Hydrohistorian
Piney/Cottonwood Creeks
Who may take water from the Piney/Cottonwood Creeks, 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.
Piney/Cottonwood Creeks on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 52 · 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 Piney River is below normal for mid October -- the 11th percentile for the week, its 9th-driest such week in 83 years of record. 1 call stands against it right now; the most senior right calling dates to 1890. DWR's statements do not settle whether 10 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 2026-09-30 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 2 ranked gages are running at a median 58% of their own long-term norm for this window — 2 below a typical year, 0 at or above. Driest relative to its record: COLORADO RIVER AT CATAMOUNT BRIDGE, CO, ranking 1st lowest of 10 years.
How this comparison is made
Each gage's mean flow over the 3 days either side of 2026-09-30, 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 2026-11-01 19:28 from 8 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.
None of the 8 gages with enough record shows a significant trend or a detected shift — which is itself the finding.
No gage shows a statistically significant trend or changepoint yet.
8 other gage(s) show no significant trend or changepoint (not shown).
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. 3 gage(s) and 56 structure(s) report in 2026, but structure reporting only reached half its modern level around ~1974. 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) |
|---|---|---|
| 1940s | 2 | 0 |
| 1950s | 2 | 0 |
| 1960s | 5 | 0 |
| 1970s | 5 | 98 |
| 1980s | 6 | 116 |
| 1990s | 5 | 114 |
| 2000s | 3 | 98 |
| 2010s | 2 | 74 |
| 2020s | 3 | 27 |
Mass-balance (network closure) trend
Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 35% of 331 schematic-relevant structures. 3 year(s) clear the 30% coverage gate so far (1985–1987) -- 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 (–)
Mass-balance kinks computed for every summer month back to (0 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.
No reach shows a statistically significant long-term gain/loss shift.
Groundwater now has its own tab: 5 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.
Reservoirs now has its own tab: 32 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1975, click-to-chart histories.
Cross-gage pattern fingerprint
Not enough gages with a long enough common-coverage window yet to fingerprint shared patterns.
Data provenance & quality
Where these numbers come from and how far they can be trusted. Grade D (2/6 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 32 day(s) old (target 7) |
| diversion record | stale | newest diversion record is 753 day(s) old (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears) |
| structure coverage | sparse | 35% of schematic structures have data |
Independent check: PASS — 100.0000% agreement across 101,495 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 — 99.55% day-level agreement with USGS's own published records for the same gages, across 8 co-listed station(s) and 99,011 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.
8 gage(s) / 99,101 daily values (1944-06-01–2026-09-30); 253 structure(s) with diversion records; 562 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 ↗
10 water-level measurements across 5 monitored well(s) — 4 alluvial, 0 bedrock — plus 1 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 0 well(s) with enough record for a trend test: 0 declining, 0 rising.
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.
45% are constructed wells; 24% 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
200 located water-supply permits with an issue date, 1956 to 2026; half of them had been issued by 1996, and the busiest year was 1993 with 9. The district’s 48 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 313 above counts every permit on file here; 65 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
The counts by year, as a table
| Year | Issued | Monitoring holes | Water-supply | Issued through that year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1956 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 1959 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 1960 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
| 1963 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 5 |
| 1964 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 9 |
| 1965 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10 |
| 1968 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 11 |
| 1973 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 15 |
| 1974 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 17 |
| 1977 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 18 |
| 1979 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 25 |
| 1980 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 28 |
| 1981 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 31 |
| 1982 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 32 |
| 1983 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 38 |
| 1984 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 42 |
| 1985 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 48 |
| 1986 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 53 |
| 1987 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 61 |
| 1988 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 63 |
| 1989 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 69 |
| 1990 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 74 |
| 1991 | 11 | 5 | 6 | 85 |
| 1992 | 9 | 4 | 5 | 94 |
| 1993 | 9 | 0 | 9 | 103 |
| 1994 | 6 | 3 | 3 | 109 |
| 1995 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 114 |
| 1996 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 119 |
| 1997 | 6 | 2 | 4 | 125 |
| 1998 | 10 | 5 | 5 | 135 |
| 1999 | 14 | 8 | 6 | 149 |
| 2000 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 157 |
| 2001 | 7 | 2 | 5 | 164 |
| 2002 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 172 |
| 2003 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 176 |
| 2004 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 179 |
| 2005 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 181 |
| 2006 | 7 | 0 | 7 | 188 |
| 2007 | 6 | 0 | 6 | 194 |
| 2008 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 199 |
| 2009 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 201 |
| 2010 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 204 |
| 2011 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 207 |
| 2012 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 210 |
| 2013 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 211 |
| 2014 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 213 |
| 2015 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 214 |
| 2016 | 5 | 1 | 4 | 219 |
| 2018 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 224 |
| 2019 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 227 |
| 2021 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 229 |
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 230 |
| 2024 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 234 |
| 2025 | 12 | 4 | 8 | 246 |
| 2026 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 248 |
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
7 PLSS townships here where at least 5 water-supply permits naming the same aquifer filed a depth (119 permits in all). Each column is one township, six miles square, on one scale to 300 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. 6 of these townships straddle a district line and are filed here because most of their permits are.
55 · 58% here
17 · 80% here
15 · 53% here
11 · 88% here
9 · 64% here
7 · 83% here
5
unnamed 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T3S R86W 6th PM | 58% | unnamed | 51 | 21 / 52 / 181 | 21 / 40 / 132 | 35 / 62 / 180 |
| T2S R82W 6th PM | 80% | unnamed | 17 | 13 / 65 / 240 | 12 / 50 / 142 | 23 / 90 / 280 |
| T5S R87W 6th PM | 53% | unnamed | 15 | 48 / 80 / 99 | 19 / 50 / 57 | 49 / 87 / 95 |
| T1S R81W 6th PM | 88% | unnamed | 11 | 20 / 250 / 300 | 32 / 146 / 266 | 60 / 266 / 363 |
| T2S R81W 6th PM | 64% | unnamed | 9 | 47 / 105 / 165 | 16 / 42 / 71 | 24 / 62 / 129 |
| T3S R85W 6th PM | 83% | unnamed | 7 | 22 / 58 / 124 | — | — |
| T4S R81W 6th PM | 100% | unnamed | 5 | 27 / 52 / 152 | — | — |
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 ↗
32 reservoir(s) with 1,433 storage measurement(s), 1975–2024.
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) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ RAGLAND RESERVOIR NO 2 (5203955) | 122 | 1990-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ MARMA LAKE (5203982) | 60 | 2013-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ JONES RESERVOIR (5203940) | 42 | 2013-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ ROCK GAP DAM (5203949) | 39 | 2013-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ OLSEN RESERVOIR NO 1 (5203959) | 35 | 2007-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ BOX CANYON RESERVOIR (5203935) | 29 | 1999-10-25 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ HURT RESERVOIR (5203939) | 26 | 2006-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ OXFORD RESERVOIR (5203946) | 25 | 2013-10-31 | — | — | dossier → |
Drought
Source Our computation, no independent reference · computed here from the screened DWR record Source Independent agency measurement · fetched 2026-10-27 · verify at U.S. Drought Monitor ↗
Right now
This is the 9th-driest week 42 in 83 years of record at PINEY RIVER NEAR STATE BRIDGE, CO (as of 2026-10-12; this week’s flow sits at the 11th 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, Eagle County is 89% in D4 exceptional drought (2026-10-27). The law agrees: the most senior active call leaves 92% of this district’s decreed flow rights junior to the calling right this week.
Every year since 1944, week by week
Each thin row is a year at PINEY RIVER NEAR STATE BRIDGE, 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 37 weeks recorded so far, 2026’s weekly trace most resembles 1977 (mean gap 13.8 percentile points; next closest 2021 (14.2), 2002 (16.8)). 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 Eagle, Grand 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 2018 — 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 (10 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| unnamed dry spell | 2025-10-20 → 2026-10-12 | 51 | 4th (2026-10-12) | not yet | — |
| unnamed dry spell | 2024-12-16 → 2025-05-19 | 22 | 26th (2025-01-20) | not yet | — |
| the 2020-22 drought | 2020-10-26 → 2022-04-18 | 77 | 12th (2021-03-22) | 58 weeks | — |
| the 2018 drought | 2018-02-05 → 2019-06-17 | 71 | 17th (2018-11-12) | 4 weeks | — |
| the 2012-13 drought | 2013-02-18 → 2013-10-07 | 33 | 13th (2013-05-06) | 0 weeks | — |
| the 2002 drought | 2002-02-18 → 2003-01-27 | 49 | 21st (2002-10-21) | 24 weeks | — |
| unnamed dry spell | 1994-07-04 → 1995-07-10 | 53 | 24th (1994-12-05) | 1 week | — |
| unnamed dry spell | 1989-10-16 → 1990-06-04 | 33 | 20th (1989-11-27) | 35 weeks | — |
| unnamed dry spell | 1988-10-10 → 1989-06-12 | 35 | 22nd (1988-12-26) | 86 weeks | — |
| the 1981 drought | 1981-06-01 → 1981-11-23 | 25 | 26th (1981-08-03) | 23 weeks | — |
| the 1981 drought | 1980-01-07 → 1980-09-22 | 37 | 2nd (1980-04-07) | 84 weeks | — |
| unnamed dry spell | 1978-12-11 → 1979-08-20 | 36 | 10th (1979-03-26) | 0 weeks | — |
| the 1977 drought | 1977-01-10 → 1978-05-22 | 71 | 3rd (1977-11-07) | 2 weeks | — |
| the 1977 drought | 1976-02-09 → 1976-09-20 | 32 | 16th (1976-03-29) | 89 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.
When this basin claimed its water
Every bar is a year’s new appropriations (452 rights across 83 years of shared record), colored by that year’s wetness from the barcode above. Here the correlation is +0.07 — 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 ↗
3 systems touch this district (3 community systems reporting 10,484 people served, a figure that counts a wholesaler's customers twice); none carries an open health-based violation on EPA's record.
| System | Serves | Source | Here |
|---|---|---|---|
| GLENWOOD SPRINGS CITY OF | 9,428 | Surface water | 2% of its area |
| TWO RIVERS VILLAGE | 896 | Groundwater | 29% of its area |
| NO NAME CREEK WS | 160 | Groundwater | 50% of its area |
Instream-flow rights held by the state
Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-11-01 · verify at CWCB instream flow program ↗
16 reaches over 120.3 miles, held by the Colorado Water Conservation Board so that water stays in the stream. Every reach, with its schedule and case →
- Colorado River, 25.0 mi: 650 (9/16 - 5/14), 900 (5/15 - 6/15), 800 (6/16 - 9/15) cfs (appropriated 2011, 11CW0161) · dossier
- Colorado River, 23.7 mi: 500 (9/16 - 5/14), 600 (5/15 - 7/31), 750 (8/1 - 9/15) cfs (appropriated 2011, 11CW0159) · dossier
- Piney River, 11.6 mi: 9 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1986, 86CW0229) · dossier
- Sheephorn Creek, 10.5 mi: 4.5 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1986, 86CW0219) · dossier
- Piney River, 7.83 mi: 4 (12/01 - 03/31), 16 (04/01 - 04/30), 55 (05/01 - 07/15), 16 (07/16 - 08/15), 8 (08/16 - 11/30) cfs (appropriated 2017, 17CW3236)
- North Fork Piney River, 6.7 mi: 2 (1/1 - 12/31) cfs (appropriated 1986, 86CW0220) · dossier
and 10 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 1883-05-01 to 2024-07-31. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 68% of a median irrigation season and 0% in a dry one. 25 abandonment screens and 122 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: 814 across 562 structure(s); 136 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 1988–2025, 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 (38 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 | 184 | 1884-04-07 |
| 2015 | 365 | 256 | 1885-07-28 |
| 2016 | 366 | 237 | 1884-04-26 |
| 2017 | 365 | 330 | 1884-05-01 |
| 2018 | 365 | 290 | 1884-03-02 |
| 2019 | 365 | 165 | 1886-08-09 |
| 2020 | 366 | 221 | 1883-03-30 |
| 2021 | 365 | 218 | 1883-03-15 |
| 2022 | 365 | 201 | 1885-06-01 |
| 2023 | 365 | 120 | 1885-07-28 |
| 2024 | 366 | 164 | 1886-08-09 |
| 2025 | 365 | 232 | 1885-06-16 |
Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations
Sustained diversion stops matched to senior administrative calls.
- ANGEHRN DITCH (5200505) DWR↗ stopped 2024-09-29 (21+ days) — call at GRAND VALLEY CANAL curtailing 63% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
- BRUNER DITCH (5200525) DWR↗ stopped 2024-08-19 (46+ days) — call at HIGHLINE DITCH (BUZZARD) curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- ASHLOCK NO 2 DITCH HDG 1 (5200515) DWR↗ stopped 2024-07-24 (13+ days) — call at CAMP BIRD DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- ASHLOCK NO 2 DITCH HDG 2 (5200516) DWR↗ stopped 2024-07-18 (105+ days) — call at EAST DIVIDE CREEK DITCH [heuristic-strong]
- ASHLOCK NO 2 DITCH HDG 1 (5200515) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-29 (12+ days) — call at EAST DIVIDE CREEK 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| BEST DITCH (5200662) DWR↗ | 1944-11-12 | 5.4% / 0.0% | 5.4% / 0.0% |
| WILMOT DITCH (5200658) DWR↗ | 1883-12-20 | 98.3% / 15.0% | 31.6% / 0.0% |
| SCHLEGAL DITCH (ALKALI) (5200632) DWR↗ | 1953-08-05 | 5.4% / 0.0% | 5.4% / 0.0% |
| SWITZER DITCH (5200648) DWR↗ | 1900-05-01 | 67.8% / 0.0% | 6.3% / 0.0% |
| HOG EYE DITCH (5200572) DWR↗ | 1889-06-15 | 69.2% / 0.0% | 6.3% / 0.0% |
| SEVEN PINES DITCH (5200633) DWR↗ | 1915-06-20 | 31.6% / 0.0% | 31.6% / 0.0% |
| GUTZLER DITCH (5200559) DWR↗ | 1887-05-01 | 69.4% / 0.0% | 31.6% / 0.0% |
| WHEELER DITCH (NEW) (5200675) DWR↗ | 1883-05-01 | 100.0% / 17.3% | 31.6% / 0.0% |
| HARTMAN COLO RIVER DITCH (5200565) DWR↗ | 1941-02-15 | 6.3% / 0.0% | 6.3% / 0.0% |
| MIN FLOW PINEY RIVER LOW (5202002) DWR↗ | 1986-01-16 | 4.9% / 0.0% | 4.9% / 0.0% |
| MCPHEE DITCH (NO 2) (5200599) DWR↗ | 1890-05-01 | 69.2% / 0.0% | 4.9% / 0.0% |
| OSAGE DITCH (5200607) DWR↗ | 1885-07-01 | 79.7% / 0.9% | 31.6% / 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 ~1974 — idleness that begins before then may be unreported use, not nonuse (flagged † below).
- CASTLE RESERVOIR (5203936) DWR↗ (1938-07-25, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1980 — 44 years idle
- A P R NO 6 DITCH (5200513) DWR↗ (1906-08-26, 2.0 cfs decreed): last active 1985 — 39 years idle
- SHEEPHORN NO 2 DITCH (5200636) DWR↗ (1916-06-05, 2.7 cfs decreed): last active 1985 — 39 years idle
- DAVIE NO 1 SPRING (5200710) DWR↗ (1915-12-31, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1985 — 39 years idle
- BAIR SPRING (5205021) DWR↗ (1930-06-30, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1985 — 39 years idle
- BIG SANDY SPRING (5205006) DWR↗ (1949-09-30, 0.2 cfs decreed): last active 1986 — 38 years idle
- BOYD SPRING (5205007) DWR↗ (1922-08-31, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1986 — 38 years idle
- RAILROAD WTR SUP AT RNGE (5200620) DWR↗ (1934-06-30, 0.4 cfs decreed): last active 1987 — 37 years idle
- ADESA SPRINGS (5200674) DWR↗ (1925-06-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1987 — 37 years idle
- BOLGER NO 1 SPRING (5200682) DWR↗ (1973-07-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1987 — 37 years idle
Compliance screens (122 advisory flags)
Screened 189 of 562 structures with rights (231 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.
- HOG EYE DITCH (5200572) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 14.0 cfs (max 14.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 12.6 cfs across 3825 recorded day(s).
- A P R NO 6 DITCH (5200513) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 13.9 cfs (max 13.9) exceeds total decreed absolute 2.0 cfs across 822 recorded day(s).
- DRY PARK DITCH (5200544) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 12.4 cfs (max 25.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 7.2 cfs across 12882 recorded day(s).
- OSAGE DITCH (5200607) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 10.0 cfs (max 10.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 8.1 cfs across 5152 recorded day(s).
- H B DICE DITCH (5200567) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 10.0 cfs (max 10.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 1.8 cfs across 4634 recorded day(s).
- CABIN DITCH (5200530) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 9.6 cfs (max 9.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 3.4 cfs across 5148 recorded day(s).
- JOHN L CONGER DITCH (5200523) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 9.0 cfs (max 9.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 3.5 cfs across 3848 recorded day(s).
- MATHER DITCH (5200590) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 8.0 cfs (max 8.2) exceeds total decreed absolute 8.0 cfs across 6998 recorded day(s).
- MCPHEE DITCH (5200598) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 8.0 cfs (max 8.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.0 cfs across 5792 recorded day(s).
- MILL DITCH (5200591) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 7.8 cfs (max 7.8) exceeds total decreed absolute 7.2 cfs across 6951 recorded day(s).
Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)
| Structure | Senior priority date | Rights | Decreed abs (cfs) | Decreed abs (AF) | Conditional? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BEST DITCH (5200662) DWR↗ | 1944-11-12 | 1 | 20.8 | 0 | — |
| WILMOT DITCH (5200658) DWR↗ | 1883-12-20 | 3 | 16.7 | 0 | — |
| SCHLEGAL DITCH (ALKALI) (5200632) DWR↗ | 1953-08-05 | 1 | 14.8 | 0 | — |
| SWITZER DITCH (5200648) DWR↗ | 1900-05-01 | 4 | 13.6 | 0 | — |
| HOG EYE DITCH (5200572) DWR↗ | 1889-06-15 | 5 | 12.6 | 0 | — |
| SEVEN PINES DITCH (5200633) DWR↗ | 1915-06-20 | 1 | 12.0 | 0 | — |
| GUTZLER DITCH (5200559) DWR↗ | 1887-05-01 | 3 | 11.8 | 0 | — |
| WHEELER DITCH (NEW) (5200675) DWR↗ | 1883-05-01 | 4 | 10.6 | 0 | — |
| HARTMAN COLO RIVER DITCH (5200565) DWR↗ | 1941-02-15 | 1 | 9.0 | 0 | — |
| MIN FLOW PINEY RIVER LOW (5202002) DWR↗ | 1986-01-16 | 1 | 9.0 | 0 | — |
| MCPHEE DITCH (NO 2) (5200599) DWR↗ | 1890-05-01 | 3 | 8.6 | 0 | — |
| OSAGE DITCH (5200607) DWR↗ | 1885-07-01 | 2 | 8.1 | 0 | — |
| TRAIL & CASTLE CR CONSOL (5200762) DWR↗ | 1889-08-29 | 3 | 8.0 | 0 | — |
| MATHER DITCH (5200590) DWR↗ | 1890-09-11 | 3 | 8.0 | 0 | — |
| CASTLE PEAK DITCH (5200534) DWR↗ | 1911-05-01 | 2 | 7.9 | 0 | — |
Recent inventory & legal-document changes
- 2026-11-01 — call set: GREEN MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR (39823)
- 2026-11-01 — call released: 39739
- 2026-10-29 — call set: DIVIDE CREEK HIGHLINE D (39816)
- 2026-10-29 — call released: 39296
- 2026-10-28 — call released: 39681
- 2026-10-28 — call released: 39624
- 2026-10-28 — call released: 36897
- 2026-10-28 — call released: 39053
Water-court filings this month (division-wide)
10 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 (24 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 10 filings, with excerpts
| Case | What it asks | County | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|---|
2026CW3048
|
— | — | CASE NO. 2026CW3048; Previous Case Nos. 20CW3005, 13CW3044, 01CW68 and 84CW178 – BOARD OF WATER WORKS OF PUEBLO, COLORADO, Attention: Executive Director, 319 West Fourth Street, Pueblo, Colorado 81003 (Please address all pleadings and inquiries regarding this … |
26CW3086
|
change of water right | GRAND | 26CW3086 GRAND COUNTY -RECTOR FAMILY LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, MIKE RECTOR, GENERAL PARTNER (5 Inverness Dr. East, Englewood, CO 80112; mhr@rimop.com; 303-570-5174), c/o Valissa Tsoucaris, Esq., Tsoucaris Law, LLC, 3000 Holly Street, Denver, CO 80… |
26CW3097
|
reasonable diligence | PITKIN | 26CW3097 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO; COLORADO RIVER OR ITS TRIBUTARIES. WOODY CREEK COMMUNE 1, LLC; WOODY CREEK COMMUNE 2, LLC; WOODY CREEK COMMUNE 3, LLC; and WOODY CREEK COMMUNE 4, LLC, Colorado limited liability companies; c/o Danielle L. Van Arsdale, Esq., Wo… |
26CW3098
|
reasonable diligence | GRAND | 26CW3098 GRAND COUNTY. Ritschard Springs Association, P.O. Box 1594, Kremmling, CO 80459, c/o Kaitlin Randall and Kent Whitmer, JVAM PLLC, PO Box 878, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602, (970) 922 -2122. APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF SEPTEMBER 2026 RESUME WATER DIVISION … |
26CW3099
|
reasonable diligence | GARFIELD | 26CW3099 GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO, A SPRING TRIBUTARY TO THE COLORADO RIVER . S Bar Lazy S Enterprises LLC, P.O. Box 809, Silt, Colorado 81652. Please direct all correspondence to Jeffrey J. Conklin and Danielle T. Skinner of Karp Neu Hanlon, P.C., P.O. Drawe… |
26CW3100
|
reasonable diligence | PITKIN | 26CW3100 PITKIN COUNTY – ROARING FORK RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES. RUSSELL WIGHT c/o Paul L. Noto and John Sittler, Patrick, Miller & Noto, P.C., 229 Midland Ave., Basalt, CO 81621 (970) 920-1030. APPLICATION FOR FINDINGS OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE. First Claim: Wi… |
26CW3101
|
reasonable diligence, make absolute | GARFIELD | 26CW3101 GARFIELD COUNTY, CANYON CRK, COLORADO RIVER. App for Reasonable Diligence and To Make Absolute. Ross Jeffery c/o Sherry Caloia, PO Box 443, Glenwood Sprgs 81602. Name: Ross Hydro, decreed in 20CW002 on 10/11/2020. Desc: 1 or more pipelines in NW¼ NE¼ … |
26CW3102
|
— | GRAND | 26CW3102 GRAND COUNTY . Moose Ridge Association, c/o Robin Tieman, President, 4075 Nassau Pl., Boulder, CO 80301. Applicant is represented by Kaitlin Randall and Kent Whitmer, JVAM PLLC, PO Box 878, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602, (970) 922 - 2122. APPLICATION FOR… |
26CW3105
|
reasonable diligence | PITKIN | 26CW3105 PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WATER RIGHT TRIBUTARY TO THE ROARING FORK RIVER. Application for Findings of Reasonable Diligence. Aspen Skiing Company, LLC, c/o Kylie J. Crandall, Esq., Mark E. Hamilton, Esq., HOLLAND & HART LLP, 600 E. Main St., Suite 104,… |
26CW3107
|
reasonable diligence | EAGLE | 26CW3107 EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, GROUNDWATER TRIBUTARY TO LAKE CREEK, TRIBUTARY TO THE EAGLE RIVER, TRIBUTARY TO THE COLORADO RIVER. WLC1003 LLC, 1003 Lake Creek Road, Edwards, Colorado 81632. Please direct all correspondence to Michael J. Sawyer and Erika S. … |
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 2026-11-04 · verify at USGS current conditions ↗
1 USGS sensor reports 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COLORADO RIVER AT CATAMOUNT BRIDGE, CO | 5.8 | 282 | 10.8 | 37 | 2026-11-04 17:30 |
Where water has been sampled
Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-08 · verify at Water Quality Portal ↗
The portal lists 1,156 sampling stations in this district's watershed (Colorado Headwaters 14010001), of which 123 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 (58), Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment-WQCD (53), Colorado River Watch (10). Most-sampled groups: Physical, Inorganics, Major, Non-metals, Nutrient, Inorganics, Minor, 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 ↗
3 community systems touch this district. None carries an open health-based violation on EPA's record. EPA sampled 2 of them for PFAS in 2023–25; none had PFOA or PFOS at or above the 2024 limit.
| System | Serves | EPA record | PFAS (UCMR 5) | Lead, latest 90th pct |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GLENWOOD SPRINGS CITY OF | 9,428 | clean, last 12 quarters | none detected | 0.001 mg/L |
| TWO RIVERS VILLAGE | 896 | clean, last 12 quarters | none detected | 0.0 mg/L |
| NO NAME CREEK WS | 160 | clean, last 12 quarters | not sampled | 0.0 mg/L |
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…
Topology cross-check: 6 parent disagreements, 1 sizable stream 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 12 streams, 6 agree. Know this water? Tell us →
| Stream | This site routes it to | DWR routes it to |
|---|---|---|
| Spruce Creek | the mainstem | Colorado River |
| Ike Creek | the mainstem | Colorado River |
| Cottonwood Creek | the mainstem | Colorado River |
| Piney River | the mainstem | Colorado River |
| Goodson Creek | the mainstem | Colorado River |
| Hartman Gulch | the mainstem | Colorado River |
Sizable streams DWR maps here that this network does not carry:
Three Licks Creek (3 mi)
Page assembled 02:16 MST · live figures refresh through the day.