Editing Lake Tahoe (section)

=====California side=====
On the California side, the shorezone is expressly maintained in a constitutionally<ref name="Cal Const Art X § 4">{{cite web |title=California Constitution Article X Section 4 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&sectionNum=SEC.%204.&article=X |website=California Legislative Information |publisher=State of California |quote=No individual, partnership, or corporation, claiming or possessing the frontage or tidal lands of ... navigable water in this State, shall be permitted to exclude the right of way to such water whenever it is required for any public purpose, nor to destroy or obstruct the free navigation of such water; and the Legislature shall enact such laws as will give the most liberal construction to this provision, so that access to the navigable waters of this State shall be always attainable for the people thereof.}}</ref> and statutorily<ref name="Cal Government Code § 670">{{cite web |title=California Government Code Section 670 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=[670. |website=California Legislative Information |publisher=State of California |quote=The State is the owner of all land below tide water, and below ordinary high-water mark, bordering upon tide water within the State; of all land below the water of a navigable lake or stream; of all property lawfully appropriated by it to its own use; of all property dedicated to the State; and of all property of which there is no other owner.}}</ref> protected [[Public trust doctrine|public trust]],<ref name="146 U.S. 387">{{cite court |litigants=[[Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois]] |vol=146 |reporter=US |opinion=387 |court=[[Supreme Court of the United States]] |date=1892 |url= }}</ref> analogous to an [[easement]],<ref name="87 Cal.App.3d 225">{{cite court |litigants=Fogerty v. State of California |vol=87 |reporter=Cal.App.3d |opinion=225 |pinpoint= |court=[[Court of Appeals of California]] |date=November 24, 1986 |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/3d/187/224.html |access-date=June 6, 2018 |quote=Littoral property owners owned the shorezone of a lake in fee simple to the low watermark of the lake in its current condition; however, their fee simple title in the shorezone was impressed with a public trust, analogous to an easement, acquired by the state pursuant to the doctrine of prescription and held for the benefit of the public for purposes of commerce, navigation, fishing, recreation, and preservation of the land in its natural state. ... The uses of land subject to the public trust over the shorezone of navigable waters are broader than actual uses of the land previously by the public. [http://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/CACourts/ See Official Reports Annotated Here]}}</ref><ref name="29 Cal.3d 240">{{cite court |litigants=State of California v. Superior Court (Fogerty) |vol=297 |reporter=Cal.3d |opinion=240 |pinpoint= |court=[[Supreme Court of California]] |date=March 20, 1981 |url=https://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/state-california-v-superior-court-fogerty-30560 |access-date=November 25, 2018 |quote= plaintiffs may use the shorezone for any purposes which are not incompatible with the public trust. Landowners who have previously constructed docks, piers and other structures in the shorezone may continue to use these facilities unless the state determines, in accordance with applicable law, that their continued existence is inconsistent with the reasonable needs of the trust. [http://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/CACourts/ See Official Reports Annotated Here]}}</ref> which is managed by the [[California State Lands Commission]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.slc.ca.gov/Meeting_Summaries/2011_Documents/04-06-11/Complete_Items/72.pdf|title=Calendar Item 72|website=Slc.ca.gov|access-date=February 15, 2022}}</ref> and under a concurrent federal easement. As public land, the shorezone on this side may be used for nearly any purpose,<ref name="87 Cal.App.3d 225"/> rather than just travel. Upland owner is not entitled to utilize their land subject to public trust in any manner incompatible with public's interest in the property—which includes broad recreational uses.<ref name="29 Cal.3d 210">{{cite court |litigants=State of California v. Superior Court (Lyon) |vol=29 |reporter=Cal.3d |court=[[Supreme Court of California]] |opinion=210 |pinpoint=222,230-231,232 |url=https://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/state-california-v-superior-court-lyon-30546 |date=1981 |quote=California succeeded to the ownership of the beds of such waters upon its admission to the Union, to the high water mark...It is well settled that if the state holds these lands in trust for the benefit of the public, its conveyance of title to private persons does not necessarily free the property from the burden of the public trust. Instead, unless the conveyance is made for the purpose of promoting trust goals, the grantee takes title subject to the rights of the public...the public's rights in tidelands are not confined to commerce, navigation and fishing, but include recreational uses and the right to preserve the tidelands in their natural state...We hold that the same incidents of the trust applicable to tidelands also apply to nontidal navigable waters and that the public's interest is not confined to the water, but extends also to the bed of the water...Nothing in the language of section 830 requires a conclusion that riparian landholders take free of the public's rights in the lands between low and high water in navigable lakes and streams.}}</ref> Owner is akin to a trustee of public trust for benefit of all the people, and as such has [[fiduciary]] responsibilities to the beneficiaries; state remains trustee with duty to supervise trust.<ref name="209 Cal.App.3d 1276">{{cite court |litigants=Golden Feather Community Assn. v. Thermalito Irrigation Dist. |vol=209 |reporter=Cal.App.3d |court=[[Court of Appeals of California]] |opinion=1276 |pinpoint=1283 |date=1989 |quote=Any conveyance of trust property to a private individual is necessarily subject to the public trust and the state remains trustee with the duty to supervise the trust.}}</ref><ref name="6 Cal.3d 251">{{cite court |litigants=Marks v. Whitney |vol=6 |reporter=Cal.3d |court=[[Supreme Court of California]] |opinion=251 |pinpoint=259 |url=https://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/marks-v-whitney-30094 |date=1971 |quote=the buyer of land under these statutes receives the title to the soil, the Jus privatum, subject to the public right of navigation, and in subordination to the right of the state to take possession and use and improve it for that purpose, as it may deem necessary. In this way the public right will be preserved, and the private right of the purchaser will be given as full effect as the public interests will permit.’}}</ref> It is a crime for anyone who hinders, prevents, or obstructs free passage over the state lands, trusts, easements,<ref name="Cal.Penal.Code. § 370">{{cite web |title=Cal.Penal.Code § 370 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=370. |publisher=State of California |quote=Anything which is...an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property by an entire community or neighborhood, or by any considerable number of persons, or unlawfully obstructs the free passage or use, in the customary manner, of any navigable lake, or river, bay, stream, canal, or basin, or any public park, square, street, or highway, is a public nuisance.}}</ref><ref name="Cal.Penal.Code. § 372">{{cite web |title=Cal.Penal.Code § 372 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=372. |publisher=State of California |quote=Every person who maintains or commits any public nuisance, the punishment for which is not otherwise prescribed, or who willfully omits to perform any legal duty relating to the removal of a public nuisance, is guilty of a misdemeanor.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.slc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2017-PublicAccessGuide.pdf|title=A LEGAL GUIDE TO THE PUBLIC'S RIGHTS TO ACCESS AND USE CALIFORNIA'S NAVIGABLE WATERS |website=Slc.ca.gov |publisher=State of California |access-date=May 5, 2023}}</ref> or federal public easement.<ref name="Cal.Penal.Code. § 420">{{cite web |title=Cal.Penal.Code § 420 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=420. |publisher=State of California |quote=Every person...who unlawfully hinders, prevents, or obstructs free passage over or through the public lands of the United States within the State of California, for the purpose of entry...is guilty of a misdemeanor.}}</ref>

Building new piers can infringe on the [[Public trust doctrine|public trust]], which among many things, is purposed to preserve the land in its natural state.<ref name="87 Cal.App.3d 225"/> Accretions created in the shorezone by artificial means remain as public land because they are part of the public trust.<ref name="457 US 273">{{cite court |litigants=California ex rel. State Lands Com'n v. United States |vol=457 |reporter=US |court=[[Supreme Court of the United States]] |opinion=273 |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/457/273 |date=June 18, 1982 |quote=Under California law where an accretion is caused by construction of artificial works on water, boundary does not move but becomes fixed at ordinary high-water mark at time artificial influence is introduced.}}</ref><ref name="63 Cal.App.2d 772">{{cite court |litigants=Carpenter v. Santa Monica |vol=63 |reporter=Cal.App.2d |court=[[Court of Appeals of California]] |opinion=772 |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2d/63/772.html |date=April 17, 1944 |quote=Where title is deraigned from the United States, the question as to the extent of the grant is to be governed by federal and not by state law; but where title is deraigned from a federal patent confirming a Mexican grant, the extent of the right gained under the patent is to be determined by state and not by federal law.&mdash;The California rule is that in a controversy between the state or its grantees and the upland owner, artificial accretions belong to the state or its grantees as the owner of the tidelands.&mdash;that is, by the works of man, such as wharves, groins, piers, etc., and by the dumping of material into the ocean&mdash;belong to the state or its grantees, and do not belong to the upland owner.}}</ref><ref name="Cal.Civ.Code § 1007">{{cite web |title=Cal. Civ. Code § 1007—Title by prescription; adverse possession; exemption of public property |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=1007. |quote=no possession by any person, firm or corporation no matter how long continued of any land, water, water right, easement, or other property whatsoever dedicated to a public use by a public utility, or dedicated to or owned by the state or any public entity, shall ever ripen into any title, interest or right against the owner thereof.}}</ref> The private Lakeside Park Association has made such an artificial accretion of land that is freely open for public use.<ref name="Cal.Civ.Code § 1007"/><ref>{{cite web |title=Lake Tahoe Beach Weddings |url=http://www.laketahoebeachweddings.com |quote=see satellite images}}</ref> Access to and from the shorezone across private land on publicly enjoyed paths is by right-of-way<ref name="Cal.Civ.Code § 801">{{cite web |title=Cal.Civ.Code § 801(a) |url=http://www.leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=801. |publisher=State of California |quote=The following land burdens, or servitudes upon land, may be attached to other land as incidents or appurtenances, and are then called easements: The right-of-way}}</ref> or prescriptive easement.<ref name="Cal.Code.Civ.Proc. § 321">{{cite web |title=Cal.Code.Civ.Proc. § 321 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CCP&sectionNum=321. |publisher=State of California |quote=the person establishing a legal title to the property is presumed to have been possessed thereof within the time required by law, and the occupation of the property by any other person is deemed to have been under and in subordination to the legal title, unless it appear that the property has been held and possessed adversely to such legal title, for five years before the commencement of the action.}}</ref><ref name="Cal.Code.Civ.Proc. § 318">{{cite web |title=Cal.Code.Civ.Proc. § 318 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CCP&sectionNum=318. |publisher=State of California |quote=No action for the recovery of real property, or for the recovery of the possession thereof, can be maintained, unless it appear that the plaintiff, his ancestor, predecessor, or grantor, was seized or possessed of the property in question, within five years before the commencement of the action.}}</ref><ref name="Cal.Civ.Code § 806">{{cite web |title=Cal.Civ.Code § 806 |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CCP&sectionNum=321. |publisher=State of California |quote=The extent of a servitude is determined by the terms of the grant, or the nature of the enjoyment by which it was acquired.}}</ref><ref name="194 Cal.App.4th 1044">{{cite court |litigants=Main Street Plaza v. Cartwright & Main |vol=194 |reporter=Cal.App.4th |court=[[Court of Appeals of California]] |opinion=1044 |pinpoint=1054 |url=https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5914af32add7b0493474b78b |date=2011 |quote=To establish a prescriptive easement, a claimant must prove use of the property, for the statutory period of five years, which has been: (1) open and notorious; (2) continuous and uninterrupted; (3) hostile to the true owner; and (4) under a claim of right.}}</ref> Recent attempts by Lakefront Homeowners to use [[pier]]s as "easement fences" to obstruct beach travel are encroaching centuries of established [[easement]] and [[admiralty law]].<ref name="87 Cal.App.3d 225"/>