256 IRRIGATION INVESTIGATIONS IN CALIFORNIA. 



Periodical reports giving an account of the use of the water, of its amount, etc. , 

 should be required to be filed in the office of record, so that an}^ person may at anj' 

 time by consulting the records ascertain any essential fact relating to claim and use. 



ADJUDICATION OF WATER BIGHTS. 



The present method of adjudicating water rights in this State is verj' unsatisfac- 

 tory. As a matter of fact, the only adjudication which maj' be had is by means of 

 a suit in the courts. Nearly every decision of the superior court is appealed to the 

 supreme court of the State, and several years time must elapse before a final and 

 conclusive decision is obtained, and thousands of dollars must be expended. Often 

 no new principle is established in this process, simply the relative rights of the 

 contestants. The costs of such litigation have often been enormous. In two coun- 

 ties alone of this State it has been estimated bj^ those well qualified to judge that 

 from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 have been expended in litigation over rights to water. 

 So long is the necessary delay in the overburdened courts and so heav\^ the legal 

 expense that many a claimant with limited means is debarred from maintaining his 

 rights, and is forced to abandon their adjudication. Wealthy claimants, bj' pro- 

 longing contests and multiplying costs are sometimes enabled to "beat oflf" those 

 who are apparently entitled to a decision in their favor. 



In place of this chaotic condition of affairs, the writer would recommend that in 

 so far as the constitution of the State will permit, legislation should be had to 

 relieve the courts of this great burden of water litigation and to place the control of 

 the streams of the State in the hands of an administrative board, which shall have 

 authority to adjudicate, upon well-established principles of law, all water claims. 

 The writer deems it essential that the decisions of this board of control shall be 

 final. 



INFLUENCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF RIPARIAN RIGHTS ON THE SUCCESS OF 



IRRIGATION. 



The doctrine of riparian rights, as existing in this State, has exerted a most 

 injurious influence on irrigation afiairs. It has been the prolific source of litigation; 

 has' greatly interfered with and even debarred irrigation enterprises. The laws of 

 the State of California clearly recognize the right to appropriate water from streams 

 and lakes, as is shown by the sections of the statutes previously' quoted. And in 

 direct opposition of interest it maintains, under the common law, the riparian rights 

 of private riparian proprietors, as evidenced bj' man}' consistent decisions of its 

 supreme court. 



The repeal of the doctrine of riparian rights, as construed bj' this court, affects 

 and relates only to the streams and lakes wholly within the public lands of the United 

 States or in those of the State. The riparian rights of private persons owning land 

 on the banks of streams remain as they were before the passage of the repealing 

 section before referred to; and all such must also, in the future, so remain during 

 the existence of our present laws on the subject. 



It seems to the writer, therefore, that the riparian doctrine has been abolished in 

 this State in so far as it can be until all the water shall be again the property of the 

 State or of the Clcneral Government, and that waters on a stream can be appropriated 

 for use in irrigation onlj' as subject to the riparian rights, if at all, on that stream. 



