What is the test for establishing a physical solution to a water dispute?

So long as there is an actual controversy, the trial court has the power to enter a judgment declaring the rights of the parties (Code Civ. Proc., 1060) and to impose a physical solution where appropriate ( City of Lodi v. East Bay Mun. Dist. (1936) 7 Cal.2d 316, 341, 60 P.2d 439( Lodi )). Each case must turn on its own facts, and the power of the court extends to working out a fair and just solution, if one can be worked out, of those facts. ( Rancho Santa Margarita v. Vail (1938) 11 Cal.2d 501, 560561, 81 P.2d 533.) As respondents correctly point out, the court not only has the power but the duty to [149 Cal.Rptr.3d 510]fashion a solution to insure the reasonable and beneficial use of the state's water resources as required by article X, section 2. ( Lodi, supra, at p. 341, 60 P.2d 439.) The only restriction is that, absent the party's consent, a physical solution may not adversely affect that party's existing water rights. (Cf. Mojave, supra, 23 Cal.4th at pp. 12431244, 12501251, 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 294, 5 P.3d 853.)

[211 Cal.App.4th 289]