Short answer. They are public property. Article 502 classifies rivers and their natural beds, and the waters and beds of springs and brooks running in their natural beds, as of public dominion. A private landowner cannot own a river, brook, or spring flowing through their property, even though they own the surrounding land.
What the law says
The following are of public dominion: (1) Rivers and their natural beds; (2) Continuous or intermittent waters of springs and brooks running in their natural beds and the beds themselves
Civil Code, Article 502 — Waters Of Public Dominion. Read the full provision →
Rivers, springs, and brooks are public dominion by category
Article 502 places these directly on its list of public dominion: the following are of public dominion: (1) Rivers and their natural beds; (2) Continuous or intermittent waters of springs and brooks running in their natural beds and the beds themselves. These two categories are not limited to water found on government-owned land; rivers and their natural beds are public dominion as such, and the same is true for springs and brooks running in their natural beds. A private landowner whose property happens to contain a stretch of river, brook, or spring does not thereby acquire ownership of the water or its bed.
The bed goes with the water
Notice that the article treats the water and its natural bed as a package: rivers are public dominion together with their natural beds, and the same holds for springs and brooks, whose beds are expressly included alongside the water itself. This matters because a landowner might otherwise assume that owning the land beneath a stream means owning the streambed as private property. Article 502 forecloses that assumption for these specific categories, keeping both the flowing water and the ground it runs over within public dominion.
Why this differs from purely private waters
The Civil Code separately recognizes certain waters as privately owned, such as rainwater that falls and stays within the boundaries of private land. Rivers, springs, and brooks running in their natural beds are treated differently precisely because they are not confined to one owner's land the way rainwater collecting on a single parcel can be; they are natural watercourses that the law has long treated as belonging to the public rather than to whoever happens to own the adjoining or underlying land.
What this means for a landowner
If a river, spring, or brook running in its natural bed passes through your property, you own the surrounding land, but not the watercourse itself or its bed, since Article 502 places both squarely within public dominion. This affects what you can lawfully do with that water and the land it occupies, since property of public dominion is governed by different rules than your own private property, including restrictions on exclusive use, diversion, or enclosure of the watercourse.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Republic of the Philippines vs. Arcadio Ivan A. Santos III, et al, G.R. No. 160453, November 12, 2012 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Pilar Development Corporation vs. Ramon Dumadag, Ronaldo Bacabac, et al, G.R. No. 194336, March 11, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Filinvest Land, Inc. vs. Flood-affected Homeowners etc., et al, G.R. No. 165955, August 10, 2007 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Pelbel Manufacturing Corporation, et al. vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 141325, July 31, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →