CANYON LAKE -- Outsiders don't have the right to use Canyon Lake anytime they want, a judge ruled recently, citing a legal precedent that dates back to 1850 when California became a state.

In the ruling, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Mac Fisher agreed with the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's contention that it does not have to open the lake to the public.

The district owns the man-made reservoir, but leases the surface to the Canyon Lake Property Owners Association. The association oversees recreational use, which is limited to residents inside the gated community and their guests.

Fisher's ruling could be appealed, but it goes a long way toward quashing Los Angeles resident Mark Bolanos' lawsuit against the district, the association, Canyon Lake and Riverside County, said Pete Racobs, the attorney for the property owners association.

"There's some other issues in the case that aren't resolved yet, but we're hoping that the plaintiff will dismiss the balance of the case since the heart of the case, the public access issue, has been resolved," Racobs said Thursday.

A phone call and e-mail to Bolanos' attorney, Mark Simpkins, were not returned Thursday.

Bolanos sued the district in 2006 after he boated down the San Jacinto River, and by toting his boat over land, reached the lake and entered it, after which he was ordered off, Racobs said.

Bolanos alleges in the suit that under state law the lake is a public resource. Therefore, the association's lease should be dissolved and the lake should be opened to the public, he contends.

He's also vying for damages stemming from allegations that his rights were violated when Riverside County sheriff's deputies ordered him and his boat off the lake and threatened arrest, according to court documents.

The judge, however, states in his ruling that Canyon Lake is not subject to the doctrine that a navigable waterway is by definition public property. That's because, before the lake was created by damming the San Jacinto River in the 1920s, the river was unnavigable and that was its condition when the state took over in 1850. So the river remained in private hands and outside the state's public trust doctrine.

The judge also states that while the water district is a public agency, it is not required to open the lake to public recreation because the surface is under the association's control stemming from lease rights that predate the district's ownership.

"Because the District does not hold the surface rights to the Reservoir, the District has no duty under (the health and safety code) to allow recreational use of the Reservoir, and has no duty to provide access to the Reservoir for public fishing under (the fish and game code)," Fisher wrote.

The case, however, could take months to resolve, Racobs said, because the 60-day time limit for filing an appeal won't start until there are final rulings on the suit's other aspects.

Contact staff writer Michael J. Williams at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2635, or mwilliams@californian.com.