| OCR Text |
OREGON 629 b. RIPARIAN RIGHTS Some of the Oregon cases discussed the riparian right in terms of the natural flow theory of riparian rights, but-taking the cases as a whole-it appears that Oregon was committed to the reasonable use theory.104 A riparian right does not constitute ownership of water flowing in the watercourse; rather, it is only a right of use.105 In defining the nature of the riparian right, the Oregon court announced that domestic and stockwatering purposes were primary purposes, with all other uses having a secondary status.106 No priority of right is established because of the time when a riparian user initiates his right.107 What is a "reasonable" use is a question of fact to be de- termined from the general size, nature, flow, and overall characteris- tics of each individual stream. However, the important observation with respect to riparian rights in Oregon today is that all riparian uses have been restricted to the quantity of water placed to beneficial use.108 In other words, bene- ficial use now constitutes the fundamental limitation on such rights. C. APPROPRIATION RIGHTS Beneficial use is also the measure of the extent and limit of the appropriation right, and applications can only be approved for proj- ects which contemplate the application of water to a beneficial use.109 An application may be approved subject to such terms, conditions, and limitations as are necessary to protect the public interest, but in no event can it be approved for more water than can be applied to beneficial use.110 As between appropriators, the first in time is first in right, and the priority of the right dates from the filing of the application in the office of the State engineer.111 The right acquired is a right of use- commonly termed a usufructuary right-rather than ownership of the corpus of the stream itself. 3.3 Changes, Sales, and Transfers Any permit to appropriate water may be assigned, but no assign- ment is binding, except upon parties thereto, unless filed for record in the office of the State engineer.112 All water used in the State for any purpose remains appurtenant to the premises upon which it is used, and no change in use or place of use of any water for any purpose may be made without com- pliance with the provisions of the water code. However, the owner of any right may, upon compliance with these provisions, change 1MCoffman v. Bobbins, 8 Oreg. 278 (1880) ; Shook v. Colohan, 12 Oreg. 239, 6 Pac. 503 (1885) ; In re Willow Creek, 74 Or. 592, 144 Pac. 505 (1914). 105 Weiss v. Oregon Iron & Steel Co., 13 Oreg. 496, 11 Pac. 255 (1886) ; Williams v. Altnow, 51 Oreg. 275, 95 Pac. 200, 97 Pac. 539 (1908). loaGavines8 v. La Grande Irr. Oo., 60 Oreg. 410, 119 Pac. 731 (1911). 107 Williams v. Altnow, 51 Oreg. 275, 95 Pac. 200, 97 Pac. 539 (1908); Hough V. Porter, 51 Oreg. 318, 95 Pac. 732 (1908), 98 Pac. 1083 (1909) ; 102 Pac. 728 (1909). 108 Sec. 539.010. i°o Sees. 537.160 and 537.250. no Sec. 537.190. i"Sec. 537.250. "a Sec. 540.510. |
