## Facts

- Donald and Douglas Joslin owned a five-acre parcel riparian to Nicasio Creek in Marin County, California.
- The creek’s natural flow carried rock, sand, and gravel in suspension and deposited those materials on the Joslins’ land.
- The Joslins operated a commercial rock-and-gravel business that sold and used the deposited materials.
- Marin Municipal Water District applied to the State Water Rights Board for a permit to appropriate and store unappropriated waters from Nicasio Creek for municipal supply, published required notices, received a permit, and constructed an upstream dam.
- After the dam began storing water, downstream flow conditions changed and the natural replenishment of rock and gravel on the Joslins’ land allegedly ceased.
- The Joslins alleged their land value diminished by \$250,000 and that they were deprived of rock and gravel valued at \$25,000.
- The district allegedly had no notice of the Joslins’ asserted claim to use the stream for gravel replenishment purposes until after the project was operating.

## Issues

1. Whether a downstream riparian owner has a compensable property right to the continued natural deposition of rock, sand, and gravel carried by a stream.
2. Whether a lawfully permitted upstream municipal dam that eliminates such deposition effects a “taking or damaging” of private property requiring compensation in inverse condemnation.
3. Whether using a stream’s natural transport of sediment to support a commercial rock-and-gravel operation falls within constitutionally protected, reasonable riparian use.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Marin Municipal Water District.
- The court held the asserted interest in continued gravel replenishment was not a legally protected property right for purposes of inverse condemnation.
- The court concluded the claimed use was not within the scope of constitutionally protected, reasonable riparian rights, so the district was not liable for compensation based on the cessation of sediment deposits.

## Legal Principles

- Inverse condemnation requires interference with a legally recognized property right; economic loss from the loss of an unprotected advantage is not compensable.
- California water rights, including riparian rights, are limited by the constitutional mandate that water be put to reasonable and beneficial use.
- Riparian rights protect certain recognized uses of water and interests in stream conditions, but do not extend to every incidental economic benefit produced by a stream’s natural behavior.
- A lawful upstream appropriation and storage of water, consistent with permitted municipal supply purposes, does not create liability for downstream losses tied to an asserted use that is outside protected riparian rights.

## Conclusion

The court rejected inverse condemnation liability for a municipal water project that stopped downstream gravel deposits, holding that a riparian owner’s commercial reliance on natural sediment replenishment is not a compensable property right under California’s reasonable-use limits on water rights.


Joslin v. Marin Mun. Water Dist., 67 Cal. 2d 132, 429 P.2d 889 (Cal. 1967)