| OCR Text |
Show ohio 599 the stream and the landowner upon whose lands the spring originates has riparian rights in both the spring and the stream.58 Thus, the nature and extent of the landowner's right is circumscribed by principles discussed in section 3.2, supra. However, if a spring is contained solely on private property, the owner of the property may use it in any manner he desires. 3.7 Diffused Surface Waters Diffused surface water is generally considered to be water which spreads over the surface of the earth from rain or melting snow. However, once diffused surface water enters a natural watercourse, it loses its identity as diffused surface water and becomes water of the watercourse. The problems which have arisen in Ohio concerning diffused surface waters have primarily centered around the disposal of these waters rather than the right to capture or use them. Therefore, there is very little authority dealing with the use of diffused sur- face waters, but the Ohio court has held that the owner of lands over which diffused surface waters flow has absolute dominion over such waters and he may use them as he wishes.59 With respect to drainage in nonurban areas, the Ohio court has concluded that an upper landowner is entitled to have diffused surface water flow from his land onto lower lands in its natural manner, and the lower land is subject to this servitude.60 However, the upper owner cannot discharge diffused surface water onto lower land which would not find its way there naturally,61 nor can he discharge surface waters onto the lower land in an artificial manner or in a place where it would not flow naturally.62 Although an upper landowner cannot increase or change the natural flow of dif- fused surface waters directly onto lower lands, he can channel sur- face water into a watercourse passing through his land and thus increase the volume and rate of flow without incurring liability.63 The Ohio court has allowed an upper landowner greater latitude in disposing of diffused surface water in urban areas. An urban landowner may make reasonable improvements on his land without incurring liability for obstructing the flow of diffused surface waters.64 or for changing the manner in which surface waters flow from his property,65 as long as his actions are reasonable. Thus, it appears Ohio follows the "reasonable land use" rule in urban areas. The Ohio statutes provide a procedure by which a landowner may acquire the right to construct an underground drain across the land of another person when such a drain is the only practical outlet for the disposal of drainage waters. If the two landowners cannot reach agreement between themselves with regard to the project, ™Gonoore v. Fritch, 92 Ohio App. 520, 111 N.B. 2d 38 (1952). *Fraeier v. Brown, 12 Ohio St. 294 (1861). «o Butler v. Peck, 16 Ohio St. 334 (1865) ; Tootle v. Clifton, 22 Ohio St. 247 (1871). « Butler v. Peek, 16 Ohio St. 334 (1865). eaMason v. Commissioners of Fulton County, 80 Ohio St. 151, 88 N.E. 401 (1909) ; Vermillion v. Myers, 82 Ohio St. 414, 92 N.E. 1125 (1910). 98Mason v. Commissioners of Fulton County, 80 Ohio St. 151. 88 N.E. 401 (1909). «*Lunsford v. Stewart, 95 Ohio App. 383, 120 N.E. 2d 136 (1953). «Mason v. Commissioners of Fulton County, 80 Ohio St. 151, 88 N.E. 401 (1909). |
