Is an appropriative right a kind of real property for at least some purposes?

More basically, however, it appears that an appropriative right, in and of itself, is a kind of real property for at least some purposes, whether or not it is appurtenant to a particular dominant estate. (See Wright v. Best, supra, 19 Cal.2d at p. 380, 121 P.2d 702 [a water right by appropriation is independent of ownership and possession of land and subject to sale separately from it]; id. at p. 381, 121 P.2d 702 [party's predecessor was the owner of an appropriative right, severable and alienable from the land to which it is appurtenant]; id. at p. 382, 121 P.2d 702 [An appropriative right constitutes an interest in realty.... It can therefore appropriately serve as a servient estate to which an easement may be annexed.].)