Hydrohistorian
Fountain Creek
Fountain Creek on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 10 · 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 Fountain Creek is critically low for late September -- 22% of normal flow. No call that the record places on it is active right now. DWR's statements do not settle whether 18 more calls reach it. This year's runoff outlook, issued 2026-06-01, called for 42% of normal.
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 2026-09-27 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 39 ranked gages are running at a median 103% of their own long-term norm for this window — 18 below a typical year, 21 at or above. Driest relative to its record: MERRIAMS ROCK CREEK DITCH AT FT. CARSON, CO, ranking 1st lowest of 28 years.
How this comparison is made
Each gage's mean flow over the 3 days either side of 2026-09-27, 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 19:53 from 79 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 79 gages with enough record, 10 are trending down and 14 up, and 23 carry a detected shift. The clearest is Fountain Creek at Pueblo, its annual mean flow changing +15.48 cfs per decade (+15.7% of its median annual flow) over 81 years (p<0.0001). The other 52 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
▸
Fountain Creek at Pueblo FOUPUECO |
↑ increasing | +15.48 cfs +15.7% | p<0.001 | 81 | ~1979 |
|
▸
⚠️
Womack Ditch from L. Fountain Cr near Ft. Carson WOMDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.39 cfs -69.7% | p<0.001 | 26 | ~2009 |
|
▸
Fountain Creek near Fountain FOUFOUCO |
↑ increasing | +13.96 cfs +11.7% | p<0.001 | 55 | ~1993 |
|
▸
Cottonwood Creek at Woodmen Rd near Colo Springs COCRWOCO |
↑ increasing | +0.79 cfs +36.9% | p<0.001 | 33 | ~2012 |
|
▸
Talcott and Cotton Ditch TACODICO |
↑ increasing | +1.43 cfs +75.8% | p<0.001 | 17 | ~2018 |
|
▸
⚠️
Merriams Rock Creek Ditch at Ft. Carson ROCDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.49 cfs -55.9% | p<0.001 | 26 | ~2017 |
|
▸
Templeton Gap Floodway at Colorado Springs TEMFLOCO |
↑ increasing | +0.24 cfs | p=0.001 | 29 | ~1964 |
|
▸
Chilcott Ditch near Fountain CHIDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -2.75 cfs -38.4% | p=0.001 | 18 | ~2019 |
|
▸
Cottonwood Creek at Mouth at Pikeview COCRPICO |
↑ increasing | +0.77 cfs +11.8% | p=0.003 | 40 | ~1994 |
|
▸
⚠️
Turkey Creek Ab Teller Reservoir near Stone City TURTELCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.49 cfs -61.6% | p=0.003 | 29 | ~2000 |
|
▸
Fountain Creek at Security FOUSECCO |
↑ increasing | +16.76 cfs +14.3% | p=0.003 | 61 | ~1982 |
|
▸
⚠️
Gale Ditch from Rock Cr near Fort Carson GALDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.23 cfs | p=0.004 | 17 | ~2008 |
|
▸
⚠️
Wood Valley Ditch near Pinon WDVDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -1.32 cfs -101.7% | p=0.004 | 21 | ~2014 |
|
▸
⚠️
Chilcott Ditch Aug Station near Fountain CHIAUGCO |
↑ increasing | +2.07 cfs +73.8% | p=0.007 | 20 | ~2013 |
|
▸
Fountain Creek near Pinon FOUPINCO |
↑ increasing | +16.61 cfs +13.4% | p=0.009 | 52 | ~1993 |
|
▸
⚠️
Dr Rogers Ditch DRGDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -1.45 cfs -126.7% | p=0.013 | 13 | ~2014 |
|
▸
Monument Creek at Pikeview MONPIKCO |
↑ increasing | +1.80 cfs +6.4% | p=0.013 | 60 | ~1982 |
|
▸
Fountain Creek near Colorado Springs FOUNCOCO |
↑ increasing | +0.89 cfs +6.8% | p=0.013 | 67 | ~1978 |
|
▸
Owen-Hall Ditch Cody Aug OWHALLCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.04 cfs | p=0.016 | 14 | — |
|
▸
⚠️
West Monument Creek at U.S. Air Force Academy MONAIRCO |
↑ increasing | +0.45 cfs +30.6% | p=0.022 | 55 | ~1994 |
|
▸
Fountain Creek at Colorado Springs FOUACSCO |
↑ increasing | +6.05 cfs +10.4% | p=0.037 | 50 | — |
|
▸
Spring Creek Aug Station near Colorado Springs SPRAUGCO |
↑ increasing | +1.06 cfs +11.7% | p=0.037 | 21 | — |
|
▸
West Monument Creek below Rampart Reservoir MONRAMCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.40 cfs -9.8% | p=0.041 | 32 | ~2001 |
|
▸
Ripley Ditch from L. Fountain Cr at Ft. Carson RIPDITCO |
↓ decreasing | -0.15 cfs | p=0.048 | 20 | — |
|
▸
Rock Creek above Fort Carson Reservation ROCAFOCO |
no clear trend | -0.36 cfs -22.6% | p=0.073 | 39 | ~1999 |
|
▸
⚠️
Turkey Cr West Seep Bl Teller Reservoir near Stone City TURWESCO |
no clear trend | +0.00 cfs | p=0.122 | 21 | ~2010 |
|
▸
⚠️
Turkey Creek near Stone City TURSTOCO |
no clear trend | -0.04 cfs | p=0.274 | 24 | ~2001 |
⚠️ 10 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.
52 other gage(s) show no significant trend or changepoint (not shown).
1 of those show a significant trend once extended backwards from a retired neighbour's record: Monument Cr above Woodmen Rd at Colorado Springs (61 yr, increasing, suspect). 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. 52 gage(s) and 100 structure(s) report in 2026, but structure reporting only reached half its modern level around ~1969. 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 | 0 | 1 |
| 1920s | 0 | 52 |
| 1930s | 0 | 48 |
| 1940s | 3 | 42 |
| 1950s | 3 | 17 |
| 1960s | 4 | 46 |
| 1970s | 6 | 65 |
| 1980s | 22 | 48 |
| 1990s | 24 | 74 |
| 2000s | 44 | 94 |
| 2010s | 49 | 90 |
| 2020s | 48 | 99 |
Mass-balance (network closure) trend
Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 5% of 3132 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 (1950–2026)
Mass-balance kinks computed for every summer month back to 1950 (3760 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.
- LITTLE FOUNTAIN CREEK NEAR FORT CARSON, CO.: reach shifted from -63 cfs to -190 cfs summer mean (more losing, p=0.001, 14 yr) [sedimentary plains/foothills: moderate groundwater connectivity -- gain/loss shifts can be real aquifer response; corroborate with nearby well records]
- JIMMY CAMP CREEK AT FOUNTAIN, CO.: reach shifted from -122 cfs to -10 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.014, 51 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=0.64) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change] [31 alluvial wells within 2 mi of the gage; pooled water table -4.2 ft (1953–2018, no_trend)]
- FOUNTAIN CREEK AT PUEBLO, CO.: reach shifted from +26 cfs to +200 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.000, 69 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=0.4) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change] [33 alluvial wells within 2 mi of the gage; pooled water table -7309.1 ft (1962–2018, no_trend)]
- FOUNTAIN CR BLW JANITELL RD BLW COLO. SPRINGS, CO: reach shifted from +106 cfs to +113 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.027, 37 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=0.5) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change] [35 alluvial wells within 2 mi of the gage; pooled water table +1395.7 ft (1977–2024, increasing)]
- FOUNTAIN CREEK AT SECURITY, CO: reach shifted from +75 cfs to +155 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.005, 62 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization] [48 alluvial wells within 2 mi of the gage; pooled water table +2.3 ft (1954–2024, no_trend)]
- FOUNTAIN CREEK NEAR FOUNTAIN, CO.: reach shifted from +94 cfs to +182 cfs summer mean (more gaining, p=0.018, 46 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=0.43) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change] [47 alluvial wells within 2 mi of the gage; pooled water table -0.9 ft (1954–1999, no_trend)]
Groundwater now has its own tab: 2002 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.
Reservoirs now has its own tab: 76 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1919, click-to-chart histories.
Cross-gage pattern fingerprint
Over the 57-year window with full coverage (1970–2026), the dominant shared pattern across 3 gage(s) explains 65% of year-to-year variance (almost certainly a basin-wide climate/snowpack driver).
MONAIRCO doesn't move with that shared pattern -- a real, localized signal (a new diversion, land-use change, or a gage-specific data problem) worth a closer look, not necessarily noise.
Structures most implicated by reconciliation (as of 2026-09-27)
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.
- 1013943 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013973 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013946 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013979 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013956 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013976 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013939 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013982 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013972 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% of that reach's correction)
- 1013945 (diversion): -3.5 cfs (4% 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 14 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 | 5% of schematic structures have data |
Independent check: PASS — 100.0000% agreement across 140,347 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 — 99.17% day-level agreement with USGS's own published records for the same gages, across 53 co-listed station(s) and 527,824 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.
79 gage(s) / 652,939 daily values (1922-01-01–2026-09-27); 368 structure(s) with diversion records; 2872 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 ↗
52,256 water-level measurements across 2002 monitored well(s) — 687 alluvial, 944 bedrock — plus 32 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 265 well(s) with enough record for a trend test: 86 declining, 45 rising.
| Fastest-declining wells | Setting | ft / decade | Span | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ DB-102 MONUMENT WELL 2 | bedrock | -239.85 | 32 yr | 0.0 |
| ▸ WOODMOOR W.D. #10 | bedrock | -208.0 | 27 yr | 0.0 |
| ▸ DB-109 DONALA 14A | bedrock | -193.36 | 16 yr | 0.0 |
| ▸ DB-128 FOREST LAKES METRO | bedrock | -156.95 | 47 yr | 0.0001 |
| ▸ DB-102 MONUMENT WELL 7 | bedrock | -144.13 | 17 yr | 0.0001 |
| ▸ DB-119 PALMER LAKE A-2 | bedrock | -118.41 | 25 yr | 0.0001 |
| ▸ DB-102 MONUMENT WELL 8 | bedrock | -107.5 | 29 yr | 0.0003 |
| ▸ DB-119 (1987-2022) | bedrock | -79.0 | 33 yr | 0.0062 |
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.
LITTLE FOUNTAIN CREEK NEAR FORT CARSON, CO.: 2 alluvial well(s) nearby
JIMMY CAMP CREEK AT FOUNTAIN, CO.: 31 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table -4.2 ft (1953–2018, no_trend, p=0.0601). Glover screen: 0.3 cfs of nearby metered alluvial pumping → est. lagged depletion 0.2–0.3 cfs (uncalibrated T/S ranges; flagged for SPDSS calibration, AWAS cross-check, and expert review — DWR's AWAS is the authority).
FOUNTAIN CREEK AT PUEBLO, CO.: 33 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table -7309.1 ft (1962–2018, no_trend, p=0.0993)
FOUNTAIN CR BLW JANITELL RD BLW COLO. SPRINGS, CO: 35 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table +1395.7 ft (1977–2024, increasing, p=0.0064). Glover screen: 0.0 cfs of nearby metered alluvial pumping → est. lagged depletion 0.0–0.0 cfs (uncalibrated T/S ranges; flagged for SPDSS calibration, AWAS cross-check, and expert review — DWR's AWAS is the authority).
FOUNTAIN CREEK AT SECURITY, CO: 48 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table +2.3 ft (1954–2024, no_trend, p=0.7885)
FOUNTAIN CREEK NEAR FOUNTAIN, CO.: 47 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table -0.9 ft (1954–1999, no_trend, p=0.6223). Glover screen: 2.1 cfs of nearby metered alluvial pumping → est. lagged depletion 1.8–2.1 cfs (uncalibrated T/S ranges; flagged for SPDSS calibration, AWAS cross-check, and expert review — DWR's AWAS is the authority).
ROCK CREEK ABOVE FORT CARSON RESERVATION, CO.: 4 alluvial well(s) nearby; pooled water table +0.5 ft (1981–1997, no_trend, p=0.4995)
BEAR CREEK NEAR COLORADO SPRINGS, CO: 0 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.
54% 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
23,960 located water-supply permits with an issue date, 1907 to 2026; half of them had been issued by 1995, and the busiest year was 1972 with 1,004. The district’s 5,904 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 37,753 above counts every permit on file here; 7,889 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 5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1907 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 1909 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 1919 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| 1928 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| 1930 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
| 1951 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| 1953 | 29 | 0 | 29 | 35 |
| 1954 | 49 | 0 | 49 | 84 |
| 1955 | 120 | 0 | 120 | 204 |
| 1956 | 151 | 0 | 151 | 355 |
| 1957 | 108 | 0 | 108 | 463 |
| 1958 | 20 | 0 | 20 | 483 |
| 1959 | 24 | 0 | 24 | 507 |
| 1960 | 100 | 0 | 100 | 607 |
| 1961 | 56 | 0 | 56 | 663 |
| 1962 | 33 | 0 | 33 | 696 |
| 1963 | 79 | 0 | 79 | 775 |
| 1964 | 81 | 0 | 81 | 856 |
| 1965 | 98 | 2 | 96 | 954 |
| 1966 | 53 | 0 | 53 | 1,007 |
| 1967 | 53 | 0 | 53 | 1,060 |
| 1968 | 46 | 0 | 46 | 1,106 |
| 1969 | 55 | 0 | 55 | 1,161 |
| 1970 | 71 | 0 | 71 | 1,232 |
| 1971 | 147 | 0 | 147 | 1,379 |
| 1972 | 1,004 | 0 | 1,004 | 2,383 |
| 1973 | 451 | 0 | 451 | 2,834 |
| 1974 | 137 | 0 | 137 | 2,971 |
| 1975 | 73 | 0 | 73 | 3,044 |
| 1976 | 119 | 0 | 119 | 3,163 |
| 1977 | 229 | 0 | 229 | 3,392 |
| 1978 | 366 | 0 | 366 | 3,758 |
| 1979 | 419 | 0 | 419 | 4,177 |
| 1980 | 262 | 0 | 262 | 4,439 |
| 1981 | 318 | 0 | 318 | 4,757 |
| 1982 | 331 | 0 | 331 | 5,088 |
| 1983 | 592 | 4 | 588 | 5,680 |
| 1984 | 707 | 2 | 705 | 6,387 |
| 1985 | 516 | 9 | 507 | 6,903 |
| 1986 | 647 | 31 | 616 | 7,550 |
| 1987 | 534 | 30 | 504 | 8,084 |
| 1988 | 463 | 111 | 352 | 8,547 |
| 1989 | 461 | 152 | 309 | 9,008 |
| 1990 | 432 | 149 | 283 | 9,440 |
| 1991 | 521 | 182 | 339 | 9,961 |
| 1992 | 576 | 135 | 441 | 10,537 |
| 1993 | 1,264 | 263 | 1,001 | 11,801 |
| 1994 | 906 | 232 | 674 | 12,707 |
| 1995 | 851 | 130 | 721 | 13,558 |
| 1996 | 1,036 | 245 | 791 | 14,594 |
| 1997 | 846 | 176 | 670 | 15,440 |
| 1998 | 819 | 137 | 682 | 16,259 |
| 1999 | 732 | 144 | 588 | 16,991 |
| 2000 | 883 | 271 | 612 | 17,874 |
| 2001 | 837 | 204 | 633 | 18,711 |
| 2002 | 1,018 | 467 | 551 | 19,729 |
| 2003 | 662 | 239 | 423 | 20,391 |
| 2004 | 820 | 334 | 486 | 21,211 |
| 2005 | 671 | 168 | 503 | 21,882 |
| 2006 | 533 | 46 | 487 | 22,415 |
| 2007 | 484 | 62 | 422 | 22,899 |
| 2008 | 411 | 103 | 308 | 23,310 |
| 2009 | 264 | 72 | 192 | 23,574 |
| 2010 | 227 | 60 | 167 | 23,801 |
| 2011 | 236 | 46 | 190 | 24,037 |
| 2012 | 266 | 58 | 208 | 24,303 |
| 2013 | 378 | 116 | 262 | 24,681 |
| 2014 | 360 | 78 | 282 | 25,041 |
| 2015 | 339 | 108 | 231 | 25,380 |
| 2016 | 521 | 297 | 224 | 25,901 |
| 2017 | 457 | 125 | 332 | 26,358 |
| 2018 | 542 | 151 | 391 | 26,900 |
| 2019 | 499 | 155 | 344 | 27,399 |
| 2020 | 468 | 124 | 344 | 27,867 |
| 2021 | 467 | 86 | 381 | 28,334 |
| 2022 | 455 | 117 | 338 | 28,789 |
| 2023 | 382 | 124 | 258 | 29,171 |
| 2024 | 279 | 70 | 209 | 29,450 |
| 2025 | 226 | 38 | 188 | 29,676 |
| 2026 | 188 | 51 | 137 | 29,864 |
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
48 PLSS townships here where at least 5 water-supply permits naming the same aquifer filed a depth (17,452 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 2,600 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. 21 of these townships straddle a district line and are filed here because most of their permits are.
2,406
1,361
1,307
1,148
996
864
839
692
679
612
553
466 · 70% here
411
409 · 93% here
399
356
325 · 54% here
316
310
301
266
257 · 88% here
237
234
unnamed alluvium Dawson Denver Arapahoe Laramie-Fox Hills more than one named 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
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T12S R65W 6th PM | 96% | unnamed | 608 | 150 / 300 / 440 | 100 / 200 / 338 | 220 / 320 / 440 |
| T12S R65W 6th PM | 96% | Dawson | 1,604 | 220 / 315 / 490 | 100 / 200 / 300 | 250 / 320 / 480 |
| T12S R65W 6th PM | 96% | Denver | 163 | 380 / 575 / 1,234 | 255 / 360 / 856 | 379 / 570 / 1,228 |
| T12S R65W 6th PM | 96% | Arapahoe | 17 | 1,512 / 1,962 / 2,214 | 1,392 / 1,585 / 1,819 | 1,840 / 1,932 / 2,090 |
| T12S R65W 6th PM | 96% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 11 | 2,261 / 2,500 / 2,590 | 2,241 / 2,280 / 2,331 | 2,440 / 2,470 / 2,522 |
| T12S R66W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 621 | 160 / 275 / 422 | 105 / 200 / 335 | 220 / 300 / 460 |
| T12S R66W 6th PM | 99% | Dawson | 534 | 275 / 400 / 544 | 100 / 200 / 335 | 272 / 400 / 540 |
| T12S R66W 6th PM | 99% | Denver | 178 | 317 / 452 / 669 | 190 / 300 / 484 | 320 / 455 / 640 |
| T12S R66W 6th PM | 99% | Arapahoe | 25 | 306 / 880 / 1,380 | 157 / 548 / 891 | 316 / 902 / 1,380 |
| T13S R64W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 9 | 83 / 122 / 262 | — | — |
| T13S R64W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 570 | 120 / 316 / 501 | 50 / 170 / 360 | 128 / 335 / 560 |
| T13S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 21 | 220 / 340 / 459 | 49 / 140 / 219 | 160 / 331 / 461 |
| T13S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 458 | 234 / 380 / 552 | 80 / 140 / 280 | 230 / 360 / 540 |
| T13S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 234 | 703 / 900 / 1,160 | 478 / 594 / 774 | 712 / 900 / 1,140 |
| T13S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 10 | 1,816 / 2,048 / 2,335 | 1,670 / 1,892 / 1,921 | 1,872 / 2,060 / 2,183 |
| T11S R67W 6th PM | 97% | unnamed | 675 | 166 / 301 / 600 | 80 / 215 / 480 | 205 / 310 / 600 |
| T11S R67W 6th PM | 97% | Dawson | 306 | 248 / 380 / 532 | 80 / 205 / 420 | 240 / 380 / 529 |
| T11S R67W 6th PM | 97% | Denver | 128 | 304 / 595 / 1,309 | 244 / 460 / 911 | 339 / 595 / 1,322 |
| T11S R67W 6th PM | 97% | Arapahoe | 31 | 1,457 / 1,764 / 2,233 | 982 / 1,300 / 1,805 | 1,332 / 1,700 / 2,195 |
| T13S R66W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 493 | 27 / 74 / 575 | 18 / 260 / 560 | 40 / 440 / 666 |
| T13S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 30 | 159 / 298 / 548 | 44 / 200 / 431 | 154 / 295 / 525 |
| T13S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 59 | 139 / 300 / 602 | 60 / 195 / 486 | 123 / 355 / 638 |
| T13S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 9 | 189 / 346 / 1,524 | — | — |
| T13S R66W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 399 | 160 / 385 / 606 | 100 / 303 / 521 | 250 / 460 / 650 |
| T12S R64W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 270 | 125 / 280 / 415 | 75 / 185 / 310 | 164 / 300 / 440 |
| T12S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 339 | 200 / 300 / 415 | 94 / 160 / 300 | 220 / 300 / 401 |
| T12S R64W 6th PM | 100% | more than one named | 5 | 133 / 400 / 918 | — | — |
| T12S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 217 | 320 / 520 / 1,054 | 173 / 280 / 760 | 315 / 520 / 1,086 |
| T12S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 12 | 1,618 / 1,730 / 1,914 | 851 / 1,280 / 1,523 | 1,528 / 1,770 / 1,964 |
| T12S R64W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 18 | 2,151 / 2,368 / 2,472 | 1,660 / 2,120 / 2,383 | 2,259 / 2,410 / 2,520 |
| T13S R65W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 474 | 80 / 200 / 380 | 40 / 153 / 270 | 120 / 270 / 410 |
| T13S R65W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 50 | 140 / 215 / 322 | 50 / 100 / 242 | 146 / 218 / 330 |
| T13S R65W 6th PM | 100% | more than one named | 5 | 196 / 241 / 1,078 | — | — |
| T13S R65W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 270 | 200 / 380 / 600 | 50 / 195 / 307 | 200 / 375 / 600 |
| T13S R65W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 33 | 714 / 1,155 / 1,493 | 438 / 815 / 1,025 | 656 / 1,025 / 1,377 |
| T14S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 688 | 33 / 180 / 500 | 18 / 199 / 458 | 43 / 280 / 540 |
| T14S R66W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 669 | 29 / 57 / 120 | 10 / 25 / 60 | 30 / 60 / 104 |
| T13S R63W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 46 | 25 / 96 / 152 | 20 / 40 / 90 | 61 / 100 / 156 |
| T13S R63W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 186 | 60 / 140 / 584 | 25 / 78 / 529 | 80 / 172 / 658 |
| T13S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 122 | 210 / 370 / 540 | 40 / 100 / 298 | 195 / 370 / 527 |
| T13S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 252 | 580 / 802 / 980 | 216 / 476 / 602 | 580 / 792 / 970 |
| T12S R63W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 16 | 58 / 130 / 172 | 26 / 40 / 90 | 70 / 115 / 170 |
| T12S R63W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 237 | 80 / 190 / 423 | 40 / 110 / 230 | 120 / 258 / 482 |
| T12S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 57 | 110 / 190 / 418 | 40 / 95 / 180 | 142 / 200 / 471 |
| T12S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 231 | 265 / 422 / 600 | 100 / 200 / 301 | 280 / 437 / 600 |
| T12S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 9 | 564 / 1,120 / 1,524 | 630 / 668 / 1,022 | 1,120 / 1,160 / 1,568 |
| T12S R62W 6th PM | 70% | alluvium | 44 | 18 / 35 / 117 | 15 / 41 / 87 | 55 / 111 / 410 |
| T12S R62W 6th PM | 70% | unnamed | 179 | 90 / 240 / 582 | 33 / 135 / 301 | 128 / 261 / 567 |
| T12S R62W 6th PM | 70% | Dawson | 10 | 286 / 370 / 629 | 90 / 130 / 256 | 270 / 360 / 498 |
| T12S R62W 6th PM | 70% | Denver | 201 | 290 / 470 / 700 | 75 / 165 / 380 | 281 / 465 / 699 |
| T12S R62W 6th PM | 70% | Arapahoe | 26 | 710 / 990 / 1,230 | 540 / 662 / 854 | 713 / 1,000 / 1,242 |
| T12S R62W 6th PM | 70% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 6 | 829 / 1,523 / 1,559 | — | — |
| T14S R62W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 98 | 68 / 120 / 160 | 30 / 77 / 95 | 105 / 136 / 175 |
| T14S R62W 6th PM | 100% | Dawson | 5 | 111 / 120 / 132 | 62 / 70 / 80 | 111 / 120 / 132 |
| T14S R62W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 218 | 61 / 121 / 170 | 40 / 80 / 112 | 95 / 126 / 170 |
| T14S R62W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 15 | 56 / 275 / 420 | 33 / 150 / 254 | 199 / 380 / 453 |
| T14S R62W 6th PM | 100% | other named | 7 | 496 / 500 / 520 | 250 / 260 / 280 | 495 / 500 / 520 |
| T14S R62W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 66 | 501 / 700 / 800 | 298 / 416 / 660 | 501 / 631 / 795 |
| T14S R64W 6th PM | 93% | unnamed | 201 | 100 / 303 / 500 | 60 / 180 / 363 | 116 / 325 / 560 |
| T14S R64W 6th PM | 93% | Dawson | 6 | 274 / 342 / 380 | 110 / 228 / 270 | 274 / 342 / 380 |
| T14S R64W 6th PM | 93% | Denver | 27 | 200 / 350 / 432 | 56 / 168 / 269 | 203 / 365 / 429 |
| T14S R64W 6th PM | 93% | Arapahoe | 113 | 361 / 535 / 824 | 196 / 260 / 414 | 360 / 505 / 814 |
| T14S R64W 6th PM | 93% | other named | 12 | 501 / 638 / 1,000 | 340 / 380 / 520 | 500 / 637 / 730 |
| T14S R64W 6th PM | 93% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 47 | 460 / 790 / 887 | 404 / 620 / 719 | 587 / 798 / 890 |
| T13S R62W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 83 | 38 / 80 / 187 | 18 / 34 / 114 | 46 / 80 / 180 |
| T13S R62W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 117 | 62 / 240 / 516 | 34 / 118 / 328 | 78 / 292 / 541 |
| T13S R62W 6th PM | 100% | Denver | 51 | 255 / 390 / 640 | 52 / 180 / 300 | 258 / 405 / 657 |
| T13S R62W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 140 | 360 / 530 / 710 | 106 / 278 / 475 | 361 / 540 / 752 |
| T15S R66W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 355 | 42 / 71 / 103 | 20 / 39 / 63 | 44 / 65 / 95 |
| T13S R69W 6th PM | 54% | unnamed | 321 | 60 / 240 / 560 | 42 / 180 / 480 | 100 / 280 / 580 |
| T16S R65W 6th PM | 99% | alluvium | 7 | 21 / 41 / 82 | 10 / 20 / 24 | 25 / 40 / 59 |
| T16S R65W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 309 | 27 / 55 / 77 | 12 / 20 / 40 | 28 / 60 / 80 |
| T15S R63W 6th PM | 97% | alluvium | 39 | 30 / 134 / 210 | 35 / 95 / 143 | 94 / 151 / 210 |
| T15S R63W 6th PM | 97% | unnamed | 105 | 73 / 180 / 446 | 40 / 115 / 340 | 95 / 200 / 482 |
| T15S R63W 6th PM | 97% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 119 | 304 / 400 / 517 | 139 / 230 / 387 | 262 / 420 / 530 |
| T15S R63W 6th PM | 97% | other named | 45 | 546 / 633 / 693 | 371 / 475 / 529 | 517 / 633 / 697 |
| T14S R63W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 39 | 96 / 177 / 200 | 74 / 110 / 140 | 150 / 175 / 200 |
| T14S R63W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 125 | 127 / 200 / 454 | 77 / 140 / 256 | 160 / 200 / 468 |
| T14S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 108 | 238 / 528 / 712 | 151 / 200 / 377 | 236 / 515 / 640 |
| T14S R63W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 23 | 630 / 890 / 925 | 409 / 662 / 783 | 586 / 900 / 923 |
| T13S R67W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 9 | 32 / 45 / 45 | — | — |
| T13S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 234 | 50 / 200 / 327 | 17 / 145 / 262 | 31 / 220 / 368 |
| T13S R67W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 17 | 177 / 233 / 373 | 100 / 170 / 210 | 170 / 234 / 372 |
| T12S R68W 6th PM | 88% | unnamed | 257 | 55 / 200 / 500 | 40 / 140 / 420 | 80 / 260 / 536 |
| T15S R65W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 219 | 37 / 61 / 80 | 15 / 25 / 48 | 48 / 62 / 80 |
| T15S R65W 6th PM | 100% | alluvium | 14 | 46 / 65 / 80 | 15 / 32 / 44 | 47 / 65 / 86 |
| T13S R68W 6th PM | 98% | unnamed | 232 | 23 / 120 / 496 | 14 / 142 / 425 | 54 / 200 / 500 |
| T14S R65W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 176 | 70 / 185 / 402 | 20 / 180 / 312 | 59 / 315 / 424 |
| T14S R65W 6th PM | 100% | Arapahoe | 12 | 280 / 344 / 399 | 128 / 229 / 274 | 337 / 352 / 424 |
| T14S R65W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 9 | 273 / 360 / 813 | 163 / 235 / 570 | 304 / 360 / 818 |
| T14S R65W 6th PM | 100% | other named | 5 | 302 / 400 / 436 | 148 / 260 / 260 | 302 / 400 / 436 |
| T16S R63W 6th PM | 88% | unnamed | 186 | 112 / 161 / 385 | 50 / 98 / 140 | 125 / 180 / 416 |
| T16S R63W 6th PM | 88% | other named | 9 | 136 / 300 / 524 | 60 / 80 / 164 | 240 / 300 / 300 |
| T16S R67W 6th PM | 89% | other named | 6 | 153 / 281 / 492 | 134 / 248 / 452 | 208 / 318 / 492 |
| T16S R67W 6th PM | 89% | unnamed | 139 | 72 / 330 / 601 | 34 / 250 / 489 | 139 / 390 / 614 |
| T17S R63W 6th PM | 76% | unnamed | 148 | 80 / 126 / 160 | 28 / 70 / 100 | 80 / 131 / 160 |
| T16S R61W 6th PM | 62% | unnamed | 91 | 210 / 315 / 500 | 80 / 200 / 304 | 258 / 400 / 502 |
| T16S R61W 6th PM | 62% | other named | 25 | 366 / 480 / 520 | 88 / 200 / 272 | 380 / 480 / 520 |
| T17S R65W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 112 | 27 / 42 / 69 | 11 / 20 / 37 | 33 / 52 / 70 |
| T17S R62W 6th PM | 99% | unnamed | 97 | 133 / 175 / 200 | 69 / 100 / 120 | 140 / 175 / 200 |
| T15S R67W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 79 | 30 / 97 / 440 | 21 / 55 / 232 | 65 / 152 / 490 |
| T15S R64W 6th PM | 93% | unnamed | 41 | 53 / 260 / 453 | 20 / 164 / 400 | 48 / 300 / 494 |
| T15S R64W 6th PM | 93% | other named | 6 | 250 / 355 / 530 | 130 / 205 / 305 | 250 / 355 / 530 |
| T15S R64W 6th PM | 93% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 30 | 396 / 515 / 620 | 304 / 400 / 440 | 392 / 520 / 620 |
| T19S R64W 6th PM | 66% | unnamed | 69 | 29 / 47 / 60 | 16 / 30 / 46 | 29 / 50 / 62 |
| T19S R67W 6th PM | 85% | unnamed | 48 | 54 / 575 / 750 | 16 / 240 / 533 | 93 / 486 / 616 |
| T19S R67W 6th PM | 85% | other named | 17 | 548 / 582 / 585 | 465 / 522 / 545 | 548 / 582 / 585 |
| T19S R65W 6th PM | 59% | unnamed | 63 | 28 / 42 / 216 | 11 / 25 / 42 | 27 / 40 / 56 |
| T18S R64W 6th PM | 63% | unnamed | 42 | 22 / 36 / 58 | 10 / 15 / 47 | 28 / 39 / 87 |
| T18S R65W 6th PM | 50% | unnamed | 42 | 29 / 40 / 97 | 17 / 24 / 37 | 31 / 46 / 108 |
| T12S R67W 6th PM | 97% | unnamed | 36 | 148 / 406 / 688 | 55 / 165 / 342 | 166 / 525 / 672 |
| T16S R64W 6th PM | 86% | unnamed | 37 | 22 / 45 / 160 | 15 / 20 / 100 | 35 / 55 / 160 |
| T20S R66W 6th PM | 57% | unnamed | 33 | 36 / 248 / 935 | — | — |
| T17S R61W 6th PM | 65% | unnamed | 27 | 93 / 135 / 304 | 63 / 116 / 190 | 123 / 173 / 230 |
| T17S R64W 6th PM | 86% | unnamed | 21 | 30 / 55 / 200 | 17 / 25 / 56 | 40 / 80 / 209 |
| T15S R62W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 7 | 20 / 93 / 328 | — | — |
| T15S R62W 6th PM | 100% | Laramie-Fox Hills | 6 | 192 / 243 / 440 | — | — |
| T16S R66W 6th PM | 97% | unnamed | 15 | 26 / 50 / 200 | 13 / 36 / 120 | 35 / 51 / 270 |
| T19S R66W 6th PM | 80% | unnamed | 11 | 34 / 300 / 740 | 84 / 340 / 622 | 420 / 694 / 884 |
| T14S R68W 6th PM | 91% | unnamed | 9 | 182 / 340 / 500 | 58 / 202 / 412 | 188 / 382 / 480 |
| T18S R67W 6th PM | 62% | unnamed | 7 | 25 / 352 / 754 | — | — |
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 ↗
76 reservoir(s) with 56,672 storage measurement(s), 1919–2026. Basin storage as of 2025-10-31 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 41,347 AF across 26 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) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ RAMPART RESERVOIR (1003670) | 27,153 | 2025-10-01 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ CATAMOUNT CR WTR SYS R1 (1003643) | 9,690 | 1970-11-01 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ NORTH CATAMOUNT RES (1003673) | 7,912 | 2025-10-01 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ MCELROY RESERVOIR (1003534) | 2,214 | 1976-07-16 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ FOUNTAIN VALLEY RES NO 2 (1003641) | 1,382 | 2025-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ BRISTLECONE RES. NO 2 (1003906) | 1,159 | 2025-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ LAKE MORAINE RESERVOIR (1003654) | 718 | 2025-10-01 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ MANITOU RESERVOIR (1003657) | 710 | 2025-10-01 | — | — | dossier → |
Snow and runoff
Source Independent agency measurement · fetched 2026-10-13 · verify at NRCS report generator ↗ Source Our computation, scored against a reference · NRCS forecast, graded here against the gage record
Snow-water equivalent, WY2027
No snow on the ground — normal for the date; the snow year begins in October. The new water year began October 1; the chart fills in a day at a time as NRCS publishes each reading.
| SNOTEL site | Elev (ft) | SWE (in) | Median (in) | % of median | Typical peak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glen Cove | 11410 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | April 23 (5.7 in) |
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.
Two ways a snow year goes wrong (2005–2026)
A bad snow year here comes in two flavors (both called snow droughtA winter that shorts the snowpack. It happens two ways: a dry one, where the snow never comes, and a warm one, where near-normal snow falls but melts off weeks early -- and the river feels them differently.), and the river feels them differently. In 7 of the last 22 winters the snow never came — the pack peaked below 80% of its median. In 1 more, the snow came but left early — a near-normal peak melted out two weeks or more ahead of its usual date, sending the water down before the season needed it.
The snow never came: 2006, 2011, 2012, 2018, 2022, 2023, 2026. The snow left early: 2020.
Computed by this site from 1 SNOTEL site’ full daily records (NRCS AWDB, back to 2005). Each year is measured against each site’s own multi-decade median — not the 1991–2020 normal the chart above uses — so the 1980s grade against a fair baseline. Peak and melt-out need 85% of the season’s days on the record; thin years are dropped, not guessed. Derived from snow measurements alone — it cannot tell dry-from-warm causes apart, only what the snowpack did.
Runoff outlook — Pueblo Reservoir Inflow
NRCS's final issue (2026-06-01) calls it even odds that at least 118 kAF arrives over 06-01 to 09-30 — 42% of a normal season; almost certainly at least 60, probably not more than 176. Our own record at this gage shows 26 kAF actually delivered. New forecasts begin in January. How to read these numbers →
The record-adjusted April benchmark
NRCS’s April issue (2026-04-01) called even odds at 170 kAF over 04-01 to 09-30. Re-anchoring that number on this river’s own history — how its April issues have verified, the winter’s baseflow, and the district’s April 1 snowpack — moves it to 87 kAF. The river delivered 48 kAF.
Computed by this site — not an NRCS number, and shown only because it earned it: replayed over 71 past seasons here (1967–2025), never seeing the year it predicts, the adjustment cut the typical April miss from 33% to 27%. At points where it does not beat NRCS, no adjusted number appears. Coefficients are frozen each August; the model never changes mid-season. Method and honest limits →
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | 94 | 118 | 142 | 176 | 280 | 26 |
How good are these forecasts here? (1966–2025)
Grading every April issue against what the river then delivered, measured at this gage’s own record — 52 seasons: the median miss of the 50% forecast is 32%, with a high bias of 2%, and the observed volume landed inside the stated 10–90% band 56% 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 →
What April snow has meant for this river (2005–2025)
Across 18 measured years, April snowpack has explained only part of this river’s season — the dots below scatter widely, so read any single year’s snow number loosely here. In warm, early-melt years the river delivered a median of 77% of a normal season, against 111% in typical years — the timing of the melt matters, not just its size.
Computed by this site: the district’s April 1 SWE (% of each SNOTEL site’s own-record median) against the observed April–July volume at this gage (% of its median season) — a fixed window every year, unlike the forecast grades above, which use each issue’s own period. The slope is fit so single wild years can’t steer it (Theil–Sen, log space); years missing 10% of their days are dropped.
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 15th-driest week 39 in 69 years of record at FOUNTAIN CREEK NEAR COLORADO SPRINGS, CO. (as of 2026-09-21; this week’s flow sits at the 22nd 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, El Paso County is 11% 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 1958, week by week
Each thin row is a year at FOUNTAIN CREEK NEAR COLORADO SPRINGS, CO.; 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 2020 (mean gap 12.5 percentile points; next closest 2008 (12.8), 1986 (18.5)). 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 El Paso, Pueblo 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 2005 — 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 (158 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 | 2023-01-23 → 2023-07-24 | 26 | 18th (2023-04-17) | 0 weeks | 1 yr (113 wells, 42 still below) |
| the 2012-13 drought | 2012-07-16 → 2013-11-25 | 71 | 3rd (2013-04-29) | 0 weeks | 3 yr (179 wells, 50 still below) |
| the 2012-13 drought | 2011-08-08 → 2012-01-30 | 25 | 20th (2011-09-05) | 3 weeks | 3 yr (188 wells, 52 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 2008-10-13 → 2009-07-27 | 41 | 20th (2009-04-06) | 7 weeks | 2 yr (185 wells, 40 still below) |
| the 2002 drought | 2001-10-29 → 2004-08-09 | 145 | 2nd (2002-12-23) | 2 weeks | 2 yr (186 wells, 39 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1993-09-20 → 1994-06-06 | 37 | 18th (1994-01-31) | 1 week | 3 yr (226 wells, 25 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1991-02-18 → 1991-09-09 | 29 | 20th (1991-05-20) | 4 weeks | 5 yr (220 wells, 40 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1989-07-17 → 1990-09-17 | 61 | 13th (1990-04-09) | 55 weeks | 5 yr (234 wells, 53 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1988-10-24 → 1989-04-17 | 25 | 27th (1989-01-02) | 129 weeks | 7 yr (238 wells, 70 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1977-09-12 → 1979-07-16 | 96 | 10th (1979-02-26) | 5 weeks | 5 yr (131 wells, 38 still below) |
| the 1977 drought | 1975-11-10 → 1977-01-03 | 60 | 15th (1976-01-19) | 137 weeks | 7 yr (168 wells, 58 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1974-09-09 → 1975-11-03 | 60 | 12th (1975-04-28) | 198 weeks | 11 yr (166 wells, 67 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1972-03-06 → 1973-07-09 | 70 | 14th (1972-07-17) | 0 weeks | 41 yr (82 wells, 40 still below) |
| unnamed dry spell | 1969-02-10 → 1969-08-04 | 25 | 19th (1969-04-14) | 4 weeks | not yet (32 of 64 wells 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 $3,191,448 in drought-caused claims across El Paso, Pueblo counties — 6.5% of all insured crop losses there. The worst year was 2012 ($406,470).
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 (2,518 rights across 69 years of shared record), colored by that year’s wetness from the barcode above. Here the correlation is -0.0 — 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 ↗
50 systems touch this district (50 community systems reporting 884,291 people served, a figure that counts a wholesaler's customers twice); 2 of them carry an open health-based violation on EPA's record.
| System | Serves | Source | Here |
|---|---|---|---|
| COLORADO SPRINGS UTILITIES | 464,111 | Surface water | 100% of its area |
| PUEBLO BOARD OF WW | 114,070 | Surface water | 52% of its area |
| US DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FORT CARSON | 48,000 | Purchased surface water | 100% of its area |
| PUEBLO WEST MD | 30,000 | Surface water | 100% of its area |
| CHEROKEE MD | 29,610 | Groundwater | 100% of its area |
| WIDEFIELD WSD | 27,640 | Purchased surface water | 100% of its area |
| FOUNTAIN CITY OF | 25,130 | Purchased surface water | 100% of its area |
| SECURITY WATER DISTRICT | 20,000 | Purchased surface water | 100% of its area |
and 42 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 ↗
12 reaches over 65.9 miles, held by the Colorado Water Conservation Board so that water stays in the stream. Every reach, with its schedule and case →
- North Monument Creek, 8.4 mi: 1 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0079) · dossier
- Monument Creek, 8.1 mi: 1.5 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0081) · dossier
- North Cheyenne Creek, 7.5 mi: 3.5 (5/1 - 10/15), 1 (10/16 - 3/31), 2.5 (4/1 - 4/30) cfs (appropriated 2008, 08CW0055) · dossier
- Camp Creek, 5.9 mi: 3 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0080) · dossier
- South Beaver Creek, 5.9 mi: 2 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0077) · dossier
- Ice Cave Creek, 5.7 mi: 1 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1980, 80CW0078) · dossier
and 6 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 1860-02-20 to 2023-09-21. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 81% of a median irrigation season and 21% in a dry one. 10 abandonment screens and 38 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: 3567 across 2872 structure(s); 149 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 2003–2025, administration on this district has been tightening: 3 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 (23 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 | 365 | 419 | 1866-05-01 |
| 2015 | 365 | 222 | 1865-10-07 |
| 2016 | 366 | 355 | 1862-04-30 |
| 2017 | 365 | 260 | 1866-10-31 |
| 2018 | 365 | 401 | 1862-04-30 |
| 2019 | 365 | 389 | 1862-03-20 |
| 2020 | 366 | 340 | 1861-05-31 |
| 2021 | 365 | 362 | 1862-04-30 |
| 2022 | 365 | 370 | 1862-11-15 |
| 2023 | 365 | 369 | 1862-04-30 |
| 2024 | 366 | 359 | 1862-04-30 |
| 2025 | 365 | 384 | 1862-04-30 |
Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations
Sustained diversion stops matched to senior administrative calls.
- MONUMENT CREEK PIPELINE (1000506) DWR↗ stopped 2025-10-09 (22+ days) — call at CANON HEIGHTS DITCH curtailing 87% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- CHILCOTT DITCH (1000593) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-17 (5+ days) — call at HOEHNE DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- TALCOTT & COTTON DITCH (1000568) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-31 (22+ days) — call at MODEL DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- COLO SPRINGS PIPELINE (1000627) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-24 (21+ days) — call at MODEL DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- FRENCH CREEK DIVERSION (1000574) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-21 (29+ days) — call at MODEL DITCH curtailing 68% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- RUXTON CREEK PIPELINE (1000581) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-21 (8+ days) — call at MODEL DITCH curtailing 88% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- DIXON DITCH (1000541) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-15 (25+ days) — call at HARDSCRABBLE DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- BURKE DITCH (1000605) DWR↗ stopped 2025-07-31 (7+ days) — call at TITSWORTH DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- TALCOTT & COTTON DITCH (1000568) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-08 (12+ days) — call at LUCERO DITCH curtailing 66% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- COLO SPRINGS PIPELINE (1000627) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-02 (17+ days) — call at PULASKI DITCH curtailing 96% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- OWEN & HALL DITCH (1000577) DWR↗ stopped 2025-05-31 (10+ days) — call at MODEL DITCH curtailing 67% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- RIPLEY DITCH (1000559) DWR↗ stopped 2025-04-16 (18+ days) — call at HOEHNE DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| FOUNTAIN MUTUAL CANAL (1000736) DWR↗ | 1861-09-21 | 95.1% / 36.7% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| BARNES ET AL NT ARAPAHOE (1009031) DWR↗ | 2009-06-24 | 0.0% / 0.0% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| EL PASO COUNTY CANAL (1000601) DWR↗ | 1861-03-20 | 96.3% / 56.5% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| CHILCOTT DITCH (1000593) DWR↗ | 1861-12-31 | 95.1% / 31.9% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| MESA PIPELINE (1000609) DWR↗ | 1860-09-01 | 96.3% / 56.5% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| OWEN & HALL DITCH (1000577) DWR↗ | 1862-12-31 | 69.4% / 16.8% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| COLO SPRINGS PIPELINE (1000627) DWR↗ | 1861-03-21 | 96.3% / 56.5% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| AUSTIN BLUFFS PIPELINE (1000659) DWR↗ | 1861-12-31 | 95.1% / 31.9% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| RUXTON CREEK PIPELINE (1000581) DWR↗ | 1860-02-20 | 100.0% / 100.0% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| BEAR CREEK PIPELINE (1000535) DWR↗ | 1861-12-31 | 95.1% / 31.9% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| NORTH SLOPE CONDUIT (1000884) DWR↗ | 1901-12-31 | 0.0% / 0.0% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
| MONUMENT CREEK PIPELINE (1000506) DWR↗ | 1862-04-01 | 93.2% / 24.8% | 0.0% / 0.0% |
Abandonment radar (10 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 ~1969 — idleness that begins before then may be unreported use, not nonuse (flagged † below).
- JACKSON & BURKE DITCH (1000806) DWR↗ (1873-03-21, 10.8 cfs decreed): last active 1929 — 62 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1969) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
- IRVINE DITCH (1000589) DWR↗ (1866-04-01, 1.8 cfs decreed): last active 1930 — 61 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1969) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
- HARMES DITCH (1000587) DWR↗ (1861-03-20, 3.7 cfs decreed): last active 1943 — 48 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1969) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
- NORTH CHEYENNE PIPELINE (1000608) DWR↗ (1890-03-01, 0.9 cfs decreed): last active 1950 — 41 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1969) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
- FORD WHITE DITCH NO 1 (1000730) DWR↗ (1888-04-13, 9.8 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 21 years idle
- H O P DITCH NO 2 (1000766) DWR↗ (1875-07-01, 2.0 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 21 years idle
- NORTHSIDE DITCH (1000612) DWR↗ (1892-11-11, 26.4 cfs decreed): last active 1971 — 20 years idle
- BANNISTER DITCH (1000744) DWR↗ (1866-09-21, 2.6 cfs decreed): last active 1976 — 15 years idle
- FOUNTAIN UNDERFLOW SYS (1000759) DWR↗ (1868-02-15, 13.8 cfs decreed): last active 1976 — 15 years idle
- WEST TURF WELL NO 1 (1005864) DWR↗ (1974-01-23, 2.4 cfs decreed): last active 1976 — 15 years idle
Compliance screens (38 advisory flags)
Screened 124 of 2872 structures with rights (164 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.
- TESTING WDID (NOT AN ACTUAL STRUCTURE) (1099999) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 123.0 cfs (max 123.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.0 cfs across 622 recorded day(s).
- BURKE DITCH (1000605) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 16.9 cfs (max 66.2) exceeds total decreed absolute 7.7 cfs across 45810 recorded day(s).
- JACKSON & BURKE DITCH (1000806) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 15.0 cfs (max 20.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 10.8 cfs across 916 recorded day(s).
- CASCADE CREEK DIVERSION (1000572) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 13.0 cfs (max 51.4) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.0 cfs across 48943 recorded day(s).
- TOM WANLESS DITCH (1000569) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 12.0 cfs (max 17.5) exceeds total decreed absolute 7.5 cfs across 15775 recorded day(s).
- LAUGHLIN DITCH (1000592) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 11.6 cfs (max 31.1) exceeds total decreed absolute 11.5 cfs across 21085 recorded day(s).
- SOUTH CATAMOUNT CREEK DIVERSION (1000576) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 11.5 cfs (max 132.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.4 cfs across 50025 recorded day(s).
- NORTH CATAMOUNT CREEK (1000575) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 11.3 cfs (max 110.2) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.9 cfs across 46432 recorded day(s).
- FRENCH CREEK DIVERSION (1000574) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 11.1 cfs (max 54.2) exceeds total decreed absolute 2.8 cfs across 42778 recorded day(s).
- ROBINSON DITCH (1000580) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 11.1 cfs (max 110.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 10.4 cfs across 18774 recorded day(s).
Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)
| Structure | Senior priority date | Rights | Decreed abs (cfs) | Decreed abs (AF) | Conditional? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FOUNTAIN MUTUAL CANAL (1000736) DWR↗ | 1861-09-21 | 15 | 412.8 | 30 | — |
| BARNES ET AL NT ARAPAHOE (1009031) DWR↗ | 2009-06-24 | 2 | 330.0 | 2410 | — |
| EL PASO COUNTY CANAL (1000601) DWR↗ | 1861-03-20 | 6 | 104.2 | 0 | — |
| CHILCOTT DITCH (1000593) DWR↗ | 1861-12-31 | 12 | 83.0 | 734 | — |
| MESA PIPELINE (1000609) DWR↗ | 1860-09-01 | 10 | 49.7 | 0 | — |
| OWEN & HALL DITCH (1000577) DWR↗ | 1862-12-31 | 2 | 46.3 | 0 | — |
| COLO SPRINGS PIPELINE (1000627) DWR↗ | 1861-03-21 | 5 | 46.1 | 0 | — |
| AUSTIN BLUFFS PIPELINE (1000659) DWR↗ | 1861-12-31 | 9 | 44.9 | 0 | — |
| RUXTON CREEK PIPELINE (1000581) DWR↗ | 1860-02-20 | 6 | 39.1 | 0 | — |
| BEAR CREEK PIPELINE (1000535) DWR↗ | 1861-12-31 | 9 | 37.9 | 0 | — |
| NORTH SLOPE CONDUIT (1000884) DWR↗ | 1901-12-31 | 1 | 35.0 | 0 | — |
| MONUMENT CREEK PIPELINE (1000506) DWR↗ | 1862-04-01 | 4 | 30.1 | 0 | — |
| NORTHSIDE DITCH (1000612) DWR↗ | 1892-11-11 | 1 | 26.4 | 0 | — |
| SOUTH CHEYENNE PIPELINE (1000537) DWR↗ | 1860-09-01 | 9 | 23.9 | 0 | — |
| TALCOTT & COTTON DITCH (1000568) DWR↗ | 1864-12-31 | 2 | 17.8 | 0 | — |
Recent inventory & legal-document changes
- 2026-10-10 — call set: FORT LYON CANAL (39703)
- 2026-10-10 — call set: JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR (39705)
- 2026-10-10 — call released: 39701
- 2026-10-10 — call released: 39694
- 2026-10-09 — call set: FORT LYON CANAL (39701)
- 2026-10-09 — call released: 39660
- 2026-10-09 — call released: 39675
- 2026-10-09 — call released: 39659
Water-court filings this month (division-wide)
3 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 3 filings, with excerpts
| Case | What it asks | County | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
2025CW3012
|
plan for augmentation, new underground right | — | CASE NO. 2025CW3012; TITAN AU, INC., 8480 E. Orchard Rd., Suite 4900, Greenwood Village, CO 80111 (Please address all pleadings and inquiries regarding this matter to Applicant’s attorney: John T. Howe, Hoskin, Farina & Kampf, P.C., 200 Grand Avenue, Suite 400… |
2026CW3037
1603718 |
— | — | CASE NO. 2026CW3037; MARIA LAKES GRAZING ASSOCIATION, LLC, c/o Donald E. Siecke, Manager, 7343 S. Alton Way, Ste. 100, Centennial, CO 80122 (Please address all pleadings and inquiries regarding this matter to Applicant’s attorneys: Karl D. Ohlsen, Beth Ann J. … |
2026CW3138
|
reasonable diligence | OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE IN PARK | CASE NUMBER 2026CW3138 MICHAEL STALL, 77 Sugar Creek Center Blvd., # 210, Sugar Land, TX, 77478. Philip E. Lopez, Eric K. Trout, Fairfield and Woods, P.C., 1801 California St, Suite 2600, Denver, CO, 80202. APPLICATION FOR A FINDING OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE IN … |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CCMD HALE RESERVOIR | 37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS | Approved | 2026-09-30 | 1007443 | plan file |
| SECURITY SANITATION DISTRICT & SECURITY WATER DISTRICT SWSP | 37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION | Approved | 2026-10-31 | 1007808 | plan file |
| CSU SUPERDITCH RF | 37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS | Approved | 2027-03-31 | 1707869 | plan file |
| ROBISON PONDS | 37-92-308(5) PLANS LESS THAN 5 YEARS | Approved | 2027-05-31 | 1007813 | plan file |
| FOUNTAIN PIT | 37-90-137(11) GRAVEL PIT PLAN | Pending | — | 1007807 | plan file |
| COLORADO SPRINGS UTILITIES FLCC SHARES | 37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION | Withdrawn | — | 1707706 | plan file |
| RIVERSIDE RANCH SANDOVALS | 37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION | Withdrawn | — | 1007455 | 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 2026-10-13 · verify at USGS current conditions ↗
16 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARKANSAS RIVER ABOVE PUEBLO, CO | 15.7 | 558 | 10.3 | 2026-10-13 20:15 | |
| ARKANSAS RIVER BELOW MOFFAT STREET AT PUEBLO, CO ↗ | 19.7 | 781 | 2026-10-13 20:15 | ||
| CLOVER DITCH DRAIN AT QUINN ST NR WIDEFIELD, CO ↗ | 15.7 | 2170 | 2026-10-13 21:00 | ||
| CLOVER DITCH DRAIN NEAR WIDEFIELD, CO. | 21.1 | 1180 | 2026-10-13 21:00 | ||
| FOUNTAIN CR BLW JANITELL RD BLW COLO. SPRINGS, CO | 21.1 | 2026-10-13 20:45 | |||
| FOUNTAIN CREEK ABV MANITOU AVE AT MANITOU SPGS, CO ↗ | 12.6 | 3 | 2026-10-13 21:00 | ||
| FOUNTAIN CREEK AT COLORADO SPRINGS, CO | 17.4 | 2026-10-13 20:45 | |||
| FOUNTAIN CREEK AT PUEBLO, CO. | 21.9 | 1170 | 2026-10-13 20:15 |
and 8 more on the statewide page.
Where water has been sampled
Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-08 · verify at Water Quality Portal ↗
The portal lists 5,214 sampling stations in this district's watersheds (Fountain 11020003, 48% of the district; Chico 11020004, 30% of the district; Upper Arkansas 11020002, 14% of the district; Upper Arkansas-Lake Meredith 11020005, 7% of the district), of which 322 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: USGS Colorado Water Science Center (166), Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment-WQCD (118), Colorado River Watch (25). Most-sampled groups: Physical, Nutrient, Information, Inorganics, Major, Metals. 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 ↗
50 community systems touch this district. 2 carry an open health-based violation on EPA's record. EPA sampled 20 of them for PFAS in 2023–25; 2 had PFOA or PFOS at or above the 2024 limit.
| System | Serves | EPA record | PFAS (UCMR 5) | Lead, latest 90th pct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RED ROCK VALLEY WD | 200 | 2 open health-based | not sampled | 0.002 mg/L |
| PALMER LAKE MOBILE HOME RANCH | 268 | 1 open health-based | not sampled | 0.0027 mg/L |
| CHEROKEE MD | 29,610 | 3 of 12 quarters with a violation | PFOA at or over the limit | 0.002 mg/L |
| WIDEFIELD WSD | 27,640 | 1 of 12 quarters with a violation | PFOA, PFOS at or over the limit | 0.0019 mg/L |
| COLORADO SPRINGS UTILITIES | 464,111 | clean, last 12 quarters | none detected | 0.0057 mg/L |
| PUEBLO BOARD OF WW | 114,070 | clean, last 12 quarters | none detected | 0.0023 mg/L |
| US DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FORT CARSON | 48,000 | 3 of 12 quarters with a violation | none detected | 0.0104 mg/L |
| PUEBLO WEST MD | 30,000 | 4 of 12 quarters with a violation | none detected | 0.002 mg/L |
| FOUNTAIN CITY OF | 25,130 | clean, last 12 quarters | 3 detected, under the limits | 0.0044 mg/L |
| SECURITY WATER DISTRICT | 20,000 | 2 of 12 quarters with a violation | 3 detected, under the limits | 0.0019 mg/L |
and 40 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…
Snowpack — no snow on the ground at 1 SNOTEL site — normal for the date; the snow year begins in October and typically peaks around April 23. Runoff outlook — Pueblo Reservoir Inflow: even odds of at least 118 kAF over 06-01 to 09-30 — 42% 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
| SNOTEL site | Elev (ft) | SWE (in) | Median (in) | % of median | Typical peak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glen Cove | 11410 | 0.0 | 0.0 | — | April 23 (5.7 in) |
Pueblo Reservoir Inflow — 06-01 to 09-30 volume, thousand acre-feet (chance the volume is AT LEAST this):
| 90% | 70% | 50% | 30% | 10% | Normal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | 94 | 118 | 142 | 176 | 280 |
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.
Topology cross-check: 12 parent disagreements, 13 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 26 streams, 14 agree. Know this water? Tell us →
| Stream | This site routes it to | DWR routes it to |
|---|---|---|
| Arkansas River | the mainstem | no parent named |
| Beaver Creek | the mainstem | Monument Creek |
| Goat Camp Creek | the mainstem | Lehman Run |
| Goat Camp Creek | the mainstem | Deadmans Creek |
| Jackson Creek | the mainstem | Monument Creek |
| Black Squirrel Creek | the mainstem | Monument Creek |
| West Monument Creek | the mainstem | Monument Creek |
| East Fork Sand Creek (AKA Bierstadt Creek) | the mainstem | Sand Creek |
Sizable streams DWR maps here that this network does not carry:
Williams Creek (27 mi) · Spring Brook (14 mi) · Shooks Run (10 mi) · Bear Creek (10 mi) · Crystola Creek (7 mi) · Porter Creek (6 mi) · Ruxton Creek (6 mi) · Crystal Creek (5 mi)