Hydrohistorian
South Platte Cheesman to Denver Gage
Who may take water from the South Platte Cheesman to Denver Gage, who is calling for it today, and how it is running, compiled from Colorado Division of Water Resources records. Click anything on the map for its record.
South Platte Cheesman to Denver Gage on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 8 · 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.
The South Platte River is below normal for late September -- 69% of normal flow. 3 calls stand against it right now; the most senior right calling dates to 1868. DWR's statements do not settle whether 4 more calls reach it.
Schematic
Historical
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 2026-10-08 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 1 ranked gage are running at a median 99% of their own long-term norm for this window — 1 below a typical year, 0 at or above. Driest relative to its record: SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT LAST CHANCE DIVERSION NEAR KASSLER, ranking 4th lowest of 9 years.
How this comparison is made
Each gage's mean flow over the 3 days either side of 2026-10-08, 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 19:51 from 72 gage(s) with cached period-of-record data. The series is each gage's annual mean flow in cfsCubic feet per second, a rate of flow. One cfs running for a day is about 2 acre-feet. (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 72 gages with enough record, 4 are trending down and 4 up, and 6 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 62 show no clear signal either way.
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 |
|
▸
South Platte River at Waterton PLAWATCO |
↓ decreasing | -9.16 cfs -7.3% | p<0.001 | 100 | ~1987 |
|
▸
Cherry Creek below Cherry Creek Lake CHEBELCO |
↑ increasing | +3.38 cfs +45.0% | p<0.001 | 73 | ~1982 |
|
▸
Plum Creek near Louviers PLULOUCO |
↑ increasing | +9.49 cfs +34.1% | p=0.004 | 44 | — |
|
▸
South Platte River below Strontia Springs PLASTRCO |
↓ decreasing | -24.10 cfs -14.0% | p=0.015 | 43 | — |
|
▸
⚠️
Cherry Creek near Melvin CHEMELCO |
↓ decreasing | -6.13 cfs -74.3% | p=0.032 | 29 | ~1949 |
|
▸
South Platte River at Englewood PLAENGCO |
↓ decreasing | -28.86 cfs -16.9% | p=0.043 | 43 | — |
|
▸
Cherry Creek near Parker CHERRYCO |
↑ increasing | +1.74 cfs +16.8% | p=0.044 | 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 |
⚠️ 1 gage 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.
62 other gage(s) show no significant trend or changepoint (not shown).
2 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); 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. 51 gage(s) and 157 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 | 2 | 0 |
| 1920s | 2 | 0 |
| 1930s | 3 | 0 |
| 1940s | 8 | 0 |
| 1950s | 9 | 17 |
| 1960s | 9 | 14 |
| 1970s | 7 | 113 |
| 1980s | 12 | 80 |
| 1990s | 16 | 72 |
| 2000s | 18 | 53 |
| 2010s | 24 | 68 |
| 2020s | 49 | 168 |
Mass-balance (network closure) trend
Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 3% of 3820 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.
Groundwater now has its own tab: 3026 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.
Reservoirs now has its own tab: 47 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1950, click-to-chart histories.
Cross-gage pattern fingerprint
Over the 101-year window with full coverage (1926–2026), the dominant shared pattern across 3 gage(s) explains 81% 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 2026-09-25)
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.
- TWO FORKS RES (diversion): -93.3 cfs (25% of that reach's correction)
- AURORA INLET PL (diversion): -93.3 cfs (25% of that reach's correction)
- AURORA PL (diversion): -93.3 cfs (25% of that reach's correction)
- DENVER FOOTHILLS PL 26 (diversion): -93.3 cfs (25% of that reach's correction)
- COLEMAN PL (diversion): -78.6 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
- WILLRICH SPRING (return): -78.6 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
- LUCKY JACK SPRING (return): -78.6 cfs (33% of that reach's correction)
- DENVER CONDUIT NO 20 (diversion): -32.1 cfs (100% of that reach's correction)
- ARAPAHOE POWER PLANT (diversion): +18.4 cfs (100% of that reach's correction)
- ISBELL SPRING 1 (return): +9.8 cfs (17% of that reach's correction)
Data provenance & quality
Where these numbers come from and how far they can be trusted. Grade B (4/6 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 | current | newest gage reading is 3 day(s) old |
| diversion record | expected-lag | newest diversion record is 346 day(s) old (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears) |
| structure coverage | sparse | 3% of schematic structures have data |
72 gage(s) / 571,051 daily values (1895-07-01–2026-10-08); 538 structure(s) with diversion records; 12310 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 ↗
36,122 water-level measurements across 3026 monitored well(s) — 735 alluvial, 1430 bedrock — plus 160 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 179 well(s) with enough record for a trend test: 86 declining, 17 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 |
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.
51% are constructed wells; 8% 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
30,115 located water-supply permits with an issue date, 1900 to 2026; half of them had been issued by 1992, and the busiest year was 1972 with 1,474. The district’s 16,146 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 56,424 above counts every permit on file here; 10,163 of them have no usable location or no issue date and are not in this chart.
water-supply permits issued that year monitoring holes, when shown 9 issued before 1950 are in the table, not the bars
The counts by year, as a table
| Year | Issued | Monitoring holes | Water-supply | Issued through that year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1900 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 1901 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 1908 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| 1909 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| 1926 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| 1928 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| 1934 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
| 1938 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 8 |
| 1942 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 9 |
| 1952 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10 |
| 1953 | 27 | 0 | 27 | 37 |
| 1954 | 85 | 0 | 85 | 122 |
| 1955 | 179 | 0 | 179 | 301 |
| 1956 | 123 | 0 | 123 | 424 |
| 1957 | 115 | 0 | 115 | 539 |
| 1958 | 77 | 0 | 77 | 616 |
| 1959 | 93 | 0 | 93 | 709 |
| 1960 | 169 | 0 | 169 | 878 |
| 1961 | 68 | 0 | 68 | 946 |
| 1962 | 71 | 0 | 71 | 1,017 |
| 1963 | 128 | 0 | 128 | 1,145 |
| 1964 | 101 | 0 | 101 | 1,246 |
| 1965 | 79 | 0 | 79 | 1,325 |
| 1966 | 127 | 1 | 126 | 1,452 |
| 1967 | 101 | 0 | 101 | 1,553 |
| 1968 | 148 | 0 | 148 | 1,701 |
| 1969 | 178 | 0 | 178 | 1,879 |
| 1970 | 170 | 1 | 169 | 2,049 |
| 1971 | 293 | 0 | 293 | 2,342 |
| 1972 | 1,474 | 0 | 1,474 | 3,816 |
| 1973 | 550 | 0 | 550 | 4,366 |
| 1974 | 260 | 0 | 260 | 4,626 |
| 1975 | 187 | 0 | 187 | 4,813 |
| 1976 | 292 | 0 | 292 | 5,105 |
| 1977 | 596 | 0 | 596 | 5,701 |
| 1978 | 1,036 | 0 | 1,036 | 6,737 |
| 1979 | 904 | 0 | 904 | 7,641 |
| 1980 | 581 | 4 | 577 | 8,222 |
| 1981 | 605 | 0 | 605 | 8,827 |
| 1982 | 474 | 2 | 472 | 9,301 |
| 1983 | 674 | 4 | 670 | 9,975 |
| 1984 | 568 | 2 | 566 | 10,543 |
| 1985 | 874 | 235 | 639 | 11,417 |
| 1986 | 896 | 55 | 841 | 12,313 |
| 1987 | 714 | 142 | 572 | 13,027 |
| 1988 | 651 | 202 | 449 | 13,678 |
| 1989 | 692 | 253 | 439 | 14,370 |
| 1990 | 769 | 314 | 455 | 15,139 |
| 1991 | 1,182 | 617 | 565 | 16,321 |
| 1992 | 1,159 | 510 | 649 | 17,480 |
| 1993 | 1,462 | 607 | 855 | 18,942 |
| 1994 | 1,464 | 663 | 801 | 20,406 |
| 1995 | 1,253 | 474 | 779 | 21,659 |
| 1996 | 1,355 | 546 | 809 | 23,014 |
| 1997 | 1,031 | 386 | 645 | 24,045 |
| 1998 | 1,201 | 431 | 770 | 25,246 |
| 1999 | 1,484 | 770 | 714 | 26,730 |
| 2000 | 1,278 | 617 | 661 | 28,008 |
| 2001 | 1,238 | 626 | 612 | 29,246 |
| 2002 | 1,252 | 703 | 549 | 30,498 |
| 2003 | 1,531 | 941 | 590 | 32,029 |
| 2004 | 1,400 | 941 | 459 | 33,429 |
| 2005 | 1,194 | 663 | 531 | 34,623 |
| 2006 | 640 | 201 | 439 | 35,263 |
| 2007 | 467 | 134 | 333 | 35,730 |
| 2008 | 351 | 93 | 258 | 36,081 |
| 2009 | 281 | 101 | 180 | 36,362 |
| 2010 | 298 | 103 | 195 | 36,660 |
| 2011 | 421 | 213 | 208 | 37,081 |
| 2012 | 575 | 310 | 265 | 37,656 |
| 2013 | 694 | 381 | 313 | 38,350 |
| 2014 | 805 | 474 | 331 | 39,155 |
| 2015 | 572 | 323 | 249 | 39,727 |
| 2016 | 844 | 511 | 333 | 40,571 |
| 2017 | 746 | 370 | 376 | 41,317 |
| 2018 | 697 | 325 | 372 | 42,014 |
| 2019 | 589 | 241 | 348 | 42,603 |
| 2020 | 708 | 390 | 318 | 43,311 |
| 2021 | 790 | 322 | 468 | 44,101 |
| 2022 | 619 | 272 | 347 | 44,720 |
| 2023 | 368 | 118 | 250 | 45,088 |
| 2024 | 368 | 163 | 205 | 45,456 |
| 2025 | 504 | 255 | 249 | 45,960 |
| 2026 | 301 | 135 | 166 | 46,261 |
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
40 PLSS townships here where at least 5 water-supply permits naming the same aquifer filed a depth (28,127 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 2,700 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. Columns are drawn to 3,000 ft at most; 1 band here runs deeper and is drawn to the bottom edge with an arrow, the numbers as filed in the table: T6S R67W more than one named (7 permits, 90th percentile 9,393 ft). 15 of these townships straddle a district line and are filed here because most of their permits are.
3,194 · 55% here
2,116 · 53% here
2,044 · 66% here
1,938 · 63% here
1,504
1,430 · 67% here
1,352 · 92% here
1,102 · 69% here
1,043
971 · 78% here
862
825 · 94% here
746 · 40% here
706
671
606 · 78% here
600
581
566
531
524
464 · 56% here
463
448
unnamed alluvium Dawson Denver Arapahoe Laramie-Fox Hills fractured crystalline more than one named other named faint = where the permits naming it stopped (10th–90th pct) · solid = their screens · tick = median · arrow = runs deeper than the scale · ft below ground as filed
Every township here, as a table
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T11S R66W 6th PM | 55% | unnamed | 446 | 170 / 300 / 460 | 100 / 200 / 319 | 200 / 300 / 460 |
| T11S R66W 6th PM | 55% | Dawson | 2,650 | 240 / 330 / 500 | 100 / 200 / 320 | 240 / 320 / 500 |
| T11S R66W 6th PM | 55% | Denver | 75 | 382 / 600 / 1,275 | 282 / 450 / 800 | 388 / 580 / 1,248 |
| T11S R66W 6th PM | 55% | Arapahoe | 19 | 1,162 / 1,754 / 2,330 | 658 / 1,185 / 1,903 | 868 / 1,535 / 2,270 |
| T7S R65W 6th PM | 53% | Dawson | 1,700 | 248 / 365 / 540 | 165 / 262 / 410 | 260 / 380 / 560 |
| T7S R65W 6th PM | 53% | unnamed | 346 | 232 / 368 / 482 | 180 / 260 / 382 | 281 / 383 / 545 |
| T7S R65W 6th PM | 53% | Denver | 62 | 833 / 995 / 1,487 | 628 / 808 / 896 | 848 / 960 / 1,094 |
| T7S R65W 6th PM | 53% | Arapahoe | 6 | 1,184 / 2,093 / 2,194 | — | — |
| T6S R70W 6th PM | 66% | unnamed | 2,020 | 80 / 320 / 705 | 46 / 200 / 502 | 165 / 380 / 730 |
| T6S R70W 6th PM | 66% | fractured crystalline | 22 | 204 / 676 / 1,283 | 132 / 300 / 566 | 280 / 652 / 1,072 |
| T6S R65W 6th PM | 63% | unnamed | 247 | 103 / 337 / 579 | 100 / 270 / 500 | 204 / 380 / 585 |
| T6S R65W 6th PM | 63% | Dawson | 1,519 | 218 / 350 / 580 | 145 / 240 / 480 | 224 / 355 / 590 |
| T6S R65W 6th PM | 63% | Denver | 163 | 520 / 680 / 907 | 430 / 556 / 690 | 510 / 685 / 898 |
| T6S R65W 6th PM | 63% | Arapahoe | 8 | 1,690 / 1,830 / 2,118 | 1,232 / 1,430 / 1,695 | 1,549 / 1,809 / 2,000 |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 13 | 42 / 60 / 75 | 20 / 26 / 49 | 51 / 56 / 69 |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 328 | 36 / 172 / 536 | 20 / 182 / 452 | 44 / 299 / 589 |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 1,002 | 187 / 321 / 565 | 125 / 252 / 439 | 200 / 340 / 576 |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 102 | 451 / 600 / 1,223 | 361 / 425 / 627 | 462 / 582 / 837 |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 43 | 1,652 / 1,761 / 1,910 | 1,109 / 1,278 / 1,544 | 1,616 / 1,700 / 1,956 |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | more than one named | 5 | 950 / 1,872 / 1,883 | — | — |
| T6S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 11 | 2,342 / 2,401 / 2,450 | 2,118 / 2,140 / 2,238 | 2,360 / 2,390 / 2,497 |
| T8S R65W 6th PM | 67% | unnamed | 599 | 207 / 302 / 440 | 140 / 215 / 322 | 228 / 310 / 455 |
| T8S R65W 6th PM | 67% | Dawson | 815 | 280 / 400 / 700 | 180 / 275 / 580 | 281 / 400 / 705 |
| T8S R65W 6th PM | 67% | Denver | 12 | 455 / 1,004 / 1,240 | 194 / 710 / 942 | 342 / 980 / 1,205 |
| T5S R66W 6th PM | 92% | alluvium | 9 | 54 / 55 / 86 | — | — |
| T5S R66W 6th PM | 92% | unnamed | 370 | 54 / 300 / 626 | 32 / 280 / 480 | 55 / 349 / 600 |
| T5S R66W 6th PM | 92% | Dawson | 342 | 230 / 300 / 423 | 154 / 226 / 322 | 232 / 302 / 420 |
| T5S R66W 6th PM | 92% | Denver | 546 | 305 / 440 / 612 | 210 / 338 / 474 | 322 / 440 / 618 |
| T5S R66W 6th PM | 92% | Arapahoe | 52 | 1,312 / 1,677 / 1,864 | 1,025 / 1,192 / 1,326 | 1,452 / 1,643 / 1,759 |
| T5S R66W 6th PM | 92% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 31 | 2,121 / 2,322 / 2,470 | 1,839 / 1,969 / 2,088 | 2,056 / 2,296 / 2,397 |
| T12S R69W 6th PM | 69% | unnamed | 1,094 | 74 / 200 / 500 | 40 / 160 / 420 | 90 / 250 / 500 |
| T12S R69W 6th PM | 69% | fractured crystalline | 7 | 200 / 300 / 524 | — | — |
| T8S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 401 | 73 / 415 / 760 | 41 / 323 / 602 | 69 / 460 / 790 |
| T8S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 197 | 293 / 504 / 816 | 199 / 378 / 668 | 287 / 500 / 820 |
| T8S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 418 | 436 / 621 / 900 | 296 / 462 / 666 | 432 / 621 / 886 |
| T8S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 23 | 1,469 / 1,860 / 2,001 | 1,008 / 1,352 / 1,548 | 1,385 / 1,830 / 1,932 |
| T4S R69W 6th PM | 78% | unnamed | 884 | 40 / 100 / 505 | 13 / 60 / 402 | 36 / 125 / 600 |
| T4S R69W 6th PM | 78% | Dawson | 7 | 100 / 150 / 343 | — | — |
| T4S R69W 6th PM | 78% | Denver | 40 | 26 / 260 / 473 | 18 / 105 / 285 | 36 / 240 / 465 |
| T4S R69W 6th PM | 78% | Arapahoe | 30 | 460 / 511 / 745 | 274 / 380 / 559 | 428 / 522 / 770 |
| T4S R69W 6th PM | 78% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 6 | 1,680 / 1,720 / 1,760 | — | — |
| T8S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 45 | 226 / 364 / 560 | 160 / 268 / 394 | 300 / 373 / 560 |
| T8S R68W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 521 | 140 / 368 / 565 | 80 / 258 / 390 | 210 / 395 / 590 |
| T8S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 277 | 320 / 480 / 658 | 162 / 340 / 470 | 323 / 485 / 660 |
| T8S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 10 | 627 / 1,056 / 1,100 | 522 / 714 / 834 | 627 / 1,056 / 1,100 |
| T5S R68W 6th PM | 94% | alluvium | 24 | 20 / 40 / 62 | 10 / 25 / 35 | 36 / 45 / 58 |
| T5S R68W 6th PM | 94% | unnamed | 685 | 27 / 100 / 1,009 | 10 / 36 / 700 | 30 / 60 / 1,052 |
| T5S R68W 6th PM | 94% | Denver | 22 | 196 / 380 / 1,113 | 136 / 182 / 816 | 205 / 370 / 1,147 |
| T5S R68W 6th PM | 94% | Arapahoe | 81 | 398 / 900 / 1,189 | 242 / 660 / 940 | 400 / 908 / 1,186 |
| T5S R68W 6th PM | 94% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 10 | 606 / 1,694 / 2,057 | 192 / 1,208 / 1,688 | 408 / 1,400 / 1,937 |
| T3S R68W 6th PM | 40% | other named | 25 | 18 / 32 / 43 | 5 / 15 / 24 | 16 / 29 / 40 |
| T3S R68W 6th PM | 40% | alluvium | 15 | 25 / 42 / 94 | 14 / 20 / 31 | 22 / 42 / 58 |
| T3S R68W 6th PM | 40% | unnamed | 641 | 22 / 45 / 490 | 5 / 20 / 340 | 17 / 38 / 500 |
| T3S R68W 6th PM | 40% | Denver | 10 | 98 / 465 / 705 | 16 / 200 / 271 | 92 / 560 / 670 |
| T3S R68W 6th PM | 40% | Arapahoe | 52 | 520 / 700 / 804 | 227 / 460 / 566 | 484 / 700 / 775 |
| T7S R66W 6th PM | 99% | alluvium | 9 | 52 / 63 / 73 | 32 / 36 / 48 | 52 / 61 / 69 |
| T7S R66W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 145 | 46 / 138 / 665 | 27 / 202 / 580 | 55 / 320 / 665 |
| T7S R66W 6th PM | 99% | Dawson | 506 | 230 / 419 / 774 | 130 / 288 / 620 | 235 / 423 / 773 |
| T7S R66W 6th PM | 99% | more than one named | 5 | 668 / 860 / 877 | — | — |
| T7S R66W 6th PM | 99% | Denver | 14 | 1,006 / 1,488 / 1,680 | 612 / 718 / 974 | 945 / 1,454 / 1,566 |
| T7S R66W 6th PM | 99% | Arapahoe | 25 | 1,846 / 2,020 / 2,238 | 1,407 / 1,539 / 1,779 | 1,739 / 1,961 / 2,178 |
| T6S R68W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 230 | 95 / 326 / 700 | 80 / 219 / 484 | 188 / 344 / 700 |
| T6S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 37 | 215 / 400 / 503 | 139 / 252 / 346 | 217 / 392 / 508 |
| T6S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 199 | 340 / 440 / 645 | 164 / 285 / 456 | 340 / 440 / 617 |
| T6S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 179 | 480 / 720 / 1,319 | 245 / 498 / 705 | 480 / 701 / 946 |
| T6S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 23 | 1,143 / 1,750 / 2,302 | 984 / 1,533 / 2,115 | 1,161 / 1,688 / 2,271 |
| T4S R67W 6th PM | 78% | alluvium | 31 | 27 / 27 / 64 | 18 / 25 / 47 | 28 / 47 / 57 |
| T4S R67W 6th PM | 78% | unnamed | 555 | 20 / 53 / 315 | 8 / 22 / 81 | 18 / 48 / 180 |
| T4S R67W 6th PM | 78% | Denver | 7 | 114 / 280 / 393 | 50 / 180 / 190 | 90 / 330 / 392 |
| T4S R67W 6th PM | 78% | Arapahoe | 7 | 760 / 980 / 1,587 | 709 / 850 / 1,053 | 794 / 980 / 1,427 |
| T10S R67W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 273 | 105 / 305 / 542 | 72 / 200 / 400 | 154 / 355 / 574 |
| T10S R67W 6th PM | 99% | Dawson | 279 | 240 / 410 / 600 | 87 / 242 / 400 | 240 / 414 / 540 |
| T10S R67W 6th PM | 99% | Denver | 39 | 396 / 680 / 1,145 | 330 / 510 / 842 | 410 / 665 / 1,143 |
| T8S R66W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 106 | 54 / 298 / 1,008 | 30 / 245 / 731 | 77 / 360 / 858 |
| T8S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 428 | 218 / 460 / 824 | 114 / 338 / 671 | 240 / 488 / 832 |
| T8S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 33 | 743 / 963 / 1,706 | 611 / 777 / 994 | 740 / 963 / 1,609 |
| T8S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 12 | 1,908 / 2,264 / 2,306 | 1,470 / 1,650 / 1,702 | 1,950 / 2,244 / 2,298 |
| T6S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 227 | 132 / 463 / 684 | 99 / 360 / 522 | 140 / 506 / 678 |
| T6S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 213 | 328 / 544 / 650 | 211 / 400 / 493 | 322 / 544 / 650 |
| T6S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 72 | 482 / 766 / 1,391 | 349 / 440 / 686 | 480 / 700 / 1,226 |
| T6S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 35 | 1,750 / 1,877 / 2,126 | 1,206 / 1,414 / 1,622 | 1,707 / 1,877 / 2,117 |
| T6S R67W 6th PM | 100% | more than one named | 7 | 1,196 / 1,929 / 9,393 (off the drawn scale) | 685 / 951 / 1,146 | 1,027 / 1,594 / 1,894 |
| T6S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 9 | 2,284 / 2,382 / 2,642 | — | — |
| T7S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 250 | 86 / 364 / 800 | 109 / 287 / 574 | 220 / 402 / 800 |
| T7S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 161 | 260 / 554 / 827 | 142 / 404 / 616 | 260 / 570 / 809 |
| T7S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 79 | 509 / 1,085 / 1,745 | 303 / 492 / 961 | 488 / 777 / 1,335 |
| T7S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 34 | 1,706 / 1,898 / 2,253 | 1,266 / 1,390 / 1,775 | 1,690 / 1,821 / 2,239 |
| T7S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 19 | 215 / 290 / 446 | 148 / 206 / 254 | 238 / 286 / 447 |
| T7S R68W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 207 | 73 / 295 / 588 | 29 / 205 / 363 | 150 / 309 / 556 |
| T7S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 218 | 309 / 458 / 623 | 140 / 277 / 420 | 300 / 450 / 606 |
| T7S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 6 | 514 / 653 / 933 | 228 / 447 / 765 | 499 / 601 / 972 |
| T7S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 66 | 578 / 770 / 1,318 | 365 / 555 / 855 | 552 / 750 / 1,250 |
| T9S R65W 6th PM | 56% | unnamed | 118 | 54 / 237 / 380 | 74 / 182 / 296 | 127 / 257 / 414 |
| T9S R65W 6th PM | 56% | Dawson | 345 | 240 / 340 / 428 | 120 / 223 / 317 | 241 / 341 / 440 |
| T10S R66W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 123 | 161 / 300 / 558 | 80 / 192 / 357 | 190 / 300 / 586 |
| T10S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 324 | 175 / 337 / 580 | 92 / 203 / 373 | 204 / 360 / 560 |
| T10S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 16 | 910 / 1,070 / 1,735 | 780 / 873 / 1,011 | 910 / 1,070 / 1,722 |
| T4S R68W 6th PM | 98% | unnamed | 422 | 21 / 41 / 300 | 7 / 15 / 35 | 15 / 30 / 60 |
| T4S R68W 6th PM | 98% | Denver | 9 | 55 / 55 / 792 | 10 / 10 / 96 | 55 / 55 / 816 |
| T4S R68W 6th PM | 98% | Arapahoe | 11 | 830 / 856 / 1,115 | 313 / 430 / 729 | 774 / 853 / 1,244 |
| T6S R69W 6th PM | 98% | alluvium | 11 | 40 / 48 / 55 | 9 / 15 / 24 | 18 / 28 / 42 |
| T6S R69W 6th PM | 98% | Arapahoe | 22 | 104 / 146 / 396 | 25 / 46 / 88 | 105 / 139 / 352 |
| T6S R69W 6th PM | 98% | unnamed | 369 | 30 / 200 / 882 | 10 / 118 / 782 | 26 / 259 / 1,000 |
| T6S R69W 6th PM | 98% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 23 | 607 / 1,067 / 1,146 | 491 / 915 / 958 | 577 / 1,071 / 1,162 |
| T5S R67W 6th PM | 99% | Dawson | 13 | 40 / 74 / 317 | 20 / 64 / 320 | 40 / 74 / 430 |
| T5S R67W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 224 | 65 / 765 / 1,400 | 13 / 320 / 962 | 31 / 800 / 1,286 |
| T5S R67W 6th PM | 99% | Denver | 9 | 757 / 923 / 1,438 | 234 / 540 / 942 | 713 / 886 / 1,431 |
| T5S R67W 6th PM | 99% | more than one named | 8 | 1,010 / 1,415 / 1,640 | — | — |
| T5S R67W 6th PM | 99% | Arapahoe | 70 | 1,045 / 1,462 / 1,712 | 742 / 926 / 1,189 | 1,018 / 1,371 / 1,629 |
| T5S R67W 6th PM | 99% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 5 | 2,189 / 2,350 / 2,350 | — | — |
| T9S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 81 | 70 / 283 / 800 | 43 / 308 / 620 | 102 / 570 / 907 |
| T9S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 21 | 355 / 525 / 810 | 180 / 475 / 540 | 312 / 595 / 858 |
| T9S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 152 | 642 / 843 / 1,124 | 440 / 620 / 726 | 643 / 825 / 1,105 |
| T9S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 19 | 960 / 1,665 / 1,836 | 728 / 1,120 / 1,374 | 1,050 / 1,585 / 1,712 |
| T7S R70W 6th PM | 59% | unnamed | 251 | 50 / 415 / 850 | 83 / 288 / 594 | 230 / 480 / 902 |
| T10S R65W 6th PM | 76% | unnamed | 68 | 117 / 240 / 415 | 49 / 170 / 280 | 118 / 282 / 430 |
| T10S R65W 6th PM | 76% | Dawson | 165 | 235 / 395 / 591 | 114 / 260 / 384 | 240 / 400 / 587 |
| T10S R65W 6th PM | 76% | Denver | 5 | 1,376 / 1,390 / 1,657 | — | — |
| T9S R66W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 28 | 104 / 310 / 682 | 38 / 203 / 580 | 181 / 423 / 694 |
| T9S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 201 | 200 / 390 / 672 | 100 / 238 / 580 | 228 / 399 / 685 |
| T11S R69W 6th PM | 96% | unnamed | 228 | 59 / 278 / 540 | 25 / 200 / 467 | 100 / 300 / 574 |
| T11S R70W 6th PM | 95% | unnamed | 180 | 66 / 200 / 440 | 30 / 152 / 360 | 91 / 200 / 420 |
| T11S R70W 6th PM | 95% | fractured crystalline | 7 | 272 / 400 / 617 | 195 / 300 / 500 | 255 / 350 / 580 |
| T8S R69W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 179 | 80 / 355 / 621 | 40 / 207 / 473 | 173 / 400 / 640 |
| T9S R68W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 137 | 48 / 90 / 600 | 16 / 36 / 385 | 46 / 88 / 594 |
| T9S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 5 | 438 / 600 / 730 | 194 / 339 / 486 | 438 / 600 / 730 |
| T9S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 24 | 552 / 702 / 933 | 389 / 542 / 630 | 582 / 740 / 965 |
| T9S R68W 6th PM | 100% | other named | 6 | 354 / 712 / 740 | 132 / 415 / 525 | 248 / 695 / 730 |
| T9S R68W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 9 | 599 / 927 / 1,114 | 400 / 575 / 806 | 680 / 908 / 1,063 |
| T10S R69W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 84 | 76 / 250 / 441 | 67 / 218 / 343 | 140 / 275 / 432 |
| T10S R70W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 75 | 17 / 220 / 400 | 40 / 140 / 330 | 100 / 240 / 400 |
| T9S R70W 6th PM | 64% | unnamed | 51 | 10 / 123 / 465 | 20 / 115 / 352 | 42 / 206 / 632 |
| T7S R69W 6th PM | 96% | unnamed | 46 | 44 / 237 / 803 | 12 / 60 / 465 | 52 / 407 / 801 |
| T9S R69W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 13 | 4 / 20 / 292 | 7 / 20 / 162 | 12 / 140 / 314 |
| T10S R68W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 9 | 39 / 220 / 361 | — | — |
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.
The ground each well hangs from is a 1-km elevation model sampled at the point the permit was spotted, so the profile is real topography smoothed to about a kilometre — peaks are shaved, valleys filled a little — and the depths are the driller’s, measured down from that ground.
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 ↗
47 reservoir(s) with 34,555 storage measurement(s), 1950–2026. Basin storage as of 2025-10-31 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 49,340 AF across 5 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) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ CHATFIELD RESERVOIR (0803514) | 31,629 | 2025-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ BECHTOLD RES (0803601) | 16,977 | 1958-06-01 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ CHERRY CREEK RESERVOIR (0803532) | 10,209 | 2022-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ MITCHELL RES (0803535) | 9,999 | 1978-11-30 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ STRONTIA SPRINGS DIVERSION DAM (0803983) | 7,394 | 2025-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ SOUTH PLATTE LAKE (0804097) | 5,524 | 2025-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ DERBY RES (0803502) | 4,742 | 1958-06-29 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ MCLELLAN RES (0803832) | 4,012 | 2025-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
Snow and runoff
Source Independent agency measurement · fetched 2026-10-16 · verify at NRCS report generator ↗ Source Our computation, scored against a reference · NRCS forecast, graded here against the gage record
Snow-water equivalent, WY2027
| SNOTEL site | Elev (ft) | SWE (in) | Median (in) | % of median | Typical peak |
|---|
NRCS SNOTEL, daily. Sites are assigned to the district whose boundary contains them — the snow that feeds this district can also sit in a neighboring headwater district.
Runoff outlook — South Platte R at South Platte
NRCS's final issue (2026-06-01) calls it even odds that at least 58 kAF arrives over 06-01 to 09-30 — 44% of a normal season; almost certainly at least 29, probably not more than 91. Our own record at this gage shows 110 kAF actually delivered. New forecasts begin in January. How to read these numbers →
We test a record-based adjustment of the April benchmark at every graded point. Here it did not beat NRCS over 78 replayed seasons (23% typical miss unadjusted vs 21% adjusted), so none is shown — NRCS’s own forecast, unadjusted, is the best April benchmark available for this river. Why we test →
| 90% chance of at least | 70% chance of at least | 50% chance of at least | 30% chance of at least | 10% chance of at least | Normal | Observed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29 | 47 | 58 | 70 | 91 | 131 | 110 |
How good are these forecasts here? (1979–2026)
Grading every April issue against what the river then delivered, measured at this gage’s own record — 47 seasons: the median miss of the 50% forecast is 25%, with a low bias of 19%, and the observed volume landed inside the stated 10–90% band 82% of the time (a calibrated forecast would say 80%).
Computed by this site: NRCS's archived April issues (their period as issued each year) against the observed volume in DWR’s published record; years with under 90% daily coverage are dropped, not summed. A grade of the forecast, never of the forecasters — these are hard rivers. How this point ranks among every graded Colorado forecast point →
Drought
Source Our computation, no independent reference · computed here from the screened DWR record Source Independent agency measurement · fetched 2026-10-13 · verify at U.S. Drought Monitor ↗
Right now
This is the 91st-driest week 39 in 132 years of record at SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT DENVER (as of 2026-09-21; this week’s flow sits at the 69th percentileRank against the record: a river at its 5th percentile is lower than it was in 95 of the past 100 years on this same date. for the date). On this week’s US Drought Monitor, Douglas County is 39% in D3 extreme drought (2026-10-13). The law agrees: the most senior active call leaves 97% 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 39 weeks recorded so far, 2026’s weekly trace most resembles 2002 (mean gap 11.3 percentile points; next closest 1908 (13.1), 1934 (15.6)). 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 Arapahoe, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson 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 1950 — 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 (1221 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 | 5 yr (110 wells, 53 still below) |
| the 2018 drought | 2018-07-16 → 2019-02-04 | 29 | 24th (2018-09-24) | 7 weeks | not yet (70 of 140 wells still below) |
| the 2012-13 drought | 2012-08-13 → 2013-04-22 | 36 | 18th (2012-10-15) | 33 weeks | 3 yr (162 wells, 58 still below) |
| the 2002 drought | 2003-11-24 → 2004-05-31 | 27 | 25th (2003-12-29) | 17 weeks | not yet (61 of 107 wells still below) |
| the 2002 drought | 2002-07-15 → 2003-06-30 | 50 | 10th (2002-12-16) | 10 weeks | not yet (64 of 100 wells still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1994-10-24 → 1995-03-20 | 21 | 25th (1994-12-19) | 13 weeks | not yet (51 of 94 wells still below) |
| the 1981 drought | 1981-08-10 → 1982-02-01 | 25 | 25th (1981-10-05) | 35 weeks | 3 yr (61 wells, 20 still below) |
| the 1977 drought | 1977-07-18 → 1979-05-28 | 97 | 15th (1977-10-31) | 5 weeks | 6 yr (35 wells, 16 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1969-03-03 → 1969-08-04 | 22 | 19th (1969-04-28) | 0 weeks | not yet (11 of 16 wells still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1966-06-13 → 1967-11-06 | 73 | 16th (1967-05-15) | 90 weeks | 17 yr (21 wells, 10 still below) |
| the 1963-64 drought | 1962-10-15 → 1965-08-16 | 148 | 6th (1965-02-15) | 0 weeks | 17 yr (29 wells, 11 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1960-11-21 → 1961-04-24 | 22 | 24th (1961-01-30) | 19 weeks | 1 yr (29 wells, 6 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1958-11-17 → 1959-08-10 | 38 | 14th (1959-01-12) | 40 weeks | 1 yr (26 wells, 5 still below) |
| the 1950s drought | 1955-11-21 → 1957-08-12 | 90 | 1st (1957-02-18) | 0 weeks | — |
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 $27,520,820 in drought-caused claims across Arapahoe, Denver, Douglas, Jefferson counties — 55.3% of all insured crop losses there. The worst year was 2022 ($4,231,473).
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 (14,945 rights across 132 years of shared record), colored by that year’s wetness from the barcode above. Here the correlation is -0.04 — 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 ↗
75 systems touch this district (75 community systems reporting 2,962,404 people served, a figure that counts a wholesaler's customers twice); 4 of them carry an open health-based violation on EPA's record.
| System | Serves | Source | Here |
|---|---|---|---|
| DENVER WATER BOARD | 1,287,000 | Surface water | 48% of its area |
| AURORA CITY OF | 533,407 | Surface water | 19% of its area |
| CASTLE ROCK TOWN OF | 110,298 | Surface water | 100% of its area |
| HIGHLANDS RANCH WSD | 103,444 | Surface water | 100% of its area |
| CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL MAPLE GROVE | 81,400 | Surface water | 48% of its area |
| PARKER WSD | 75,949 | Surface water | 100% of its area |
| SOUTH ADAMS COUNTY WSD | 75,559 | Purchased surface water | 1% of its area |
| EAST CHERRY CREEK VALLEY WSD | 66,130 | Purchased surface water | 40% of its area |
and 67 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 ↗
11 reaches over 82.4 miles, held by the Colorado Water Conservation Board so that water stays in the stream. Every reach, with its schedule and case →
- West Creek, 13.4 mi: 1.5 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0212) · dossier
- Trout Creek, 11.0 mi: 2 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1977, 77W8731) · dossier
- Trail Creek, 10.0 mi: 1 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1977, 77W8732) · dossier
- Turkey Creek, 9.9 mi: 2 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0208) · dossier
- Jackson Creek, 9.2 mi: 3 (4/1 - 8/31), 1 (9/1 - 3/31) cfs (appropriated 1986, 86CW0294) · dossier
- West Creek, 6.6 mi: 4 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0211) · dossier
and 5 more on the district's instream-flow page.
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 2024-09-03. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 5% of a median irrigation season and 0% in a dry one. 25 abandonment screens and 78 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: 16434 across 12310 structure(s); 0 structure(s) carry 0 court-case references. Advisory reading aids on public DWR data — not administrative or legal conclusions.
Is the river getting harder to divert from?
Over 1951–2025, administration on this district has been tightening: 2 of 3 measures (days under callA senior water right demanding its water, which requires everyone junior on that stream to stop diverting until it is satisfied., calls set, seniorityColorado shares water by date: the earlier the right, the stronger its claim when the river runs short. "First in time, first in right." of the controlling call) are moving toward more administration, none the other way.
The three measures, year by year
One row per whole calendar year inside the call record's coverage (75 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 | 329 | 145 | 1870-06-01 |
| 2016 | 366 | 168 | 1875-06-30 |
| 2017 | 365 | 248 | 1881-02-01 |
| 2018 | 365 | 274 | 1876-05-10 |
| 2019 | 365 | 281 | 1881-02-01 |
| 2020 | 366 | 197 | 1869-04-01 |
| 2021 | 365 | 186 | 1867-04-15 |
| 2022 | 365 | 236 | 1867-04-15 |
| 2023 | 333 | 222 | 1869-04-01 |
| 2024 | 366 | 197 | 1881-02-01 |
| 2025 | 365 | 329 | 1881-02-01 |
Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations
Sustained diversion stops matched to senior administrative calls.
- CASTLE ROCK SURFACE DIVERSION 1 (0800534) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-06 (19+ days) — call at WESTERN MUTUAL DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-03 (5+ days) — call at PREWITT INLET CANAL curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2025-03-03 (6+ days) — call at NORTH STERLING CANAL curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-11-06 (60+ days) — call at CITY DITCH PL curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- CASTLE ROCK SURFACE DIVERSION 1 (0800534) DWR↗ stopped 2024-10-24 (94+ days) — call at DENVER CONDUIT NO 20 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-09-27 (6+ days) — call at BURLINGTON D RIVER HEADGATE curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- CHATFIELD ARBORETUM WETLANDS INLET DITCH (0800524) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-28 (6+ days) — call at STERLING IRR CO DITCH 1 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-09 (8+ days) — call at STERLING IRR CO DITCH 1 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- CHATFIELD ARBORETUM WETLANDS INLET DITCH (0800524) DWR↗ stopped 2024-05-21 (24+ days) — call at HARMONY DITCH 1 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- CASTLE ROCK SURFACE DIVERSION 1 (0800534) DWR↗ stopped 2024-05-12 (9+ days) — call at BURLINGTON D RIVER HEADGATE curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-03-05 (21+ days) — call at BURLINGTON D RIVER HEADGATE curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong, district-confirmed]
- PLUM CREEK DIVERSION (0800525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-01-13 (31+ days) — call at LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 9 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| HIGHLINE CNL (0801004) DWR↗ | 1861-08-30 | 100.0% / 61.2% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| DENVER CONDUIT NO 20 (0801002) DWR↗ | 1860-12-28 | 100.0% / 84.1% | 8.2% / 0.0% |
| DENVER FOOTHILLS PL 26 (0801017) DWR↗ | 1860-12-28 | 100.0% / 84.1% | 5.6% / 0.0% |
| LACOMBE POWER PLANT (0801016) DWR↗ | 1863-03-15 | 100.0% / 50.9% | 14.8% / 0.0% |
| AURORA INTAKE (0801001) DWR↗ | 1863-12-30 | 100.0% / 47.7% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| CITY DITCH PL (0801008) DWR↗ | 1860-11-28 | 100.0% / 84.1% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 10 (0801997) DWR↗ | 1994-12-02 | 5.1% / 0.0% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 9 (0801998) DWR↗ | 1991-08-02 | 5.1% / 0.0% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 4 (0801999) DWR↗ | 1991-08-02 | 5.1% / 0.0% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| STRONTIA SPGS POWER P (0801669) DWR↗ | 1962-03-21 | 5.6% / 0.0% | 5.6% / 0.0% |
| NEVADA DITCH (0801009) DWR↗ | 1861-08-30 | 100.0% / 61.2% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
| LAST CHANCE DITCH 2 (0801007) DWR↗ | 1862-11-30 | 100.0% / 50.9% | 5.1% / 0.0% |
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 — 73 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 — 56 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
- STEWART DITCH (0801212) DWR↗ (1874-04-01, 2.7 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- BALL DITCH (0801213) DWR↗ (1872-04-19, 0.3 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- CONEHAY DITCH (0801360) DWR↗ (1892-08-19, 1.9 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- ADKINS PL & DITCH (0801456) DWR↗ (1920-06-29, 0.6 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- MARTHA E HIGSON DITCH (0801458) DWR↗ (1876-04-01, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- DEVINNY RES 2 (0803946) DWR↗ (1893-11-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- HOCKADAY WELL (0805019) DWR↗ (1955-06-01, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
- DENVER C C W BATT 1 (0805024) DWR↗ (1902-06-16, 5.5 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 51 years idle
Compliance screens (78 advisory flags)
Screened 144 of 12310 structures with rights (209 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.
- 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).
- PLATTE CANON DITCH (0801005) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 39.0 cfs (max 43.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.7 cfs across 1396 recorded day(s).
- SOUTH PLATTE LAKE (0804097) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 23.7 cfs (max 61.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.2 cfs across 14451 recorded day(s).
- WAUCONDAH RES (0803516) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 20.2 cfs (max 152.3) exceeds total decreed absolute 3.0 cfs across 6858 recorded day(s).
- DENVER C C W BATT 1 (0805024) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 17.0 cfs (max 17.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.5 cfs across 180 recorded day(s).
- EAST PLUM CR DITCH (0801180) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 10.6 cfs (max 10.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 10.6 cfs across 7990 recorded day(s).
- LAKEWOOD CC PUMP 1 (0805034) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 10.5 cfs (max 10.5) exceeds total decreed absolute 3.3 cfs across 330 recorded day(s).
- BROWN DITCH (0801011) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 10.0 cfs (max 16.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 3.8 cfs across 8516 recorded day(s).
- LOWER PLUM CREEK DITCH (0801161) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 8.0 cfs (max 8.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.0 cfs across 1052 recorded day(s).
- ALDERMAN DITCH (0801400) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 8.0 cfs (max 8.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.0 cfs across 3204 recorded day(s).
Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)
| Structure | Senior priority date | Rights | Decreed abs (cfs) | Decreed abs (AF) | Conditional? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIGHLINE CNL (0801004) DWR↗ | 1861-08-30 | 13 | 628.3 | 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 |
| LACOMBE POWER PLANT (0801016) DWR↗ | 1863-03-15 | 3 | 300.0 | 0 | — |
| AURORA INTAKE (0801001) DWR↗ | 1863-12-30 | 18 | 230.0 | 474 | yes |
| CITY DITCH PL (0801008) DWR↗ | 1860-11-28 | 21 | 109.5 | 1790 | yes |
| LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 10 (0801997) DWR↗ | 1994-12-02 | 1 | 100.0 | 0 | — |
| LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 9 (0801998) DWR↗ | 1991-08-02 | 1 | 100.0 | 0 | — |
| LITTLETON BOAT CHUTE NO 4 (0801999) DWR↗ | 1991-08-02 | 1 | 100.0 | 0 | — |
| STRONTIA SPGS POWER P (0801669) DWR↗ | 1962-03-21 | 1 | 72.0 | 0 | — |
| NEVADA DITCH (0801009) DWR↗ | 1861-08-30 | 19 | 66.3 | 418 | — |
| LAST CHANCE DITCH 2 (0801007) DWR↗ | 1862-11-30 | 20 | 64.3 | 10 | — |
| EVANS WELL LFH (0808967) DWR↗ | 1984-12-18 | 1 | 60.4 | 0 | — |
| LAKE GULCH AQUEDUCT (0800593) DWR↗ | 1985-03-20 | 1 | 53.7 | 0 | yes |
| BRONES NNT DA WELL FIELD (0818119) DWR↗ | 2021-07-29 | 1 | 38.0 | 0 | — |
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)
20 applications in the 2026-09 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 2026-11-30 (45 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 20 filings, with excerpts
| Case | What it asks | County | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
19CW3169
|
reasonable diligence | — | Case No. 19CW3169 Court: Water Court, Division 1. Remark: Finding of reasonable diligence for Applicant’s divided 1/8th interest in the conditional rights for the Grey Mountain Dam & Reservoir decreed in the Original Decree. 3. Other Relevant Decree : Date of … |
2026CW10
|
reasonable diligence | REASONABLE DILIGENCE IN DOUGLAS | CASE NUMBER 2026CW10 JOHN AND LINDSEY ROMINSKY, 1350 Cathedral Rock Dr., Sedalia, CO 80135. APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE IN DOUGLAS COUNTY. Date of original decree: 12 -15-13 in case 10CW209, WD 1. Subsequent Decree: 09-04-20 in case 19CW36,… |
2026CW11
|
reasonable diligence | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW11 APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE OF JOHN HARDEN – Application incomplete -no physical legal description for structures provided. Publication of Resume for 2026CW11 to be included in future resume once amended application is … |
2026CW3143
|
— | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3143 (20CW3036, 13CW3099, 07CW75, 00CW212, 94CW26, 86CW372)… |
2026CW3144
|
reasonable diligence | NORTH WELD | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3144 (17CW3057) Name of Applicant: NORTH WELD COUNTY WATER DISTRICT (“North Weld”) c/o Eric Reckentine, General Manager 32825 Co. Rd. 39 Lucerne, CO 80646 Phone: (970) 356 -3020 Direct all pleadings to: Scott E. Holwick, Esq. sholwick@lyonsga… |
2026CW3145
|
reasonable diligence | SOUTH | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3145 Applicants. JASON MENEGATTI AND EMILY MENEGATTI, 645 South County Road 31, Berthoud, CO 80513 with all correspondence connected herewith being sent to Applicant’s counsel, David P. Jones, Lawrence Custer Grasmick Jones & Donovan, LLP., 5… |
2026CW3146
|
reasonable diligence | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3146 (19CW3229, 13CW3028, 96CW199, 89CW212) TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK, Attn: Mark Marlowe, Director of Castle Rock Water 175 Kellogg Court Castle Rock, CO 80109 (720)733-6001. Serve all pleadings on: Madoline Wallace-Gross, Casey J. Weaver, Lyons G… |
2026CW3147
|
plan for augmentation | PASO | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3147 APPLICATION FOR ADJUDICATION OF DENVER BASIN GROUNDWATER AND PLAN FOR AUGMENTATION OF DOLLEY LIVING TRUST IN EL PASO COUNTY – Order granting motion to request no publication order by Division 1 entered September 30, 2026. Water Division … |
2026CW3148
|
— | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3148 NORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, c/o Nathan Baker; 220 Water Avenue, Berthoud, Colorado 80513; nbaker@northernwater.org; (800) 369- 7246; Please direct all pleadings and correspondence to Applicants counsel: Michael A. Kopp,… |
2026CW3149
|
reasonable diligence, make absolute | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3149 LOGAN WELL USERS, INC., P.O. Box 1172, Sterling Colorado, 80751, Lawrence Custer Grasmick Jones & Donovan LLP Ryan M. Donovan, #44435 and Regan M. O’Donnell, #62937 Attorneys for Applicant, Logan Well Users Inc. APPLICATION TO MAKE CONDI… |
2026CW3150
|
reasonable diligence | EAST LARIMER | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3150 EAST LARIMER COUNTY WATER DISTRICT , 232 South Link Lane, Fort Collins, CO 80524. Lawrence Custer Grasmick Jones & Donovan LLP, Ryan M. Donovan, #44435. David L. Strait, #52659, Attorneys for Applicant, East Larimer County Water District… |
2026CW3151
|
reasonable diligence | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3151 THE CACHE LA POUDRE WATER USERS ASSOCIATION , c/o Shawn Hoff, President, 106 Elm St., Eaton, Colorado 80615. Please send all further pleadings to: Brent A. Bartlett and Whitney Phillips, Fischer, Brown, Bartlett, Larsen & Irby, P.C., 131… |
2026CW3152
|
plan for augmentation | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3152 DAVID D. CURRIN, 17945 Saddlewood Road, Monument, CO 80132; Please direct all correspondence concerning this application to: Chris D. Cummins, Monson, Cummins, Shohet & Farr, LLC, 13511 Northgate Estates Drive, Suite 250, Colorado Spring… |
2026CW3153
|
new underground right | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3153 KIMBERLY KILZER AND MARCUS ELLER, 655 Hier Lane, Castle Rock, CO 80109. 720 -737-6252, kimberlykilzer@hotmail.com; ch4marcus@gmail.com. Forward all pleadings and correspondence to: Michael A. Kopp, #43204 and Erin Kincaid, # 61571. TROUT… |
2026CW3154
|
reasonable diligence | NAL WATER RIGHT IN CLEAR CREEK | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3154 (20CW3007; 12CW218; 03CW142; 95CW155) CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, A COLORADO CORPORATION. APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE FOR A CONDITIONAL WATER RIGHT IN CLEAR CREEK… |
2026CW3155
|
reasonable diligence | AL WATER RIGHTS IN CLEAR CREEK | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3155 (20CW3006; 12CW217; 06CW18; 98CW6; 91CW15; 91CW16) CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, A COLORADO CORPORATION . APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE FOR CONDITIONAL WATER RIGHTS I… |
2026CW3156
|
new underground right | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3156 JUAN AND ELIZABETH AGUILAR, ET AL., 9166 E Rocky Mountain Lane, Parker, CO 80138. John D Buchanan, James J Petrock, Hayes Poznanovic Korver LLC, 700 17th Street, Suite 1800, Denver, CO 80202. APPLICATION FOR UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS IN T… |
2026CW3157
|
plan for augmentation | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3157 THOMAS J. RIKLI AND MEREDITH A RIKLI, 6019 Alpine Vista Circle, Unit 208, Castle Rock, Colorado 80108; Please direct all pleadings and correspondence to Applicants’ counsel: Michael A. Kopp, Trevor I. Klein, Trout Raley, 1120 Lincoln St.… |
2026CW3158
|
— | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3158 TINY TOWN INVESTMENT CORPORATION AND ADAM AND ANNA WOLKE, Tiny Town Investment Corporation, 6403 Boyd Court, Castle Rock, CO 80104; Adam and Anna Wolke, 5166 Bear Mountain Road, Evergreen, CO 80439 Broadway Street, Boulder, CO 80304; Ema… |
2026CW3160
|
new underground right | — | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3160 ALPINE LAND RESOURCES LLC (“Alpine”), 970 Yuma St., Denver, CO 80204; Please direct all correspondence to: Wesley S. Knoll, Lawrence Custer Grasmick Jones & Donovan LLP, 5245 Ronald Reagan Blvd., Suite 1, Johnstown, CO 80534; wes@lcwater… |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CITY OF ENGLEWOOD CHATFIELD RESERVOIR OUTLET MANIFOLD TEMPORARY CLOSURE | 37-92-308(7) PLAN EMERGENCY | Approved | 2026-11-26 | — | plan file |
| SPILLANE POND | 37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS | Approved | 2027-02-28 | — | plan file |
| BOW MAR OWNERS, INC. AND BOW MAR SOUTH, INC. | 37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION | Approved | 2027-03-31 | — | plan file |
| CASTLE ROCK, TOWN OF 24CW3037 | 37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION | Approved | 2027-03-31 | — | plan file |
| ENGLEWOOD NEVADA DITCH | 37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS | Approved | 2027-06-30 | — | plan file |
| NGA2 DIVERSION FOR RUETER-HESS RESERVOIR | 37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION | Approved | 2027-06-30 | — | plan file |
| DENVER WATER - LOLLIPOP LAKE | 37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS | Approved | — | 0802708 | plan file |
| FIRESTONE GRAVEL RESOURCE-FKA THE DEL CAMINO PIT | 37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN | Pending | — | 0503005 | plan file |
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 2026-10-17 · verify at USGS current conditions ↗
3 USGS sensors report temperature, conductance, dissolved oxygen or turbidity from inside this district; provisional readings, never merged into the verified record.
| Site | Temp °C | Cond µS/cm | DO mg/L | Turb FNU | As of |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOUTH PLATTE R AT 64TH AVE. COMMERCE CITY, CO. | 15.6 | 2026-10-16 23:45 | |||
| SOUTH PLATTE RIVER ABV STRONTIA SPGS RESERVOIR, CO ↗ | 9.5 | 301 | 9.7 | 2 | 2026-10-17 00:00 |
| SOUTH PLATTE RIVER AT ENGLEWOOD, CO. | 13.9 | 1130 | 9.6 | 2026-10-17 00:15 |
Where water has been sampled
Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-08 · verify at Water Quality Portal ↗
The portal lists 10,211 sampling stations in this district's watersheds (Upper South Platte 10190002, 67% of the district; Middle South Platte-Cherry Creek 10190003, 32% of the district), of which 360 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 (188), Colorado River Watch (57), USGS Colorado Water Science Center (56). 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 ↗
75 community systems touch this district. 4 carry an open health-based violation on EPA's record; 2 are listed by EPA as serious violators. EPA sampled 23 of them for PFAS in 2023–25; 5 had PFOA or PFOS at or above the 2024 limit.
| System | Serves | EPA record | PFAS (UCMR 5) | Lead, latest 90th pct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NORTH LINCOLN WSD | 1,000 | 1 open health-based | not sampled | — |
| VALLEY MAINT CORP NO 1 | 470 | 1 open health-based | not sampled | 0.0029 mg/L |
| TRANQUIL ACRES WS | 180 | 1 open health-based | not sampled | 0.0095 mg/L |
| VALLEY MAINT CORP NO 2 | 55 | 1 open health-based | not sampled | 0.0067 mg/L |
| PARKER WSD | 75,949 | 5 of 12 quarters with a violation | PFOA at or over the limit | 0.0026 mg/L |
| ENGLEWOOD CITY OF | 57,332 | 1 of 12 quarters with a violation | PFOA at or over the limit | 0.005 mg/L |
| ARAPAHOE CNTY WWWA | 31,000 | clean, last 12 quarters | PFOA at or over the limit | 0.0 mg/L |
| STONEGATE MD | 15,295 | clean, last 12 quarters | PFOA, PFOS at or over the limit | 0.002 mg/L |
| COTTONWOOD WSD | 10,867 | 11 of 12 quarters with a violation | PFOA at or over the limit | 0.0 mg/L |
| DENVER WATER BOARD | 1,287,000 | 11 of 12 quarters with a violation | none detected | 0.0036 mg/L |
and 65 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.
Impaired waters
Source Register of another agency · verify at EPA ATTAINS ↗
The state's 303(d) impaired-waters list has not been joined to this basin's own watershed boundary yet, so nothing is shown rather than a guess; the basins with a join carry the full list here. Why the join is geometry, not a name match.
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
DWR administration numbers encode appropriation and adjudication dates; lower is more senior.
This week's diagnostic
Loading…
System status
Loading…
Active river calls
Loading…
Hydrographs vs. historical envelope
Loading…
Anomaly flags
Loading…
Runoff outlook — South Platte R at South Platte: even odds of at least 58 kAF over 06-01 to 09-30 — 44% of a normal season, per NRCS, issued 2026-06-01 — the season’s final; new forecasts begin in January. Full snow & runoff picture — charts, forecast history and how the forecasts have verified →
Sites, exceedance bands and sources
South Platte R at South Platte — 06-01 to 09-30 volume, thousand acre-feet (chance the volume is AT LEAST this):
| 90% | 70% | 50% | 30% | 10% | Normal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29 | 47 | 58 | 70 | 91 | 131 |
Snow-water equivalent and medians (1991–2020) from NRCS SNOTEL; seasonal volume forecasts from the NRCS National Water and Climate Center. Sites and forecast points are assigned to the district whose boundary contains them — snowpack that feeds this district can also sit in a neighboring headwater district. Toggle the Snow chip on the map above to see the sites.