South Platte: Denver Gage to Greeley

Division 1 · Water District 2 · As of 2026-10-11 00:41 MDT · 2 days ago

Live · reviewed by a person

How this page was built

Rebuilt 2026-10-11 12:57 UTC from 55,958 input files: two runs agree (output 094436769fd80227…); matches the analysis served here. The receipt

South Platte: Denver Gage to Greeley on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 2 · clicktap anything for its record

The well-permit cells in view, as a table

Each row is one ~1-mile cell (0.02°) with the permits the file spots inside it, split into water-supply permits and monitoring holes (DWR’s two monitoring categories: drilled to look at the water, not to pump it). These are permits, not wells: a permit is a piece of paper, and the file does not say which were drilled. Spotting is the file’s own, about a mile at best, which is why the cells are no finer.

Lat	Lon	Water-supply permits	Monitoring holes

Browse this district’s ditches, gages, reservoirs, wells and springs as a list.

48% of normal flow, week of 2026-09-28

1 call the record places on it, 6 unsettled

The South Platte River is well below normal for late September -- 48% of normal flow. 1 call stands against it right now; the most senior right calling dates to 1871. DWR's statements do not settle whether 6 more calls reach it.

Schematic

Historical

Reconstruct conditions as of

Evolution of the network

Trends

Source Our computation, no independent reference · computed here from the screened DWR record Source Our computation, no independent reference · no independent reference; see /methods

This year, in context

In the weeks around 2026-10-02 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 152 ranked gages are running at a median 89% of their own long-term norm for this window — 88 below a typical year, 64 at or above. Driest relative to its record: NEW BRANTNER RETURN TO BIG DRY CRK, ranking 1st lowest of 5 years.

How this comparison is made

Each gage's mean flow over the 3 days either side of 2026-10-02, compared with the same window in every year of its own record — so a gage is only ever measured against itself, and gages with no record in the window are counted out rather than guessed.

Gage flow trend & changepoints

What counts as a trend here

Computed 2026-10-11 19:39 from 271 gage(s) with cached period-of-record data. The series is each gage's annual mean flow in cfs (years with ≥300 days of record). Mann-Kendall (trend, with the Hamed–Rao correction for serial correlation — persistence can otherwise fake significance) and Pettitt (changepoint) both require at least 8 years spanning at least 10 years of record. A gage below that reports no signal — which is not the same as “no change.” The %-per-decade figure is the same Sen slope divided by the gage's median annual flow, for comparing across streams of very different size; it is omitted for near-ephemeral channels where the median is too small to divide by honestly.

Of the 271 gages with enough record, 17 are trending down and 13 up, and 20 carry a detected shift. The clearest is Cherry Creek at Denver, its annual mean flow changing +3.60 cfs per decade (+13.6% of its median annual flow) over 68 years (p<0.0001). The other 236 show no clear signal either way. 1 transbasin gage meters imported or exported water — marked ⇆ below and kept out of these counts, because that flow is an operator's decision, not the basin's hydrology (all transbasin diversions).

Drought history, cost, and the four-century context moved to the Drought tab.

Gage	Trend	Change / decade cfs · % of median annual flow	Significance	Years	Changepoint
▸ Cherry Creek at Denver CHEDENCO	↑ increasing	+3.60 cfs +13.6%	p<0.001	68	~1982
▸ ⚠️ First Cr below Buckley Rd, at Rocky Mountain Arsenal FIRBUCCO	↑ increasing	+1.12 cfs +61.6%	p<0.001	33	~2012
▸ North Fork South Platte River below Geneva Creek, at Grant NORGENCO	↑ increasing	+12.23 cfs +11.5%	p<0.001	60	~1974
▸ South Platte River near Lake George PLAGEOCO	↑ increasing	+6.88 cfs +7.3%	p<0.001	96	~1983
▸ South Platte River at Waterton PLAWATCO	↓ decreasing	-9.16 cfs -7.3%	p<0.001	100	~1987
▸ South Platte River above Elevenmile Reservoir PLAHARCO	↑ increasing	+6.96 cfs +7.3%	p<0.001	87	~1983
▸ ⚠️ Cherry Creek below Cherry Creek Lake CHEBELCO	↑ increasing	+3.38 cfs +45.0%	p<0.001	73	~1982
▸ Gardener Ditch to Cherokee Power Plant GDRDITCO	↓ decreasing	-0.69 cfs	p<0.001	13	~2018
▸ Platteville Ditch Diversion PLADITCO	↓ decreasing	-6.13 cfs -23.8%	p<0.001	17	—
▸ Sand Creek at Mouth near Commerce City SANCOMCO	↓ decreasing	-8.93 cfs -20.1%	p<0.001	32	~2009
▸ Aurora Homestake Pipeline to Spinney Mountain Reservoir (Relief Valve) HOMSPRCO	↑ increasing	+0.38 cfs	p=0.002	11	~2017
▸ Cherokee Power Plant Return to South Platte River CHERTNCO	↓ decreasing	-1.00 cfs -74.8%	p=0.002	13	—
▸ ⇆ Roberts Tunnel at East Portal near Grant ROBTUNCO	↑ increasing	+10.24 cfs +13.6%	p=0.002	62	~1988
▸ South Platte River at Henderson PLAHENCO	↑ increasing	+18.27 cfs +4.6%	p=0.003	100	~1968
▸ South Platte River at Fort Lupton PLALUPCO	↑ increasing	+22.13 cfs +5.9%	p=0.003	87	~1968
▸ Jay Thomas Ditch JAYTOMCO	↓ decreasing	-1.67 cfs	p=0.003	11	—
▸ Plum Creek near Louviers PLULOUCO	↑ increasing	+9.49 cfs +34.1%	p=0.004	44	—
▸ Lower Latham Augmentation Bypass LLABYPCO	↓ decreasing	-118.04 cfs -221.0%	p=0.004	13	~2017
▸ Lower Latham Ditch LLADIVCO	↑ increasing	+10.65 cfs +16.6%	p=0.009	17	—
▸ South Platte River below Strontia Springs PLASTRCO	↓ decreasing	-24.10 cfs -14.0%	p=0.015	43	—
▸ South Platte Supply Canal below Sand Lake near F SPSCFLCO	↓ decreasing	-1.58 cfs -21.7%	p=0.018	41	~1981
▸ Ft. Saint Vrain Power Plant Return to St. Vrain Creek SVPPRTCO	↓ decreasing	-0.77 cfs -52.7%	p=0.020	11	—
▸ Meadow Island No 1 Ditch MEDIS1CO	↓ decreasing	-2.15 cfs -24.0%	p=0.029	15	—
▸ ⚠️ Cherry Creek near Melvin CHEMELCO	↓ decreasing	-6.13 cfs -74.3%	p=0.032	29	~1949
▸ Farmers Independent Ditch FRMDITCO	↓ decreasing	-2.43 cfs -6.9%	p=0.034	18	—
▸ Uvalda Intercept Bl 56th Av at Rocky Mountain Ars RMAUVACO	↑ increasing	+0.22 cfs +29.8%	p=0.036	19	—
▸ South Platte River at Englewood PLAENGCO	↓ decreasing	-28.86 cfs -16.9%	p=0.043	43	—
▸ ⚠️ Sand Hill Lake Lm Outlet SHLLMOCO	↓ decreasing	-0.25 cfs	p=0.044	17	~2015
▸ Cherry Creek near Parker CHERRYCO	↑ increasing	+1.74 cfs +16.8%	p=0.044	34	—
▸ South Platte River at 64th Ave. Commerce City PLASIXCO	↓ decreasing	-19.98 cfs -16.5%	p=0.044	44	—
▸ Burlington-Wellington Canal BURCANCO	↓ decreasing	-12.32 cfs -7.6%	p=0.047	34	—
▸ South Platte River at Denver PLADENCO	no clear trend	-7.56 cfs -2.6%	p=0.058	131	~1949
▸ South Platte River at South Platte PLASPLCO	no clear trend	+5.90 cfs +1.4%	p=0.101	127	~1978
▸ South Platte River below Cheesman Reservoir PLACHECO	no clear trend	+3.19 cfs +1.8%	p=0.204	101	~1981
▸ ⚠️ Boreas Pass Ditch at Boreas Pass BORDITCO	no clear trend	-0.00 cfs	p=0.642	84	~1962

⚠️ 7 gages flagged: their records may have quietly shifted against their neighbours, so treat their trends with caution.

How drift is detected

Every gage's annual flows are compared against each neighbour's as a double-mass curve (Searcy & Hardison, USGS WSP 1541-B); a Pettitt step test looks for a break in the ratio. A gage is flagged only when the breaks AGREE across its references, and a break against an already-suspect gage is never counted against a healthy one. A double-mass break means the ratio between two gages changed, not that either gage is faulty: a new diversion, a reservoir, or an import changes that ratio exactly as a rating shift does. Screening aid for expert review, never a measurement verdict.

236 other gage(s) show no significant trend or changepoint (not shown).

3 of those show a significant trend once extended backwards from a retired neighbour's record: So. Platte River below Brush Cr. near Trumbull (102 yr, increasing); North Fork South Platte River at Grant (87 yr, increasing); South Platte River below Union Ave, at Englewood,C (40 yr, decreasing). Those are reconstructions, not measurements — each gage's page shows both.

How the measurement network itself changed

This basin was not always measured the way it is today — the API-era record is dense and recent, the early record sparse. 198 gage(s) and 691 structure(s) report in 2026, but structure reporting only reached half its modern level around ~1973. Every historical claim below is checked against this: long-term shifts that co-move with the growth of the network carry an explicit measurement-evolution caution, and abandonment screens whose idleness begins before the modern reporting era are flagged †.

Decade	Gages with data (median yr)	Structures reporting (median yr)
1890s	2	0
1900s	2	0
1910s	7	0
1920s	8	0
1930s	12	0
1940s	17	0
1950s	20	174
1960s	21	82
1970s	22	368
1980s	32	358
1990s	62	338
2000s	72	307
2010s	104	494
2020s	195	691

Mass-balance (network closure) trend

Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 4% of 10276 schematic-relevant structures. 0 year(s) clear the 30% coverage gate so far -- the trend activates automatically once qualifying years span a full decade. No action needed; the nightly backfill keeps extending the record.

Reach gain/loss shifts (1950–2025)

Mass-balance kinks computed for every summer month back to 1950 (1323 reach-snapshots) — which reaches gain or lose water, and how that has shifted across decades. Each shift is cross-checked against the observation record above: as more diversions became metered, "unaccounted" water shrinks mechanically, which can masquerade as a hydrologic shift.

SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT FORT LUPTON, CO.: reach shifted from +86 cfs to +539 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.000, 70 yr) [sedimentary plains/foothills: moderate groundwater connectivity -- gain/loss shifts can be real aquifer response; corroborate with nearby well records] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=0.6) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change] [76 alluvial wells within 2 mi of the gage; pooled water table +1.1 ft (1929–2025, no_trend)]
FIRST CR BEL BUCKLEY RD, AT ROCKY MTN ARSENAL, CO: reach shifted from -30 cfs to -16 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.049, 14 yr) [sedimentary plains/foothills: moderate groundwater connectivity -- gain/loss shifts can be real aquifer response; corroborate with nearby well records] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=0.67) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change]

Groundwater now has its own tab: 8967 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.

Reservoirs now has its own tab: 283 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1950, click-to-chart histories.

Cross-gage pattern fingerprint

Over the 102-year window with full coverage (1925–2026), the dominant shared pattern across 3 gage(s) explains 82% of year-to-year variance (almost certainly a basin-wide climate/snowpack driver).

All gages in this window move with the shared pattern -- no localized outlier.

Structures most implicated by reconciliation (as of 2026-09-01)

Which structures' data absorbed the most correction when the current mass-balance snapshot was reconciled -- see the Historical tab for the full picture on any date.

CHEROKEE EXCHANGE PIPELINE (diversion): -131.0 cfs (83% of that reach's correction)
TWO FORKS RES (diversion): -118.3 cfs (31% of that reach's correction)
AURORA INLET PL (diversion): -118.3 cfs (31% of that reach's correction)
AURORA PL (diversion): -118.3 cfs (31% of that reach's correction)
COLEMAN PL (diversion): -72.3 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
WILLRICH SPRING (return): -72.3 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
LUCKY JACK SPRING (return): -72.3 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
LUPTON BOTTOM D WEST LATERAL AUG RETURN (return): +64.3 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
AURORA EVERIST RESERVOIR 1 (diversion): +64.3 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
PLATTEVILLE D CENTRAL AUG RT (return): +64.3 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)

Data provenance & quality

Where these numbers come from and how far they can be trusted. Grade C (3/6 points) — the components below are the finding; the letter alone is not. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260928 (imported 2026-10-04) for history, plus the CDSS REST API for current conditions.

Check	State	What was measured
gage freshness	stale	newest gage reading is 9 day(s) old (target 7)
diversion record	expected-lag	newest diversion record is 346 day(s) old (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears)
structure coverage	sparse	4% of schematic structures have data

Independent check: PASS — 100.0000% agreement across 53,853 stored values re-checked against DWR's authoritative record (HydroBase_CO_20260707), over 20 structures. 0 disagreement(s) beyond a 0.01 cfs tolerance. Checked 2026-08-19; a rotating sample covers the whole basin across successive runs, and the structures this report cites are checked every time.

Federal cross-check: PASS — 95.69% day-level agreement with USGS's own published records for the same gages, across 76 co-listed station(s) and 693,915 overlapping days (within max(2%, 0.5 cfs) daily). Pre-1950 records at some gages carry known between-agency day-stamp and transcription differences — scored at each year's best ±1-day alignment; residual disagreement is real historical divergence, flagged for review.

Upstream revisions: DWR's HydroBase_CO_20260707 image changed 70 previously-published historical value(s) across 2 structure(s) in this basin. The revised record now governs; every change is logged, none swapped silently.

271 gage(s) / 1,760,716 daily values (1895-07-01–2026-10-02); 1753 structure(s) with diversion records; 21886 with decreed rights. Methodology has not yet had independent expert review — treat every figure as an advisory screen, not an administrative or legal conclusion.

Groundwater

Source DWR administrative record · verify at DWR groundwater wells ↗ Source DWR administrative record · verify at DWR well permits ↗

176,540 water-level measurements across 8967 monitored well(s) — 3558 alluvial, 2848 bedrock — plus 215 administered well(s) reporting metered pumping.

What is being counted

Observation wells and pumping wells are different populations and are never conflated: water levels come from monitored observation wells, and metered pumping comes from administered wells reporting through diversion records. Click any well to chart its own record.

Well map

3D aquifer x-ray

Every aquifer unit as its own head surface, animated through time.

How the surfaces are built, and what they are not

Alluvial water table on top, Denver Basin members (Dawson, Denver, Arapahoe, Laramie–Fox Hills) stacked beneath where measured, interpolated from measured water levels. Units are never mixed; a surface exists only inside its own unit's well coverage, with no extrapolation; thin epochs are suppressed and say why. Vertical scale is exaggerated for readability and z is head elevation in feet. These are measured heads, not a calibrated groundwater model.

Water-table trends

Of 390 well(s) with enough record for a trend test: 158 declining, 53 rising.

Fastest-declining wells	Setting	ft / decade	Span	p
▸ CASTLE PINES A-1	bedrock	-307.81	28 yr	0.0
▸ DB-106 CPNMD A-2	bedrock	-266.68	32 yr	0.0
▸ DB-106 CPNMD A-3	bedrock	-258.69	32 yr	0.0
▸ DB-113 DEN TECH CNTR, SOUTH	bedrock	-256.67	31 yr	0.0
▸ JORDAN WELL	bedrock	-255.88	21 yr	0.0375
▸ DB-118 CASTLE ROCK WELL 14	bedrock	-253.52	35 yr	0.0003
▸ SC00606624ADA1	unknown	-251.12	22 yr	0.0006
▸ DB-113 DEN TECH CNTR, NORTH	bedrock	-235.24	31 yr	0.0002

Stream corridors — the surface connection

Where a reach's gain or loss has shifted, the wells within two miles of its anchoring gage and what their water table did over the same era.

How the corridor is assembled

For each reach whose gain/loss has shifted (Trends tab): the wells within 2 miles of its anchoring gage, their pooled water-table history over the same era, and an advisory Glover screen of lagged stream depletion from nearby metered pumping. v1 proximity = distance to the reach's anchoring gage; segment-based reach join is a flagged upgrade.

SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT FORT LUPTON, CO.: 76 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table +1.1 ft (1929–2025, no_trend, p=0.257). Glover screen: 2.4 cfs of nearby metered alluvial pumping → est. lagged depletion 2.1–2.4 cfs (uncalibrated T/S ranges; flagged for SPDSS calibration, AWAS cross-check, and expert review — DWR's AWAS is the authority).

FIRST CR BEL BUCKLEY RD, AT ROCKY MTN ARSENAL, CO: 62 alluvial well(s) nearby

Wells labeled by administrative world before anything else is said about them: tributary alluvium participates in the priority system; designated-basin and Denver Basin bedrock aquifers are governed differently and are excluded from stream-connection reasoning. Read bedrock declines differently too: deep bedrock aquifers recharge negligibly on human timescales, so a falling bedrock level is storage mining — effectively permanent — not a drought response that a wet year undoes. All screens advisory.

44,849 well permits on file — not decreed rights

33% household or domestic use

46 ft median depth, 27,193 wells reporting

53% are constructed wells; 10% tie to a decreed structure. A permit is permission to drill, not a water right; most here are exempt household wells. More in three things called “well”, or turn on the Well permits chip on the map above to see where they sit.

Permits issued here, by year

16,890 located water-supply permits with an issue date, 1905 to 2026; half of them had been issued by 1991, and the busiest year was 1972 with 664. The district’s 15,880 monitoring holes are counted apart: they are drilled to look, not to pump. A permit is not a well, and the year is the date the paper was issued, not a drilling date. The 44,849 above counts every permit on file here; 12,079 of them have no usable location or no issue date and are not in this chart.

Show the monitoring holes too (15,880; the scale changes)

water-supply permits issued that year monitoring holes, when shown 7 issued before 1950 are in the table, not the bars

The counts by year, as a table

Located well permits with an issue date in this district, by issue year. Monitoring holes are the two DWR monitoring categories; water-supply is everything else.
Year	Issued	Monitoring holes	Water-supply	Issued through that year
1905	1	0	1	1
1908	1	1	0	2
1912	1	1	0	3
1926	1	0	1	4
1934	1	0	1	5
1936	1	0	1	6
1944	1	1	0	7
1952	1	0	1	8
1953	27	0	27	35
1954	138	0	138	173
1955	271	0	271	444
1956	177	0	177	621
1957	139	0	139	760
1958	228	0	228	988
1959	325	0	325	1,313
1960	661	0	661	1,974
1961	71	0	71	2,045
1962	88	0	88	2,133
1963	149	0	149	2,282
1964	133	0	133	2,415
1965	85	0	85	2,500
1966	123	0	123	2,623
1967	75	0	75	2,698
1968	117	0	117	2,815
1969	95	0	95	2,910
1970	111	0	111	3,021
1971	167	0	167	3,188
1972	664	0	664	3,852
1973	314	0	314	4,166
1974	151	0	151	4,317
1975	150	0	150	4,467
1976	163	0	163	4,630
1977	262	0	262	4,892
1978	454	0	454	5,346
1979	348	0	348	5,694
1980	234	0	234	5,928
1981	231	6	225	6,159
1982	268	1	267	6,427
1983	218	2	216	6,645
1984	235	8	227	6,880
1985	327	72	255	7,207
1986	379	92	287	7,586
1987	382	109	273	7,968
1988	383	131	252	8,351
1989	446	236	210	8,797
1990	490	240	250	9,287
1991	669	373	296	9,956
1992	713	440	273	10,669
1993	520	254	266	11,189
1994	1,100	648	452	12,289
1995	888	444	444	13,177
1996	628	224	404	13,805
1997	539	175	364	14,344
1998	841	495	346	15,185
1999	496	171	325	15,681
2000	610	240	370	16,291
2001	589	269	320	16,880
2002	725	365	360	17,605
2003	923	570	353	18,528
2004	939	691	248	19,467
2005	886	648	238	20,353
2006	700	460	240	21,053
2007	393	195	198	21,446
2008	411	241	170	21,857
2009	317	200	117	22,174
2010	384	234	150	22,558
2011	405	277	128	22,963
2012	522	326	196	23,485
2013	794	643	151	24,279
2014	586	426	160	24,865
2015	427	312	115	25,292
2016	687	531	156	25,979
2017	523	326	197	26,502
2018	565	378	187	27,067
2019	694	494	200	27,761
2020	662	477	185	28,423
2021	769	607	162	29,192
2022	754	601	153	29,946
2023	488	353	135	30,434
2024	696	575	121	31,130
2025	1,034	870	164	32,164
2026	606	447	159	32,770

Every district in the file on one scale · the whole file, one year at a time · Plate 4 of the Driller’s Atlas.

What drillers reached, township by township

25 PLSS townships here where at least 5 water-supply permits naming the same aquifer filed a depth (14,339 permits in all; the 24 most-drilled are drawn, every one is in the table). Each column is one township, six miles square, on one scale to 2,100 ft below ground: a faint lane spans the 10th to 90th percentile of where the permits naming that aquifer stopped, the solid band their screens, the tick the median. This is the permit file’s view of the ground — the aquifer is the name the driller wrote, the band is where those holes ended — not a geologic map, and a township is as fine as it gets. Monitoring holes are left out. 13 of these townships straddle a district line and are filed here because most of their permits are.

T1N R66W
1,426

T1S R66W
1,112

T2S R67W
1,078

T1S R67W
998

T5N R65W
853 · 61% here

T1S R68W
714 · 86% here

T2S R69W
711 · 51% here

T4N R66W
700

T1N R65W
692 · 76% here

T3S R67W
659 · 80% here

T2N R66W
616

T4N R65W
510

T1N R67W
487

T2N R67W
470 · 80% here

T3S R66W
424

T2S R68W
413 · 74% here

T2N R65W
398 · 68% here

T3N R66W
383

T3N R67W
354 · 71% here

T2S R66W
310

T4S R65W
289 · 92% here

T3N R65W
272 · 86% here

T4S R66W
205

T5S R65W
198 · 71% here

unnamed alluvium Dawson Denver Arapahoe Laramie-Fox Hills other named faint = where the permits naming it stopped (10th–90th pct) · solid = their screens · tick = median · ft below ground as filed

Every township here, as a table

Water-supply permits by PLSS township and the aquifer named on them, where at least 5 filed a depth: percentiles of the depth drilled to and of the screen top and bottom (where at least 5 filed a screen), feet below ground as filed. The permit file’s view, not a geologic map.
Township	Share of its permits in this district	Aquifer named	Permits with a depth	Drilled depth p10 / p50 / p90, ft	Screen top p10 / p50 / p90, ft	Screen bottom p10 / p50 / p90, ft
T1N R66W 6th PM	98%	alluvium	79	32 / 40 / 54	13 / 18 / 37	23 / 31 / 54
T1N R66W 6th PM	98%	unnamed	786	30 / 50 / 382	17 / 32 / 666	34 / 56 / 825
T1N R66W 6th PM	98%	Arapahoe	196	108 / 301 / 488	59 / 178 / 328	139 / 310 / 494
T1N R66W 6th PM	98%	other named	5	96 / 500 / 568	—	—
T1N R66W 6th PM	98%	Laramie-Fox Hills	355	800 / 960 / 1,200	650 / 820 / 1,020	803 / 977 / 1,220
T1S R66W 6th PM	99%	unnamed	838	35 / 65 / 500	20 / 40 / 347	37 / 64 / 519
T1S R66W 6th PM	99%	alluvium	34	40 / 72 / 85	16 / 24 / 34	30 / 38 / 50
T1S R66W 6th PM	99%	Denver	5	70 / 178 / 390	—	—
T1S R66W 6th PM	99%	Arapahoe	206	298 / 518 / 760	200 / 340 / 550	340 / 520 / 760
T1S R66W 6th PM	99%	Laramie-Fox Hills	24	673 / 1,172 / 1,298	826 / 1,008 / 1,121	984 / 1,170 / 1,306
T2S R67W 6th PM	99%	alluvium	16	36 / 46 / 110	—	—
T2S R67W 6th PM	99%	unnamed	778	29 / 50 / 404	14 / 32 / 325	29 / 50 / 523
T2S R67W 6th PM	99%	Dawson	8	324 / 440 / 509	172 / 260 / 344	347 / 460 / 2,122
T2S R67W 6th PM	99%	Arapahoe	264	286 / 474 / 625	228 / 340 / 422	349 / 500 / 620
T2S R67W 6th PM	99%	Denver	10	156 / 555 / 601	115 / 354 / 443	148 / 565 / 603
T1S R67W 6th PM	99%	alluvium	13	27 / 33 / 58	—	—
T1S R67W 6th PM	99%	unnamed	658	26 / 50 / 455	13 / 34 / 327	30 / 53 / 477
T1S R67W 6th PM	99%	Arapahoe	199	345 / 440 / 556	157 / 240 / 400	345 / 440 / 555
T1S R67W 6th PM	99%	Laramie-Fox Hills	122	900 / 1,050 / 1,179	652 / 835 / 959	909 / 1,050 / 1,176
T5N R65W 6th PM	61%	unnamed	811	25 / 50 / 95	11 / 30 / 57	30 / 50 / 87
T5N R65W 6th PM	61%	alluvium	34	40 / 58 / 78	20 / 30 / 49	40 / 54 / 70
T5N R65W 6th PM	61%	Laramie-Fox Hills	6	58 / 88 / 220	—	—
T1S R68W 6th PM	86%	unnamed	472	55 / 338 / 900	28 / 160 / 745	76 / 375 / 902
T1S R68W 6th PM	86%	Arapahoe	70	200 / 345 / 411	94 / 150 / 234	205 / 340 / 416
T1S R68W 6th PM	86%	Laramie-Fox Hills	166	790 / 915 / 998	606 / 740 / 780	800 / 905 / 985
T2S R69W 6th PM	51%	unnamed	592	30 / 170 / 446	19 / 100 / 295	39 / 250 / 440
T2S R69W 6th PM	51%	Dawson	5	239 / 275 / 389	48 / 190 / 257	210 / 275 / 377
T2S R69W 6th PM	51%	Arapahoe	77	150 / 325 / 456	56 / 180 / 306	148 / 325 / 468
T2S R69W 6th PM	51%	Laramie-Fox Hills	31	400 / 1,100 / 1,180	237 / 882 / 992	400 / 1,055 / 1,162
T4N R66W 6th PM	95%	unnamed	649	37 / 65 / 98	13 / 40 / 67	32 / 63 / 97
T4N R66W 6th PM	95%	alluvium	30	55 / 74 / 100	20 / 40 / 69	46 / 67 / 92
T4N R66W 6th PM	95%	Laramie-Fox Hills	18	73 / 270 / 395	35 / 138 / 197	72 / 300 / 415
T1N R65W 6th PM	76%	alluvium	19	40 / 60 / 80	19 / 26 / 50	41 / 60 / 80
T1N R65W 6th PM	76%	unnamed	405	40 / 64 / 235	12 / 40 / 309	32 / 66 / 465
T1N R65W 6th PM	76%	Arapahoe	161	160 / 325 / 570	80 / 200 / 390	180 / 330 / 585
T1N R65W 6th PM	76%	Laramie-Fox Hills	103	751 / 901 / 1,082	646 / 748 / 940	750 / 870 / 1,082
T3S R67W 6th PM	80%	unnamed	639	21 / 46 / 103	12 / 30 / 67	21 / 44 / 84
T3S R67W 6th PM	80%	other named	8	48 / 51 / 55	32 / 40 / 43	48 / 50 / 53
T2N R66W 6th PM	98%	alluvium	13	43 / 50 / 59	10 / 22 / 33	39 / 50 / 56
T2N R66W 6th PM	98%	unnamed	349	30 / 52 / 645	13 / 30 / 528	30 / 53 / 642
T2N R66W 6th PM	98%	Arapahoe	65	230 / 265 / 285	40 / 55 / 80	230 / 265 / 290
T2N R66W 6th PM	98%	other named	6	44 / 350 / 590	—	—
T2N R66W 6th PM	98%	Laramie-Fox Hills	181	575 / 705 / 870	380 / 544 / 712	575 / 700 / 870
T4N R65W 6th PM	97%	unnamed	449	12 / 61 / 142	2 / 28 / 73	11 / 45 / 120
T4N R65W 6th PM	97%	alluvium	17	26 / 65 / 90	12 / 42 / 52	36 / 71 / 100
T4N R65W 6th PM	97%	Laramie-Fox Hills	42	150 / 300 / 447	66 / 173 / 268	100 / 280 / 376
T1N R67W 6th PM	99%	unnamed	225	15 / 40 / 702	10 / 20 / 578	26 / 42 / 734
T1N R67W 6th PM	99%	alluvium	41	39 / 51 / 58	20 / 31 / 40	31 / 40 / 46
T1N R67W 6th PM	99%	Arapahoe	10	84 / 260 / 807	20 / 260 / 597	90 / 360 / 828
T1N R67W 6th PM	99%	Laramie-Fox Hills	202	660 / 740 / 870	475 / 540 / 661	675 / 740 / 870
T2N R67W 6th PM	80%	alluvium	10	27 / 44 / 80	12 / 20 / 26	34 / 45 / 68
T2N R67W 6th PM	80%	unnamed	346	28 / 63 / 442	14 / 40 / 299	29 / 60 / 414
T2N R67W 6th PM	80%	Laramie-Fox Hills	110	270 / 513 / 610	162 / 360 / 445	310 / 519 / 619
T3S R66W 6th PM	98%	alluvium	6	19 / 32 / 40	—	—
T3S R66W 6th PM	98%	unnamed	400	23 / 43 / 542	9 / 25 / 510	27 / 48 / 597
T3S R66W 6th PM	98%	Arapahoe	11	896 / 1,100 / 1,245	684 / 873 / 1,049	872 / 1,150 / 1,226
T2S R68W 6th PM	74%	unnamed	384	21 / 55 / 702	10 / 22 / 486	24 / 40 / 750
T2S R68W 6th PM	74%	Arapahoe	19	460 / 620 / 761	342 / 412 / 526	460 / 616 / 759
T2S R68W 6th PM	74%	Laramie-Fox Hills	9	1,409 / 1,425 / 1,615	1,085 / 1,137 / 1,286	1,388 / 1,431 / 1,580
T2N R65W 6th PM	68%	unnamed	265	40 / 64 / 612	21 / 41 / 534	41 / 64 / 641
T2N R65W 6th PM	68%	alluvium	17	53 / 64 / 84	20 / 40 / 56	51 / 65 / 82
T2N R65W 6th PM	68%	Laramie-Fox Hills	110	519 / 646 / 810	400 / 480 / 634	520 / 640 / 795
T3N R66W 6th PM	98%	alluvium	9	51 / 58 / 66	—	—
T3N R66W 6th PM	98%	unnamed	271	40 / 60 / 405	25 / 40 / 314	50 / 60 / 440
T3N R66W 6th PM	98%	Laramie-Fox Hills	100	250 / 380 / 500	140 / 220 / 360	250 / 378 / 500
T3N R67W 6th PM	71%	unnamed	318	27 / 51 / 84	11 / 28 / 50	30 / 50 / 80
T3N R67W 6th PM	71%	alluvium	16	36 / 58 / 88	19 / 29 / 61	39 / 58 / 91
T3N R67W 6th PM	71%	Laramie-Fox Hills	18	130 / 240 / 306	31 / 130 / 156	98 / 240 / 279
T2S R66W 6th PM	99%	Denver	9	43 / 120 / 368	50 / 158 / 270	82 / 287 / 380
T2S R66W 6th PM	99%	unnamed	239	42 / 400 / 610	20 / 260 / 452	42 / 450 / 639
T2S R66W 6th PM	99%	Arapahoe	55	400 / 510 / 750	240 / 340 / 560	400 / 500 / 720
T2S R66W 6th PM	99%	Laramie-Fox Hills	5	1,340 / 1,360 / 1,452	—	—
T4S R65W 6th PM	92%	unnamed	90	28 / 348 / 801	10 / 410 / 650	28 / 620 / 819
T4S R65W 6th PM	92%	Dawson	5	390 / 505 / 630	—	—
T4S R65W 6th PM	92%	Denver	79	509 / 670 / 852	355 / 502 / 711	574 / 682 / 890
T4S R65W 6th PM	92%	Arapahoe	112	735 / 1,060 / 1,160	534 / 920 / 990	716 / 1,057 / 1,310
T3N R65W 6th PM	86%	Denver	11	26 / 26 / 26	—	—
T3N R65W 6th PM	86%	unnamed	132	16 / 72 / 339	6 / 46 / 252	16 / 68 / 340
T3N R65W 6th PM	86%	Laramie-Fox Hills	125	295 / 380 / 518	220 / 260 / 314	300 / 385 / 514
T4S R66W 6th PM	97%	unnamed	145	29 / 220 / 1,009	12 / 38 / 716	17 / 84 / 764
T4S R66W 6th PM	97%	Denver	40	100 / 330 / 741	141 / 300 / 552	200 / 480 / 724
T4S R66W 6th PM	97%	Arapahoe	15	606 / 1,020 / 1,443	420 / 858 / 953	582 / 1,010 / 1,343
T5S R65W 6th PM	71%	unnamed	44	41 / 350 / 665	17 / 260 / 563	40 / 420 / 663
T5S R65W 6th PM	71%	Dawson	48	229 / 403 / 476	192 / 305 / 380	320 / 415 / 479
T5S R65W 6th PM	71%	Denver	78	416 / 568 / 817	260 / 370 / 575	408 / 570 / 838
T5S R65W 6th PM	71%	Arapahoe	26	1,378 / 1,739 / 2,006	1,009 / 1,226 / 1,381	1,344 / 1,664 / 1,810
T2S R65W 6th PM	62%	unnamed	63	48 / 64 / 272	30 / 42 / 220	48 / 68 / 305

These columns on the map · Plate 6 of the Driller’s Atlas.

The Driller’s Atlas · Plate 2 A cross-section nobody surveyed

Every permitted well within a few miles of the line, drawn from the ground to its drilled depth as the driller filed it. The bright part of each stroke is the perforated casing — where the well actually takes water — coloured by the aquifer named on the permit. Nobody arranged these; the aquifers arrange themselves.

Line Corridor

Hover or arrow through the strokes to read a well.

The same corridor as a table


Miles from A	Wells drawn	Median depth (ft)	With a screen	Most-named aquifer	No depth filed	Ground, ft above sea level (median)

Bins run from end A to end B of the line. “Most-named aquifer” is the family most often named on permits in the bin, with its count; permits naming no aquifer are the majority of the file and are not a family.

Reservoirs

Source DWR administrative record · verify at DWR structure records ↗

283 reservoir(s) with 273,566 storage measurement(s), 1950–2026. Basin storage as of 2025-10-31 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 424,400 AF across 83 reservoir(s).

Why storage matters to the flow network

Storage change is real water the mass balance must credit — a losing reach beside a filling reservoir isn't losing water, it's banking it.

Reservoir map — how full is each vessel?

What “full” is measured against

Bubble size is proportional to a reservoir's record-high storage. Fill is its last recorded storage as a share of its surveyed capacity (USACE National Inventory of Dams) where a confident NID match exists — the tooltip names the matched dam — and as a share of its own record high otherwise. A wrong capacity would be worse than an honest record high, so only confident joins upgrade.

A dashed teal ring marks reservoirs reporting live DWR telemetry: their fill reflects yesterday's storage, is drawn as a dotted tail on charts, and is treated as provisional until the next verified HydroBase snapshot supersedes it.

A dashed red ring marks a dam under an active storage restriction from DWR's Dam Safety branch — the State Engineer has limited how much it may legally store, so a low fill can be an order, not a drought. Hazard class and inspection condition come from the same record, joined only where the dam carries this reservoir's WDID or a confident NID match — a wrong dam's restriction would be worse than none shown.

Basin storage, end of each water year

End-of-water-year totals; per-year reservoir counts shown because reporting coverage varies -- a total is only comparable to years with similar counts.

Largest reservoirs on record

Click a row to chart its full storage history, or open its dossier for rights, documents and dam-safety facts.

Reservoir	Last recorded storage (AF)	As of	Full	Dam (DWR Dam Safety)
▸ ELEVEN MILE RES (2303965)	100,140	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ CHEESMAN RES (8003550)	68,135	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ STANDLEY RES (0203903)	38,598	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ CHATFIELD RESERVOIR (0803514)	31,629	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ AURORA RES (0203379)	27,960	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ SPINNEY MTN RESERVOIR (2304013)	23,202	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ ANTERO RES (2303904)	18,272	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ BECHTOLD RES (0803601)	16,977	1958-06-01	—	—	dossier →

Drought

Source Our computation, no independent reference · computed here from the screened DWR record Source Independent agency measurement · fetched 2026-10-06 · verify at U.S. Drought Monitor ↗

Right now

This is the 63rd-driest week 40 in 132 years of record at SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT DENVER (as of 2026-09-28; this week’s flow sits at the 48th percentile for the date). On this week’s US Drought Monitor, Boulder County is 24% in D4 exceptional drought (2026-10-06). The law agrees: the most senior active call leaves 0% of this district’s decreed flow rights junior to the calling right this week.

Every year since 1895, week by week

Each thin row is a year at SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT DENVER; each cell is one week’s flow ranked against the same calendar week of every other year — warm means dry for the date, blue wet, so seasonality cancels and droughts appear as warm bands. Gaps are missing record, never a dry river. Click a year to reconstruct it on the Historical tab.

This year against its analogs

Over the 40 weeks recorded so far, 2026’s weekly trace most resembles 2002 (mean gap 11.2 percentile points; next closest 1908 (13.1), 2012 (15.9)). The analog’s remainder is drawn as context — its ending is what happened to it, not a forecast for this year.

The Drought Monitor’s view since 2000

Mean share of area in each class across Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Clear Creek, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson, Logan, Morgan, Park, Pueblo, Sedgwick, Washington, Weld counties — the counties this district’s gages sit in, which overlap the district imperfectly. The Drought Monitor weighs soils, vegetation and local reports; it is CONTEXT beside the river’s own record above, not the water-rights picture.

The law’s own drought gauge

When water runs short, administration answers: calls reach further back in time, and more decreed rights go junior to the calling right. This is that response, weekly since 2011 — the share of this district’s decreed flow rights junior to the most senior active call. Watch it spike in the named droughts below, and linger after the river recovers.

Computed from DWR’s call record (1512 calls touching this district) against the district’s rights index. Scoping is deliberately coarse — a call’s own district, or districts named in its comments — and this is administration’s RESPONSE, not a per-structure verdict (each dossier’s curtailment card does that, with stream miles). A deepening call can also reflect growing demand, not only shrinking supply.

This basin’s droughts, by its own record

Drought	Span	Weeks	Trough percentile	Flows recovered	Water table back
the 2020-22 drought	2020-08-24 → 2021-04-26	35	13th (2020-11-16)	2 weeks	4 yr (168 wells, 81 still below)
the 2018 drought	2018-07-16 → 2019-02-04	29	24th (2018-09-24)	7 weeks	not yet (122 of 231 wells still below)
the 2012-13 drought	2012-08-13 → 2013-04-22	36	18th (2012-10-15)	33 weeks	2 yr (243 wells, 71 still below)
the 2002 drought	2003-11-24 → 2004-05-31	27	25th (2003-12-29)	17 weeks	7 yr (217 wells, 90 still below)
the 2002 drought	2002-07-15 → 2003-06-30	50	10th (2002-12-16)	10 weeks	not yet (133 of 253 wells still below)
unnamed dry spell	1994-10-24 → 1995-03-20	21	25th (1994-12-19)	13 weeks	12 yr (196 wells, 89 still below)
the 1981 drought	1981-08-10 → 1982-02-01	25	25th (1981-10-05)	35 weeks	6 yr (177 wells, 68 still below)
the 1977 drought	1977-07-18 → 1979-05-28	97	15th (1977-10-31)	5 weeks	5 yr (144 wells, 49 still below)
unnamed dry spell	1969-03-03 → 1969-08-04	22	19th (1969-04-28)	0 weeks	1 yr (261 wells, 41 still below)
unnamed dry spell	1966-06-13 → 1967-11-06	73	16th (1967-05-15)	90 weeks	8 yr (100 wells, 29 still below)
the 1963-64 drought	1962-10-15 → 1965-08-16	148	6th (1965-02-15)	0 weeks	12 yr (75 wells, 25 still below)
unnamed dry spell	1960-11-21 → 1961-04-24	22	24th (1961-01-30)	19 weeks	1 yr (71 wells, 16 still below)
unnamed dry spell	1958-11-17 → 1959-08-10	38	14th (1959-01-12)	40 weeks	1 yr (66 wells, 11 still below)
the 1950s drought	1955-11-21 → 1957-08-12	90	1st (1957-02-18)	0 weeks	5 yr (32 wells, 11 still below)

Detected mechanically: the 26-week smoothed percentile below the 30th for at least 20 weeks; recovered on regaining the 50th. The water-table clock compares each monitoring well against its own pre-drought median (the 3 years before onset) and dates the year the median well got back — the aquifer remembers longest, and “still below” is a finding, not a gap. The knobs are stated because the episode list depends on them — a different reasonable choice merges or splits episodes at the edges. Names are attached where an episode overlaps a drought Colorado already talks about.

What drought has cost here

Since 1991, federal crop insurance has paid $447,890,017 in drought-caused claims across Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Clear Creek, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson, Logan, Morgan, Park, Pueblo, Sedgwick, Washington, Weld counties — 38.5% of all insured crop losses there. The worst year was 2022 ($122,163,264).

USDA crop-insurance indemnities where the recorded cause of loss is drought, summed over the counties this district's gages sit in. Counties overlap water districts imperfectly, and insured-crop claims are a floor on drought damage, not a total. Source: USDA RMA cause-of-loss files.

When this basin claimed its water

Every bar is a year’s new appropriations (25,471 rights across 132 years of shared record), colored by that year’s wetness from the barcode above. Here the correlation is -0.09 — essentially no wet-dry pattern; here, law and settlement set the pace, not the weather. Across the state both behaviors exist: ephemeral southwest basins file after wet demonstrations, transbasin-source basins under drought — and the biggest statewide filing waves sat in the 1950s drought and after 2002, not in the wet 1980s–90s.

Appropriation dates are the CLAIMED initiation of a right, not the courthouse filing date; the record is survivor-biased (abandoned claims are absent, so failed dry-era scrambles are undercounted); and the big 1960s and 2000s spikes sit on legal events — the pre-1969-Act adjudication era and 2000s legislation — not on weather. A correlation here is a description, never a cause.

New to how a dry winter becomes a call on the river? Anatomy of a drought walks the chain in four minutes — snow to rivers to reservoirs to calls to the water table.

Legal

Who serves it, who protects it

Two registers the site fetches on their own schedules, read for this district. Neither is a DWR record; each links its own page and its agency.

Public water systems here

Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-06 · verify at EPA SDWIS ↗

63 systems touch this district (63 community systems reporting 3,237,629 people served, a figure that counts a wholesaler's customers twice); 1 of them carries an open health-based violation on EPA's record.

System	Serves	Source	Here
DENVER WATER BOARD	1,287,000	Surface water	34% of its area
AURORA CITY OF	533,407	Surface water	81% of its area
THORNTON CITY OF	226,465	Surface water	100% of its area
WESTMINSTER CITY OF	202,078	Surface water	89% of its area
ARVADA CITY OF	171,610	Surface water	11% of its area
GREELEY CITY OF	132,310	Surface water	23% of its area
BROOMFIELD CITY AND COUNTY OF	106,153	Surface water	62% of its area
SOUTH ADAMS COUNTY WSD	75,559	Purchased surface water	86% of its area

and 55 more; the full directory filters by district.

Instream-flow rights held by the state

Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-11 · verify at CWCB instream flow program ↗

The Board's tabulation lists no instream-flow reach or natural lake level in this district. Statewide →

What the water is like -- USGS sensors right now, where it has been sampled, the impaired-waters list, and how the tap water here stands with EPA -- is on the Water quality tab.

Designated groundwater basins are on their own page.

Source Adjudicated record · verify at DWR water-right transactions ↗ Source Adjudicated record · verify at DWR net amounts ↗

Decreed rights on this network run from 1859-03-01 to 2024-11-18. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 55% of a median irrigation season and 35% in a dry one. 25 abandonment screens and 297 compliance flags are listed below as leads for review — a screen is not an abandonment and a flag is not a violation.

Rights on file: 28338 across 21886 structure(s); 1170 structure(s) carry 1931 court-case references. Advisory reading aids on public DWR data — not administrative or legal conclusions.

Is the river getting harder to divert from?

Over 2012–2025, none of the three measures of administration (days under call, calls set, seniority of the controlling call) shows a significant trend — the river is being administered about as it was.

The three measures, year by year

One row per whole calendar year inside the call record's coverage (14 years); partly-covered years are omitted rather than reported as quiet. Trend is Mann-Kendall with the same significance gate as every other trend on this site. Counted from DWR's published call record, which begins in the early 2000s: earlier years are absent, not quiet. A rise in the number of calls set can also reflect how finely an administrator records one episode, which is why days under call -- insensitive to that -- is the component to read first. Advisory summary of the public record, not an administrative finding.

Year	Days under call	Calls set	Controlling priority (median)
2014	309	220	1873-06-30
2015	330	155	1870-06-01
2016	366	203	1875-06-30
2017	365	296	1881-02-01
2018	365	334	1876-05-10
2019	365	289	1881-02-01
2020	366	249	1869-04-01
2021	349	227	1867-04-15
2022	365	291	1867-04-15
2023	331	255	1869-04-01
2024	366	213	1881-02-01
2025	365	333	1881-02-01

What the water is for — decade by decade

Of the water this district's structures diverted, the share whose decree includes municipal supply moved from 79% in the 1970s to 86% in the 2020s.

The decades, and how the attribution works

Every structure's recorded diversions, attributed to what its water was decreed FOR in that year. Colorado decrees are usually multi-use (“IRR MUN COM IND…”), so these are shares of water whose decree includes a use — non-exclusive, and they do not sum to 100%. A right that adds municipal use in 1988 counts toward it only after. Decades before this basin's modern reporting era are flagged: their records are thinner, not their rivers drier. Shares of recorded diverted volume, not of water rights or of acreage. A structure's water is attributed only to uses decreed by that year, so a later municipal decree cannot reach back and recolour earlier diversions. Families overlap -- a ditch decreed for irrigation and municipal supply counts in both -- so shares can sum past 100%. Volume the record cannot attribute is reported separately, never distributed.

Decade	Recorded AF	Structures	Includes municipal	Unattributed
1900s †	30	1	0%	0%
1910s †	3,142	1	100%	0%
1940s †	12,702	2	100%	0%
1950s †	4,931,345	241	73%	14%
1960s †	5,749,139	209	76%	23%
1970s	8,483,293	675	79%	16%
1980s	10,661,264	608	86%	7%
1990s	11,616,300	404	90%	6%
2000s	12,256,193	422	91%	11%
2010s	14,578,179	868	90%	22%
2020s	12,161,000	817	86%	22%

Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations

Sustained diversion stops matched to senior administrative calls.

TCVS-01 (0200525) DWR↗ stopped 2025-10-02 (5+ days) — call at FARMERS IRRIGATION CANAL [heuristic-strong]
TCVS-01 (0200525) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-13 (50+ days) — call at NEW CACHE LA POUDRE CO DITCH [heuristic-strong]
MILLIKEN RESERVOIR PUMP NO 1 (0200582) DWR↗ stopped 2024-11-30 (36+ days) — call at NORTH STERLING CANAL [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
MILLIKEN RESERVOIR PUMP NO 1 (0200582) DWR↗ stopped 2024-08-31 (16+ days) — call at STERLING IRR CO DITCH 1 [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
TCVS-01 (0200525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-08-17 (26+ days) — call at WESTERN MUTUAL DITCH [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
TCVS-01 (0200525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-03-09 (6+ days) — call at BIJOU CANAL [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
WESTERN SEEP DITCH (0200537) DWR↗ stopped 2023-10-15 (16+ days) — call at JACKSON LAKE INLET DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]

Right yield — how often could these rights actually divert?

Share of irrigation-season days each structure's rights were not called out, derived from the 22-year district-scoped call record (senior right = floor, junior right = ceiling constraint). Call-record-derived; DWR's own analysis governs where available.

Structure	Senior priority	Senior right: median / dry yr	Junior right: median / dry yr
BURLINGTON D RIVER HEADGATE (0200802) DWR↗	1861-06-29	72.5% / 38.3%	0.0% / 0.0%
EVANS NO 2 DITCH (0200817) DWR↗	1871-10-05	35.2% / 20.1%	0.0% / 0.0%
UNION DITCH (0200828) DWR↗	1873-09-26	31.8% / 15.4%	0.0% / 0.0%
FULTON DITCH (0200808) DWR↗	1863-03-15	60.0% / 36.0%	0.0% / 0.0%
HIGHLINE CNL (0801004) DWR↗	1861-08-30	72.5% / 38.3%	0.0% / 0.0%
LAKE GEORGE INTAKE (2300693) DWR↗	1994-12-21	0.0% / 0.0%	0.0% / 0.0%
DENVER CONDUIT NO 20 (0801002) DWR↗	1860-12-28	91.8% / 72.0%	5.8% / 0.0%
DENVER FOOTHILLS PL 26 (0801017) DWR↗	1860-12-28	91.8% / 72.0%	0.0% / 0.0%
LOWER LATHAM DITCH (0200834) DWR↗	1869-05-12	39.0% / 21.5%	0.0% / 0.0%
LACOMBE POWER PLANT (0801016) DWR↗	1863-03-15	60.0% / 36.0%	11.4% / 0.0%
0200895 DWR↗	1970-05-13	0.0% / 0.0%	0.0% / 0.0%
BURLINGTON DITCH 3RD (0200866) DWR↗	1887-09-15	24.8% / 1.4%	24.8% / 1.4%

Abandonment radar (25 screens)

Absolute rights with 10+ years of no recorded diversions. Screens only — storage, alternate points, and plan operations can explain nonuse lawfully. And diversion REPORTING itself only reached its modern level ~1973 — idleness that begins before then may be unreported use, not nonuse (flagged † below).

HUGGINS DITCH (0801129) DWR↗ (1870-03-15, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 1951 — 74 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
RANDALL D EXT CLAIM (2300988) DWR↗ (1878-08-01, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 1951 — 74 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
FURMAN WASTE WATER DITCH (2300981) DWR↗ (1882-05-01, 10.0 cfs decreed): last active 1958 — 67 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
KESTER SWEET SPRINGS (2300543) DWR↗ (1876-12-31, 0.2 cfs decreed): last active 1962 — 63 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
0200902 DWR↗ (1976-08-03, 100.0 cfs decreed): last active 1964 — 61 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
LITTLETON PL (0801462) DWR↗ (1861-08-30, 0.5 cfs decreed): last active 1968 — 57 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
0200870 DWR↗ (1883-09-15, 13.0 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 55 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
HAYMAN SPRG STOCK WTR DE (2301504) DWR↗ (1983-07-31, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 55 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
HURST SPRING 1 (2301589) DWR↗ (1932-06-21, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 55 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
TOMS SPRING 1 (2301639) DWR↗ (1961-09-02, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 55 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1973) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse

Compliance screens (297 advisory flags)

Screened 552 of 21886 structures with rights (763 have diversion history on file). A flag is a lead for expert review — augmentation plans, exchanges, and free-river conditions can make over-decree diversions lawful and are deliberately not modeled.

LORENZ TRUST 4-R12939 (0207026) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 123904.7 cfs (max 123904.7) exceeds total decreed absolute 4.3 cfs across 12 recorded day(s).
LOWER PLUM CREEK DITCH LEFT IN STREAM (0802922) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 338.8 cfs (max 475.5) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.0 cfs across 5146 recorded day(s).
MILTON RES (0203876) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 256.0 cfs (max 602.1) exceeds total decreed absolute 50.0 cfs across 34963 recorded day(s).
ANTERO RES (2303904) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 215.0 cfs (max 462.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.0 cfs across 11185 recorded day(s).
0200902 DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 141.0 cfs (max 141.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 100.0 cfs across 36 recorded day(s).
MONTGOMERY RES (2303962) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 110.5 cfs (max 261.5) exceeds total decreed absolute 0.5 cfs across 40688 recorded day(s).
WHIPPLE DITCH (0200871) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 92.1 cfs (max 143.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.0 cfs across 11491 recorded day(s).
SECTION NO 3 DITCH (0200830) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 58.0 cfs (max 141.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 57.7 cfs across 33792 recorded day(s).
CANON DITCH (2300694) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 50.0 cfs (max 50.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 35.4 cfs across 2574 recorded day(s).
NORTH RESERVOIR COMPLEX (0203000) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 49.3 cfs (max 101.4) exceeds total decreed absolute 1.1 cfs across 11281 recorded day(s).

Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)

Structure	Senior priority date	Rights	Decreed abs (cfs)	Decreed abs (AF)	Conditional?
BURLINGTON D RIVER HEADGATE (0200802) DWR↗	1861-06-29	54	5216.8	10000	yes
EVANS NO 2 DITCH (0200817) DWR↗	1871-10-05	17	1008.1	6565	yes
UNION DITCH (0200828) DWR↗	1873-09-26	11	744.3	620	yes
FULTON DITCH (0200808) DWR↗	1863-03-15	30	719.2	0	yes
HIGHLINE CNL (0801004) DWR↗	1861-08-30	13	628.3	0	—
LAKE GEORGE INTAKE (2300693) DWR↗	1994-12-21	1	600.0	0	—
DENVER CONDUIT NO 20 (0801002) DWR↗	1860-12-28	27	439.8	0	—
DENVER FOOTHILLS PL 26 (0801017) DWR↗	1860-12-28	25	413.0	0	yes
LOWER LATHAM DITCH (0200834) DWR↗	1869-05-12	7	329.6	0	yes
LACOMBE POWER PLANT (0801016) DWR↗	1863-03-15	3	300.0	0	—
0200895 DWR↗	1970-05-13	1	290.0	0	—
BURLINGTON DITCH 2ND (0200865) DWR↗	1886-11-15	1	250.0	0	—
BURLINGTON DITCH 3RD (0200866) DWR↗	1887-09-15	1	250.0	0	—
WESTERN MUTUAL DITCH (0200825) DWR↗	1866-05-05	8	242.3	0	yes
AURORA INTAKE (0801001) DWR↗	1863-12-30	18	230.0	474	yes

Recent inventory & legal-document changes

2026-10-10 — call set: SOUTH FLAT DITCH (39707)
2026-10-10 — call set: STERLING IRR CO DITCH 1 (39706)
2026-10-10 — call released: 39612
2026-10-09 — call released: 39680
2026-10-09 — call set: SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT WATERTON (39697)
2026-10-09 — call set: CHATFIELD RESERVOIR (39698)
2026-10-09 — call released: 39678
2026-10-08 — call set: TRUE WEBSTER DITCH (39693)

Water-court filings this month (division-wide)

24 applications in the 2026-08 resume for this basin's division — new rights, changes, augmentation plans — from the water clerk's statutory monthly notice (C.R.S. 37-92-302), the earliest public signal of a new claim. Filings are division-wide, not district-filtered: check the county column. Full resume PDF at the Judicial Branch →

Anyone affected may file a statement of opposition until 2026-10-31 (18 days left). C.R.S. 37-92-302(3): due by the last day of the second month following the filing month — computed, not legal advice; confirm with the water clerk.

All 24 filings, with excerpts

Case	What it asks	County	Excerpt
`2026CW3039`	—	—	CASE NO. 20 26CW3039; STATE ENGINEER AND WATER DIV 2 ENGINEER vs. ANDREW STOREY – Verified Complaint for Injunctive Relief, Penalties, and Costs. This case is being listed in the resume to account for the case number in consecutive order. ---------------------…
`2026CW3040`	plan for augmentation, new underground right	—	CASE NO. 2026CW3040 , Water Division 2 and CASE NO. 2026CW3135, Water Division 1; JANICE L DUNCAN, 6440 Highline Place, Colorado Springs, CO, 80908 (Please address all pleadings and inquiries regarding this matter to Applicant’s attorney: Philip E. Lopez, Eric…
`2026CW3088`	plan for augmentation	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3088 NORTH RANCH, LLC, c/o Robert L. Myers, 944 Cheyenne Blvd., Colorado Springs, CO 80905; Please direct all correspondence concerning the application to: Ryan W. Farr, Sedona E. Chavez, Monson, Cummins, Shohet & Farr, LLC, 13511 Northgate E…
`2026CW3089`	—	—	CASE NUMBER 20 26CW3089 ROBERSON LIVING TRUST, c/o Tamara Roberson -George, Rex Roberson, Kevin Roberson, Co-Trustees, 18235 Black Forest Road, Colorado Springs, CO 80908; Please direct all correspondence concerning this application to: David M. Shohet, and Se…
`2026CW3119`	change of water right, plan for augmentation, new storage right	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3119 SHARON AND MARK WEATHERFORD, 12328 S. State Hwy 83, Franktown, CO 80116. (Forward all pleadings and correspondence to Chris D. Cummins and Sedona E. Chavez, Monson, Cummins, Shohet & Farr, LLC, 13511 Northgate Estates Dr., Ste. 250, Colo…
`2026CW3120` 4404471	reasonable diligence	THE CITY AND	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3120 THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS (“Denver Water” or “Applicant”), 1600 West 12th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80204. Jessica R. Brody, General Counsel, Daniel J. Arnold, James M. Wittler, …
`2026CW3121`	—	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3121 (2018CW3222)…
`2026CW3122`	plan for augmentation, new underground right	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3122 DOUBLE S CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN LLC, ATTN: Scott Berry, 42631 Sager Lane, Parker, CO, 80138. APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM NONTRIBUTARY AND NOT-NONTRIBUTARY SOURCES AND APPROVAL OF PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION, IN THE NONTRIBUTAR…
`2026CW3123`	reasonable diligence	THE CITY AND	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3123 THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS (“Denver Water” or “Applicant”), 1600 West 12th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80204. Jessica R. Brody, General Counsel, Daniel J. Arnold, James M. Wittler, …
`2026CW3124`	reasonable diligence, make absolute, new underground right	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3124 WESTERN EQUIPMENT AND TRUCK, INC. , 2055 1 st Ave., Greeley, CO 80631, 970 -353-6682. P. Andrew Jones, Law Office of P. Andrew Jones, 1213 Founders Circle, Windsor, CO 80550, 970 -297-0570, ajones@pandrewjones.com. APPLICATION TO MAKE CO…
`2026CW3125` 0600538 0600565 0600576	reasonable diligence	EASONABLE DILIGENCE IN BOULDER	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3125 (90CW108) (99CW125) (12CW72) (20CW3017) APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE IN BOULDER COUNTY . 1. Name, Mailing Address, Phone Number, and E -mail Address of Applicant . CITY OF LAFAYETTE , c/o Cari Bischoff, Water Resources…
`2026CW3126` 0815262 0815263 0815264	reasonable diligence, make absolute	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3126 MARY GUENZEL CHARITABLE TRUST, P.O. Box 9, Woodland Park, Colorado 80866; Please direct all correspondence concerning this application to: Ryan W. Farr, Monson, Cummins, Shohet & Farr, LLC, 13511 Northgate Estates Drive, Suite 250, Color…
`2026CW3127`	new underground right	UPPER LARAMIE AQUIFER IN WELD	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3127 THE CITY OF GREELEY, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS WATER AND SEWER BOARD, AND THE COLORADO STATE BOARD OF LAND COMMISSIONERS. APPLICATION FOR NONTRIBUTARY UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS IN THE UPPER LARAMIE AQUIFER IN WELD COUNTY. I. Name, mailing…
`2026CW3128`	reasonable diligence, make absolute	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3128 Applicant. CHRIS DINSDALE, P.O. Box 1807, Sterling, CO 80751, 970-522-9052 with all correspondence connected herewith being sent to Applicant’s Counsel, David P. Jones, Lawrence Custer Grasmick Jones & Donovan, LLP., 5245 Ronald Regan Bl…
`2026CW3129`	plan for augmentation, new underground right	PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION IN ELBERT	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3129 VANCE ROBERT ANDRUS & TONI COLLEEN ANDRUS , 6414 Sherman Peak, Castle Rock, Colorado 80108. APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS FROM NONTRIBUTARY AND NOT-NONTRIBUTARY SOURCES AND APPROVAL OF PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION IN ELBERT COUNTY . …
`2026CW3130`	—	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW 3130 THE CITY OF GREELEY, ACTING BY AND THROUGH ITS WATER AND SEWER BOARD c/o Leah Hubbard, Deputy Director of Water Resources, 1001 – 11th Avenue, 2nd Floor, Greeley, Colorado 80631, leah.hubbard@greeleygov.com, (970) 350-9811. Please send …
`2026CW3131`	reasonable diligence	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3131 CITY OF LOVELAND , Colorado (“Loveland”), c/o Noah Cecil, Assistant City Attorney, 500 East Third Street, #330, Loveland, Colorado 80537, Telephone: (970) 962 - 2434. APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE IN LARIMER AND WELD CO…
`2026CW3132`	—	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3132 Applicants. THE CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT AND THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT SUBDISTRICT OF THE CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT , 3209 West 28 th Street, Greeley, Colorado, 80634, 970-330-4540 with all future co…
`2026CW3133`	reasonable diligence	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3133 CHELEY LAND, LLC AND CHELEY COLORADO CAMPS, LLC (f.k.a. Cheley Colorado Camps, Inc.) , 601 Steele Street, P.O. Box 6525, Denver, CO 80206. c/o Karen L. Henderson, Bushong & Holleman PC, 1966 13th Street, Suite 270, Boulder, CO 80302; (30…
`2026CW3139`	change of water right	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3139 ALBERT WENDELL NELSON REVOCABLE TRUST c/o Wendell Nelson, Trustee 5537 N. County Road 9 Fort Collins, CO 80524 303 -921-4750 Sally Jean Nelson Revocable Trust c/o Wendell Nelson, Trustee 5537 N. County Road 9 Fort Collins, CO 80524 303 -…
`2026CW3140`	plan for augmentation	PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION IN ELBERT	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3140 DAVID JOE KRAXNER III, 754 Highway 86, Elizabeth, CO, 80107. Philip E. Lopez, Eric K. Trout, Fairfield and Woods, P.C., 1801 California St, Suite 2600, Denver, CO, 80202. APPLICATION FOR A PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION IN ELBERT COUNTY. Subject …
`2026CW3141`	plan for augmentation	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3141 KELTY COLORADO FAMILY LLLP, C/o Bruff Shea, P.O. Box 21, Franktown, Colorado 80166. Please direct all pleadings and correspondence to Applicants counsel: Michael A. Kopp, Trout Raley PC, 1120 Lincoln St., Suite 1600, Denver, CO 80203, (3…
`2026CW3142`	new underground right	—	CASE NUMBER 2026CW3142 1. Name, address, and telephone number of Applicant and Landowner: 1.1. Applicant and Landowner: CAP LAND LLC, a Colorado limited liability company 47 (“CAP Land”) c/o Lena Vander Laan P.O. Box 105 Henderson, CO 80640 Please direct all c…
`2026CW9`	reasonable diligence, make absolute	LARIMER	CASE NUMBER 2026CW9 SPRING44 DISTILLING, INC. (“Spring44”), 505 West 66th Street, Loveland, Colorado 80538, Telephone: (970) 445 -7109. APPLICATION FOR FINDINGS OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE AND CLAIM TO MAKE CERTAIN AMOUNTS ABSOLUTE IN LARIMER COUNTY. 2. Lindauer S…

Active substitute water supply plans in this district

Temporary State Engineer approvals to divert out of priority (37-92-308 / 37-90-137). A structure operating under one behaves differently under a call than its decreed rights alone suggest — the priority tables above don't know about these; this list does. Source: DWR’s active-SWSP register, refreshed nightly.

Plan	Type	Status	Expires	Structure	Documents
CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT - GMSD - 23CW3086	37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION	Approved	2026-06-30	—	plan file
GREELEY HAREN RECHARGE POND CREDIT	37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS	Approved	2026-06-30	—	plan file
CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT - GWMSD - 24CW3078	37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION	Approved	2026-08-31	—	plan file
CENTRAL COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT - GWMSD - 25CW3070	37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION	Approved	2026-08-31	—	plan file
FLYING J RANCH	37-92-308(7) PLAN EMERGENCY	Approved	2026-09-09	—	plan file
GSL SAND AND GRAVEL MINE	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-10-31	0202584	plan file
LUPTON LAKES RESOURCE PIT AKA RIVERBEND EAST (MARTIN MARIETTA)	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-10-31	0203041	plan file
RIVERBEND OPERATION AKA RIVERBEND WEST	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-10-31	0203014	plan file
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD CHATFIELD RESERVOIR OUTLET MANIFOLD TEMPORARY CLOSURE	37-92-308(7) PLAN EMERGENCY	Approved	2026-11-26	—	plan file
BRIGHTON PIT M77436 -56993-F SEE ALSO 4848 READY MIXED CONCRETE - NORTH TOWER PIT M77436	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
DPG GRAVEL PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	0302587	plan file
DURHAM S&G CO PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	0303029	plan file
EWING GRAVEL MINE	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
FULTON LAKES AKA JERONIMUS PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
HAZELTINE PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
INOUYE GRAVEL MINE	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
MORTON LAKES PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	0203053	plan file
PLATTE VALLEY PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
SHORES GRAVEL PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	0505500	plan file
SPEER MINING RESOURCE	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
TUCSON SOUTH PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
WATTENBERG PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2026-12-31	—	plan file
ADAMS COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS	37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS	Approved	2027-01-31	—	plan file
NORTHERN COLORADO CONSTRUCTORS INC - BENNETT GRAVEL PIT	37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN	Approved	2027-02-28	—	plan file
SPILLANE POND	37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS	Approved	2027-02-28	—	plan file

Showing 25 of 63 plans — the rest are on DWR’s register.

Water quality

The water itself, in this district

Four registers, each on its own schedule: what USGS sensors read right now, where samples have been taken, which stretches the state lists as impaired, and how the tap water of the systems here stands with EPA. None is a DWR record; each links its own page.

Right now

Source Provisional telemetry · fetched 2026-10-13 · verify at USGS current conditions ↗

No USGS continuous water-quality sensor reports from inside this district. Statewide sensors →

Where water has been sampled

Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-08 · verify at Water Quality Portal ↗

The portal lists 9,420 sampling stations in this district's watersheds (Middle South Platte-Cherry Creek 10190003; St. Vrain 10190005, 2% of the district), of which 305 reported a sample in the last 5 years on the state and tribal side (USGS activity is in the station count, not in that figure). Most active: Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment-WQCD (179), USGS Colorado Water Science Center (42), Metro Water Recovery (formerly Metro Wastewater Reclamation District) (41). Most-sampled groups: Inorganics, Major, Metals, Physical, Nutrient, Organics, Pesticide. Every station as a file ↗

Results themselves are not fetched here; USGS samples added after March 2024 may not be in the portal's legacy profiles yet.

Drinking water

Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-07 · verify at EPA SDWIS ↗

63 community systems touch this district. 1 carries an open health-based violation on EPA's record. EPA sampled 28 of them for PFAS in 2023–25; 4 had PFOA or PFOS at or above the 2024 limit.

System	Serves	EPA record	PFAS (UCMR 5)	Lead, latest 90th pct
FRIENDLY VILLAGE OF THE ROCKIES	1,046	1 open health-based	not sampled	0.0 mg/L
THORNTON CITY OF	226,465	2 of 12 quarters with a violation	PFOA, PFOS at or over the limit	0.0023 mg/L
BRIGHTON CITY OF	56,304	1 of 12 quarters with a violation	PFOA, PFOS at or over the limit	0.002 mg/L
LITTLE THOMPSON WD	25,654	clean, last 12 quarters	PFOA at or over the limit	—
TODD CREEK VILLAGE MD	7,363	clean, last 12 quarters	PFOS at or over the limit	0.0008 mg/L
DENVER WATER BOARD	1,287,000	11 of 12 quarters with a violation	none detected	0.0036 mg/L
AURORA CITY OF	533,407	clean, last 12 quarters	4 detected, under the limits	0.0047 mg/L
WESTMINSTER CITY OF	202,078	2 of 12 quarters with a violation	none detected	0.0013 mg/L
ARVADA CITY OF	171,610	2 of 12 quarters with a violation	none detected	0.0031 mg/L
GREELEY CITY OF	132,310	3 of 12 quarters with a violation	none detected	0.004 mg/L

and 53 more; the full directory filters by district.

EPA's record carries violations and lead/copper percentiles; nitrate and disinfection by-product results are not in it. UCMR 5 samples are monitoring, not compliance, and the 2024 PFOA/PFOS limits equal its reporting limit, so any detection of those two is at or above them.

Every assessed stretch below is drawn on the district map above: turn on the Impaired waters layer (red is on the list, grey is assessed and attaining; click a stretch for its causes).

Water quality

59 of 110 assessed segments in this basin are on Colorado's impaired-waters list (2024 assessment), most often metals.

54% of assessed segments impaired

110 named segments assessed

Metals most common cause (41 segments)

2024 assessment cycle

Where these stretches are

Impaired, cleanup plan written (TMDL) Impaired, no plan yet Assessed, meeting standards

Tap a stretch for its causes. A named creek appears more than once because CDPHE assesses it in separate units, so the map shows where a finding starts and stops rather than colouring a whole creek at once.

On the impaired-waters list

Each entry is one CDPHE assessment unit — a named, mapped stretch of stream, not the whole creek at once, which is why a single named creek can appear more than once with different findings above and below a tributary or discharge.

Bear Creek, mainstem Temperature
Bear Creek, mainstem Temperature
Bear Creek, mainstem Temperature
Bear Creek, mainstem Metals
Bear Creek, mainstem Pathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Bear creek, mainstem Temperature
Big Dry Creek, mainstem MetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Big Dry Creek, mainstem and all tributaries Pathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Cherry Creek, mainstem Metals
Cherry Creek, mainstem Pathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Cherry Creek, mainstem Pathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Clear Creek, mainstem MetalsPathogensSedimentTemperature
Crow Creek and Box Elder Creek, mainstems Metals
East Plum Creek, mainstem Metals
Fourmile Creek MercuryMetals
Geneva Creek, all tributaries. Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Geneva Creek, mainstem. Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Geneva Creek, mainstem. MetalspH / acidity Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Goldsmith Gulch MetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Goose Creek Metals
Gooseberry Creek, tributary Ammonia
Horse Creek, mainstem and all tributaries. Metals
Lone Tree Creek, mainstem Nutrients
Mosquito Creek, mainstem Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Mosquito Creek, mainstem Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Mt. Vernon Creek, mainstem and tributaries
No Name Creek Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
North Fork South Platte River, mainstem and all tributaries. MetalspH / aciditySediment Cleanup plan (TMDL)
North Fork South Platte River, mainstem and all tributaries. MetalspH / aciditySediment Cleanup plan (TMDL)
North Fork South Platte River, mainstem and all tributaries. MetalsPathogens
North Walnut Creek, mainstem and tributaries Nutrients
Pine Creek Metals
Plum Creek, mainstem MetalsPathogens
Sand Creek, mainstem MetalsPathogens
Sand Creek, mainstem Pathogens
Sand Creek, mainstem MetalsPathogens
Snyder Creek, mainstem and all tributaries.
South Fork South Platte River, mainstem. MetalsOxygen depletion
South Mosquito Creek Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Mosquito Creek Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, all tributaries. MetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem MetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem MetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. MetalsSediment Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. MetalsSediment Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. Metals
South Platte River, mainstem. MetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. MetalsPathogens
South Platte River, mainstem. AmmoniaMetalsPathogensSolids chlorides sulfates Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. AmmoniaMetalsPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
South Platte River, mainstem. AmmoniaPathogens Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Spring Creek, mainstem and tributaries.
Trout Creek, mainstem and all tributaries. MetalsOxygen depletionpH / acidity Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Upper Windmill Creek Metals Cleanup plan (TMDL)
Vance Creek and tributaries. Temperature
West Plum Creek, mainstem
Willow Creek, mainstem and all tributaries. Metals
Woman and Walnut Creeks, mainstem and all tributaries Metals

42 segments meeting standards, 9 not yet assessed

Bear Creek tributaries Fully Supporting
Bear Creek, all tributaries Fully Supporting
Bear Creek, mainstem Fully Supporting
Bear Creek, mainstem Fully Supporting
Bear Creek, mainstem and tributaries Fully Supporting
Bear Creek, mainstem. Fully Supporting
Cherry Creek, all tributaries Fully Supporting
Cook Creek, mainstem. Fully Supporting
Cottonwood Creek, mainstem and all tributaries Fully Supporting
Deer Creek and the North and South Forks, mainstems. Fully Supporting
East Plum Creek, all tributaries. Fully Supporting
Garber Creek and Bear Creek, mainstems. Fully Supporting
Gooseberry Gulch, mainstem and all tributaries. Fully Supporting
Gooseberry Gulch, mainstem and all tributaries. Fully Supporting
Hankins Gulch Fully Supporting
Jackson Creek, mainstem. Fully Supporting
Lakewood Gulch, mainstem. Fully Supporting
Lee Gulch, Little's Creek, Big Dry Creek, and Little Dry Creek, mainstems. Fully Supporting
Marcy Gulch, mainstem. Fully Supporting
McMurdo Gulch Fully Supporting
Middle Fork South Platte River Fully Supporting
North Turkey Creek, mainstem Fully Supporting
North and South Walnut Creek and Walnut Creek Fully Supporting
Salt Creek Fully Supporting
Sawmill, Troublesome and Cold Springs Gulches, and Cub Creek mainstems Fully Supporting
South Fork South Platte River, all tributaries. Fully Supporting
South Platte River, all tributaries Fully Supporting
South Platte River, all tributaries. Fully Supporting
South Platte River, all tributaries. Fully Supporting
South Platte River, all tributaries. Fully Supporting
South Platte River, all tributaries. Fully Supporting
South Platte River, mainstem. Fully Supporting
Sugar Creek Fully Supporting
Swede/Kerr Gulch. Fully Supporting
Trail Creek Fully Supporting
Trail Creek Fully Supporting
Turkey Creek, mainstem Fully Supporting
Turkey Creek, mainstem and tributaries Fully Supporting
Twin Creek Fully Supporting
West Creek Fully Supporting
West Toll Gate Creek and East Toll Gate Creek, mainstems and all tributaries. Toll Gate Creek, mainstem. Fully Supporting
Wigwam Creek Fully Supporting
Barr Lake, tributary. Not Assessed
Bear Creek, all tributaries. Not Assessed
East Plum and West Plum Creeks, mainstems and all tributaries. Not Assessed
Hayesmount Tributaries, Upper Hayesmount Tributary, Lower Hayesmount Tributaries Not Assessed
Second Creek, mainstem. Not Assessed
Stark and Grove Creek, mainstems Not Assessed
Third Creek, mainstem. Not Assessed
Upper Big Dry Creek and South Upper Big Dry Creek Not Assessed
West Plum Creek, all tributaries. Not Assessed

Source: EPA ATTAINS (Colorado Regulation 93 / Clean Water Act §303(d) list); state.co.us hosts the same assessment, ATTAINS is EPA's public mirror of it.. A segment being “Not Supporting” means it fails Colorado’s water-quality standard for the stated use (aquatic life, recreation, drinking-water supply...) for the stated cause — a legal, periodic finding, independent of whether any sensor happens to be deployed there right now.

Call cascade

If a call were placed at a given seniority, which structures in this basin would be out of priority, and how much of their decreed rate would be curtailed? Computed from this basin's cached decrees.

What this does and doesn't model. Seniority arithmetic only: every right junior to the call is treated as curtailed. It does not model reach applicability — structures downstream of the calling point are not administered by it — and it applies no futile-call judgment. Read it as “who is junior to this date, and by how much,” not as a prediction of what the Division Engineer would actually order.

Pick a calling right

Real decrees from this basin, ordered by administration number — that is, by actual seniority. The years will look out of order, and that is correct: an administration number encodes the adjudication date as well as the appropriation date, so a right appropriated in 1970 can be administered ahead of one from 1950. A senior call curtails almost everything; a junior one curtails almost nothing.

Or enter an administration number directly

Administration number

DWR administration numbers encode appropriation and adjudication dates; lower is more senior.

System status

Loading…

Active river calls

Loading…

Hydrographs vs. historical envelope

Loading…

Anomaly flags

Loading…

Topology cross-check: 12 parent disagreements, 20 sizable streams not on this network (vs DWR's route framework — under review)

This flow network was built mechanically; DWR's Source Water Route Framework disagrees with it in the places below. Each row is a question a human reviewer has not yet answered — not an error verdict. Checked 36 streams, 24 agree. Know this water? Tell us →

Stream	This site routes it to	DWR routes it to
Jarre Creek	the mainstem	Plum Creek
Bear Creek	the mainstem	West Plum Creek
West Plum Creek	the mainstem	Plum Creek
East Plum Creek	the mainstem	Plum Creek
West Cherry Creek	the mainstem	Cherry Creek
East Cherry Creek	the mainstem	Cherry Creek
Elk Creek	the mainstem	West Cherry Creek
Fourmile Creek	the mainstem	South Fork South Platte River

Sizable streams DWR maps here that this network does not carry:

Cache la Poudre River (127 mi) · Box Elder Creek (82 mi) · Big Thompson River (79 mi) · Clear Creek (66 mi) · Big Dry Creek (43 mi) · Saint Vrain Creek (32 mi) · Beebe Draw (30 mi) · Second Creek (25 mi)

Something wrong on this page? Tell us →

South Platte: Denver Gage to Greeley

Schematic

Historical

Evolution of the network

Trends

This year, in context

Gage flow trend & changepoints

How the measurement network itself changed

Mass-balance (network closure) trend

Reach gain/loss shifts (1950–2025)

Cross-gage pattern fingerprint

Structures most implicated by reconciliation (as of 2026-09-01)

Data provenance & quality

Groundwater

Well map

3D aquifer x-ray

Water-table trends

Stream corridors — the surface connection

Permits issued here, by year

What drillers reached, township by township

Reservoirs

Reservoir map — how full is each vessel?

Basin storage, end of each water year

Largest reservoirs on record

Drought

Right now

Every year since 1895, week by week

This year against its analogs

The Drought Monitor’s view since 2000

The law’s own drought gauge

This basin’s droughts, by its own record

What drought has cost here

When this basin claimed its water

Legal

Who serves it, who protects it

Public water systems here

Instream-flow rights held by the state

Is the river getting harder to divert from?

What the water is for — decade by decade

Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations

Right yield — how often could these rights actually divert?

Abandonment radar (25 screens)

Compliance screens (297 advisory flags)

Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)

Recent inventory & legal-document changes

Water-court filings this month (division-wide)

Active substitute water supply plans in this district

Water quality

The water itself, in this district

Right now

Where water has been sampled

Drinking water

Water quality

Where these stretches are

On the impaired-waters list

Call cascade

Pick a calling right

System status

Active river calls

Hydrographs vs. historical envelope

Anomaly flags

Keep track of Colorado’s water?