Opinion ID: 2461173
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Establishing whether the land was submerged beneath navigable waters

Text: As an initial matter, the public trust doctrine is rooted in our constitutional and statutory law and inherent limitations on the state's power and, thus, cannot be relaxed simply because it may present courts with difficult factual questions. And in any event, Clark County overstates the complexity of determining the character of land for public trust doctrine purposes. Determining whether land is held in trust for the public by the state begins by reference to whether the land was submerged beneath navigable water when Nevada joined the United States on October 31, 1864, as Nevada joined the United States on equal footing with other states in every respect, State v. Bunkowski, 88 Nev. 623, 628, 503 P.2d 1231, 1234 (1972), and, consequently, obtained title to all land below the high-water mark of Nevada's navigable waters on the date of its admission to the Union. See Utah v. United States, 403 U.S. 9, 10, 91 S.Ct. 1775, 29 L.Ed.2d 279 (1971); Illinois Central, 146 U.S. at 434, 13 S.Ct. 110; Bunkowski, 88 Nev. at 628, 503 P.2d at 1234. Thus, determining whether land is subject to the public trust does not require consideration as to whether land was at any time underwater, as Clark County claims. Rather, it requires consideration of whether the land was beneath navigable waters on October 31, 1864. See Bunkowski, 88 Nev. at 628, 503 P.2d at 1234 (explaining that, for purposes of determining state ownership, the factual question of whether the Carson River is navigable is determined by reference to its condition October 31, 1864). Further, determining the navigability of a segment of a body or channel of water, which under federal law refers to the ordinary and natural condition of the watercourse, may be accomplished through expert testimony, historical surveys, and news clippings from the relevant time, as the Arizona Court of Appeals recognized in Arizona Center for Law v. Hassell, 172 Ariz. 356, 837 P.2d 158, 164-65 (App.1991); see also State Engineer v. Cowles Bros., Inc., 86 Nev. 872, 874, 478 P.2d 159, 160 (1970) (A body of water is navigable if it is used or is usable in its ordinary condition as a highway of commerce over which trade and travel are or may be conducted in the customary modes of trade and travel on water. (citing Brewer Oil Co. v. United States, 260 U.S. 77, 86, 43 S.Ct. 60, 67 L.Ed. 140 (1922))).