With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". court correctly dismissed the complaint as barred by governmental immunity. Judge MICHELE M. CHRISTIANSEN authored this Opinion, in which Judges CAROLYN B. MeHUGH and J. FREDERIC VOROS JR. concurred. 1 . Although we agree with the State that Glaittli did not preserve his argument under the public improvement waiver, that provision does not affect our analysis because both the negligence waiver and the public improvement waiver are equally affected by the natural condition exception. 2 . The State also does not contest that the injuries occurred on publicly owned and controlled lands. 3 . Although there is no Utah authority on this point, the California Court of Appeal has considered similar issues. See Osgood v. County of Shasta, 50 Cal.App.3d 586, 123 Cal.Rptr. 442, 444-45 (1975) (<HOLDING>); Knight v. City of Capitola, 4 Cal.App.Ath

A: holding lake on private land was not navigable in fact and there was no right of public use and enjoyment as lake was not fed by or part of a navigable stream
B: holding that the tribes are the beneficial owners of the south half of flathead lake and that tribal ownership encompasses the lake bed to the high water mark
C: holding that the county was immune from suit for injuries incurred in a collision on a manmade lake under the california tort claims act which provides governmental immunity for an injury caused by a natural condition of any unimproved public property including but not limited to any natural condition of ary lake stream bay river or beach quoting cal govcode  8312
D: recognizing the need for reasonable preservation of the natural environment and allowing minimum stream flow and natural lake surface level and volume appropriations on behalf of the people of the state of colorado for that purpose
C.