Opinion ID: 6536839
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Right to wharf out

Text: Pre-statehood courts considered the right to wharf out as a subsidiary to the right of access, meaning a riparian or littoral landowner only had the right to wharf out as the means by which he or she exercised the right of access. 41 In Dalton v. Hazelet the Ninth Circuit noted that owners of land bordering on or bounded by navigable waters ... ha[ve] the right to a free and unobstructed access to such waters. 42 In Alaska Juneau Gold Mining Co. v. Northern Lumber Mills , the territorial court noted that the right of access to navigable water meant access to or from the water in the usual way by which such access is attained and enjoyed; and that is dependent upon the purpose for which such access is desired, and upon the reasonableness of the manner in which it is proposed to make such right available. 43 Comparing the right of access to navigable waters to that of access to a highway, the court explained that a littoral landowner had the right to wharf out not because he [or she] ha[d] a right to erect a structure on the shore, but because he [or she] ha[d] a right of access to the deep water, and ... [could not] enjoy that right except by means of a wharf. 44 But the territorial court limited this right: [T]he use must be reasonable. ... And 'what shall be deemed a reasonable and proper use of a way depends largely on the local situation and on the public usage.'  45 It announced that reasonable access, according to circumstances, [is] all the upland owner [is] entitled to. 46 Additionally, the territorial court noted that it would not intervene if a riparian or littoral landowner has other and equally convenient means of access to navigable waters or if the landowner had not yet reasonably exercised his or her right of access. 47 Since statehood we have had only one opportunity to discuss the right to wharf out, in State, Department of Natural Resources v. Alaska Riverways, Inc. 48 There we concluded that Wernberg did not create an independent right to wharf out, and all that existed was the common-law right ... that was recognized in territorial days. 49 We noted, however, that this common-law right to wharf out is limited by the state's exercise of its authority under the public trust doctrine as incorporated by the Alaska Constitution  and Alaska Statutes. 50 Thus, the right to wharf out is the means by which a riparian or littoral landowner may exercise his or her right of access to deep or navigable waters, and it may not be unreasonably obstructed. This right is a qualified right and subject to the State regulations. 51