Does the reasonableness standard apply when flood control measures cause damage to land that was not historically subject to flooding?

1 As in Belair, this case does not present, and we do not decide, the question whether the reasonableness standard applies when flood control measures cause flood damage to land that was not historically subject to flooding. (See Belair, supra, 47 Cal.3d at p. 565, 253 Cal.Rptr. 693, 764 P.2d 1070.) Of course, if the government, by works it constructs on its own property or elsewhere, diverts or dams natural waters, thereby permanently submerging previously dry private land in order to provide benefits to the public at large, a compensable direct "taking" of the submerged land may occur no matter how "reasonable" the government's conduct. Moreover, cases under the federal Constitution have held that a "taking" may occur when a government dam or flood control project subjects certain previously dry lands to inundation that is less than permanent, but is frequent and inevitably recurring. (Barnes v. United States (1976) 210 Ct.Cl. 467, 538 F.2d 865, 870, and cases cited.)

2 Plaintiffs are Kenneth and Deidre Bunch (the Bunches).