supreme court). In Antioch v. Williams Irr. Dist., 188 Cal. 451,456, 205 Pac. 688 (1922), the claims of riparian rights of the City of Antioch in the San Joaquin River, which is actually navigable in this locality, were passed upon by the supreme court without regard to the question of navigability. 403Cal. Const, art. XIV, § 3. A0ALos Angeles v. Aitken, 10 Cal. App. (2d) 460, 474, 52 Pac. (2d) 585 (1935, hearing denied by supreme court). 405 United States v. Gerlach Livestock Co., 339 U.S. 725, 739, 754-755 (1950). See Blake v. United States, 295 Fed. (2d) 91, 96 (4th Cir. 1961). 406See Clark v. Cambridge & Arapahoe Irr. & Improvement Co., 45 Nebr. 798, 804-805, |