However, questions regarding property become problematic when it comes to properties that stretch over the boundaries of many private properties (as well as public properties) owned by several owners such as water bodies like streams or rivers. Therefore, it worthwhile to analyse water rights in the light of property issues.
McPherson states that property has different connotations in different contexts and he rightly argues that property is a right and not physical possession. For instance, a person may be in possession of a house on rent or for safekeeping on behalf of a friend or a landlord, but that does not mean that the current occupant is the owner of the property. Assuming that rights will settle the matter as to who owns the property there are several instances where the boundaries of rights can become confusing. One is where the property is described as a common one and the other is where the property in question is a water body. As McPherson purports everyone has an 'enforceable claim to use' common lands, public parks, city streets, highways (McPherson 4). On the other hand, there are state owned properties like for example, NASA or other properties owned by the state and federal governments. These properties do not provide the same rights to citizens as do common properties. ...Show more