16. Riparian refers to those things related to, or located on, the bank of a natural 

 watercourse. 



17. State V. Pla cid Oil Co. , 300 So. 2d 154 (La. 1975), cert, denied, 419 E.S. 1110 

 (19731 



18. Miami Corp. v. State , 186 La. 784, 173 So. 315 (1937), overruling State v. Erwin , 

 l73La. 507, 136 So. 84(1931) 



19. See, YIANNOPOULAS, supra , note 10. As can be imagined, the proof problems in 

 establishing what was navigable in 1812 are enormous. Most, if not all water bottoms 

 were unsurveyed at that time. Although the burden of proving navigability rests with 

 the state, it is not a task of such insurmountable magnitude as to nullify State claims 

 to newly inundated lands. 



20. Supra , note 18 



21. ]d., at322 



22. ]d., at 323 



23. La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 453 



24. See, La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 506. See also , La. Civ. Code Ann. arts, 499-505 See, 

 YIANNOPOULAS, supra , note 10. TKis criticism is lent indirect support byTRe 

 Supreme Court's recent decision in Kaiser Aetna v. United States , 444 U.S. 164 

 (1979). In that case, the Court held that a non-navigable pond that was artificially 

 connected to the sea could not be ruled open to public navigation without paying its 

 private owners compensation under the Eminent Domain Clause of the Fifth 

 Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The courts in Louisiana may be willing to 

 extend this rule and require the State to compensate a private landowner if the State 

 takes title to the bed of a formerly non-navigable lake on the landowner's property. 



25. See, La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 506. See also . La. Civ. Code Ann. arts. 499-505 



26. See , Smith v. Dixie Oil Co ., 156 La. 691, 101 So. 24(1924) 



27. La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 506. See State v. Aucoin , supra , note 13; Bank of 

 Coushatta v. Yarborough , 139 La. 510, 71 S. 784(1916) 



28. See, Esso Std. Oil v. Jones , 233 La. 9 1 5, 98 So. 2d 236 ( 1 957), State v. Capdeville , 

 supra , note 14. It should be noted in this situation that land loss experienced by one 

 land owner will be accompanied by a deposition of alluvion and a corresponding gain 

 to some other landowner, usually on the opposite bank. Therefore, although the State 

 stands to gain greatly from erosion of private property, the laws of nature dictate 

 that the State's water bottom holdings remain relatively constant. This is not 

 accurate, however, when both banks of a navigable river are eroding. In that case, 

 the State's gain is absolute. 



29. 44 La. Ann. 1043, I I So. 715 (1892) 



30. Id., at 716 



136 



