| OCR Text |
Show 144 CALIFORNIA tion use is the next highest use. While this should determine the priority of applications simultaneously received, it is unclear what the effect of the preference ranking is on established appropriative uses. C. LIMITATION TO REASONABLE BENEFICIAL USE All uses of water in California are subject to the limitation that they be reasonable beneficial uses. California Constitution Act XIV, section 3, says in part: [The right to use water] is and shall be limited to such water as shall be reasonably required for the beneficial use to be served, and such right does not and shall not extend to the waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable diver- sion of water. This provision applies to riparian as well as appropriative water rights and waste is determined on a case by case basis.137 The reasonable beneficial-use doctrine contemplates use of waters for purposes which are beneficial to the claimant and which are reasonable relative to that use and to demands of other claimants. The question of reasonable use relates to the actual use, the method of use, and the method of diversion.138 A water right ceases to be in effect when the water is not applied to beneficial use. In addition to limitations found in the constitution, the legislature has indicated the policy of the State to be that the waters of the State be developed and used for the greatest public benefit.139 One application of this policy is found in water code section 1253 which authorizes the State Water Resources Control Board to allow appro- priation "under such terms and conditions as in its judgment will best develop, conserve, and utilize in the public interest the water sought to be appropriated." 3.3 Changes, Sales, and Transfers a. CHANGES IN DIVERSION AND USE OF WATER The general rule in California for appropriative rights is that changes of the place of use, point of diversion, nature of use, and diversion works are permissible to the extent that the changes do not injure the rights of others.140 If there is a change in the point or means of diversion for statutory appropriations, the change must be approved by the State Water Resources Control Board.141 For non- statutory appropriations, the requirement is only that others are not injured.142 One court has held that sufficient injury has occurred to prevent alteration of diversion works where the new works prevent seepage which had been beneficially used by other appropriators.143 ™ Pealody v. Vallejo, 2 C. 2d 351, 367, 368, 40 P. 2d 486 (1935). 1S8W.C, sec. 100. 138 W.C., sees. 104, 105. ™Kidd v. Laird, 15 C. 161, 179, 181 (1860) (change of place of diversion) ; 8o. Calif. Inv. Co. v. Wilshire, 144 C. 68, 71-72, 77 P. 767 (1904). 141 W.C., sees. 1700, 1702-1705. 14aW.C, sec. 1706. 3« Dannenbrink v. Burger, 23 Cal. app. 587, 593-595, 138 p. 751 (1913). |
