1113 River Rouge, 269 U.S. at 417-18. While the remainder property may be subject to the navigational servitude, it is “fundamental error” to “over-emphasi[ze] the contingent character of the rights of the riparian owners.” Id. at 420-21.1114 E.g., United States v. Fort Smith River Dev. Corp., 349 F.2d 522, 525-26 (8th Cir. 1965) (reversing award that failed to consider special benefits due to United States’ revetment project that “manifestly” protected remainder land “from further reliction or erosion. That fact alone apparently places [the remainder] in a ‘better position’ because of the taking” and must be considered).