In Otay Water Dist. v. Beckwith (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 1041, it was held that a water district had obtained an exclusive prescriptive easement over an adjacent property owner's land. Otay held: "Thus, while an exclusive easement 'is an unusual interest in land' , where, as here, the use during the statutory period was exclusive, a court may properly determine the future use of the prescriptive easement may continue to be exclusive. The court's ruling is particularly justified on this record where Otay submitted uncontested evidence showing Beckwith's proposed recreational use would unreasonably interfere with Otay's right to continue operating a reservoir. Otay established its exclusive use is necessary to prevent potential contamination of the water supply and for other health and safety purposes.Beckwith argues nonetheless that since an exclusive easement is tantamount to a fee estate, the only mechanism by which Otay could continue exclusive use would be to obtain a fee title. Otay could not obtain such a title by adverse possession because it failed to establish the requisite element of payment of taxes during the statutory period. (See Code Civ. Proc., 325; ; .)Beckwith is correct that where an easement would create the practical equivalent of an estate, the party must satisfy the elements of an adverse possession, rather than a prescriptive easement. (See Raab v. Casper, supra, 51 Cal. App. 3d at pp. 876-877 .) Contrary to Beckwith's arguments, however, an exclusive easement is not always 'tantamount to a fee estate.' The easement granted by the court here, for example, was significantly less than a fee title. The court granted Otay an easement consistent with its historical use, restricting Otay's use of the property for reservoir purposes only and prohibiting Otay from increasing the burden placed upon the servient estates. If Otay stops using the property as a reservoir or increases the burden on Beckwith's property, Otay's easement can be taken away. Such a restricted use is not the same as a fee interest." (Otay Water Dist. v. Beckwith, supra, 1 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1047-1048.)