White River Basin

Evolution of the network

This year, in context

In the weeks around 2026-07-06 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 9 ranked gages are running at a median 25% of their own long-term norm for this window — 9 below a typical year, 0 at or above. Driest relative to its record: PICEANCE CREEK AT WHITE RIVER, CO, ranking 2nd lowest of 58 years.

How this comparison is made

Each gage's mean flow over the 3 days either side of 2026-07-06, 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 2026-08-30 21:00 from 55 gage(s) with cached period-of-record data. The series is each gage's annual mean flow in cfs (years with ≥300 days of record). Mann-Kendall (trend, with the Hamed–Rao correction for serial correlation — persistence can otherwise fake significance) and Pettitt (changepoint) both require at least 8 years spanning at least 10 years of record. A gage below that reports no signal — which is not the same as “no change.” The %-per-decade figure is the same Sen slope divided by the gage's median annual flow, for comparing across streams of very different size; it is omitted for near-ephemeral channels where the median is too small to divide by honestly.

Of the 55 gages with enough record, 5 are trending down and 1 up, and 5 carry a detected shift. The clearest is Piceance Creek at White River, its annual mean flow changing -2.69 cfs per decade (-14.3% of its median annual flow) over 56 years (p=0.0028). The other 49 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
▸ Piceance Creek at White River☆ PICRAWCO	↓ decreasing	-2.69 cfs -14.3%	p=0.003	56	~1999
▸ Corral Gulch near Rangely☆ CORNRACO	↓ decreasing	-0.19 cfs -28.2%	p=0.005	51	~2000
▸ ⚠️ Corral Gulch below Water Gulch, near Rangely☆ CORWATCO	↑ increasing	+1.00 cfs	p=0.016	14	~1982
▸ Piceance Creek Bl Ryan Gulch, near Rio Blanco☆ PICRYACO	↓ decreasing	-1.48 cfs -9.7%	p=0.041	55	~1997
▸ White River below Boise Creek, near Rangely☆ WHIBOICO	↓ decreasing	-81.31 cfs -12.5%	p=0.044	40	—
▸ Yellow Creek near White River☆ YELWHICO	↓ decreasing	-0.29 cfs -17.2%	p=0.047	46	~2004

⚠️ 1 gage flagged: their records may have quietly shifted against their neighbours, so treat their trends with caution.

How drift is detected

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

49 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: White River below Meeker (121 yr, decreasing, 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. 9 gage(s) and 490 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)
1900s	3	0
1910s	3	0
1920s	1	0
1930s	1	0
1940s	2	0
1950s	4	54
1960s	10	108
1970s	34	317
1980s	26	304
1990s	14	478
2000s	9	567
2010s	9	385
2020s	9	250

Mass-balance (network closure) trend

Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 16% of 2768 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 (1952–2026)

Mass-balance kinks computed for every summer month back to 1952 (2381 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.

• NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER NEAR BUFORD, CO.: reach shifted from +367 cfs to -46 cfs summer mean (more losing, p=0.019, 17 yr) [sedimentary uplands: moderate groundwater connectivity -- gain/loss shifts can be real aquifer response; corroborate with nearby well records] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=-0.42) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change]
• SOUTH FORK WHITE RIVER AT BUDGES RESORT, CO.: reach shifted from +179 cfs to -361 cfs summer mean (more losing, p=0.028, 21 yr) [mountain crystalline canyon: minimal groundwater storage -- large or shifting unaccounted losses here are more consistent with data/measurement issues or unmodeled plumbing than with aquifer exchange] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=-0.65) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change]
• LOST CREEK NEAR BUFORD, CO.: reach shifted from -8 cfs to -382 cfs summer mean (more losing, p=0.011, 25 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization]
• PICEANCE CREEK AT WHITE RIVER, CO: reach shifted from -104 cfs to -621 cfs summer mean (more losing, p=0.000, 57 yr) [sedimentary uplands: moderate groundwater connectivity -- gain/loss shifts can be real aquifer response; corroborate with nearby well records] [measurement-evolution caution: this shift co-moves with the growth of the gage/metering network (rho=-0.54) -- part of it may be unaccounted water becoming accounted, not hydrologic change]

Groundwater now has its own tab: 438 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.

Reservoirs now has its own tab: 137 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1962, click-to-chart histories.

Cross-gage pattern fingerprint

Over the 65-year window with full coverage (1962–2026), the dominant shared pattern across 3 gage(s) explains 99% of year-to-year variance (almost certainly a basin-wide climate/snowpack driver).

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

Structures most implicated by reconciliation (as of 2026-07-06)

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.

• LOWLAND DITCH (diversion): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• ARMIT DITCH NO 1 (diversion): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• ARMIT DITCH NO 2 (diversion): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• LAYTON SPG 1 (return): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• LAYTON SPG 2 (return): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• STORY GULCH PARACHUTE PIPELINE (diversion): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• KILLDUFF SPG NO 2 (return): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• KILLDUFF SPG NO 1 (return): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• KILLDUFF SPG NO 4 (return): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)
• KILLDUFF SPG NO 3 (return): +4.3 cfs (7% of that reach's correction)

137 reservoir(s) with 10,886 storage measurement(s), 1962–2026. Basin storage as of 2025-10-31 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 7,985 AF across 51 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)
▸ MOON LAKE PL (4302132) ☆	13,800	2002-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ TAYLOR DRAW RES (4304433) ☆	6,578	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ JOHNNIE JOHNSON RESERVOIR (4303642) ☆	789	2025-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ TAYLOR DRAW PWR CONDUIT (4302571) ☆	620	2013-05-02	—	—	dossier →
▸ RIO BLANCO LAKE FDR (4301120) ☆	500	2002-10-28	—	—	dossier →
▸ SKINNY FISH RESERVOIR (4303659) ☆	301	2018-08-13	—	—	dossier →
▸ MCGINNIS MEADOW RES (4303651) ☆	87	2015-09-11	—	—	dossier →
▸ GREENO DITCH 2 (4302474) ☆	81	2002-10-31	—	—	dossier →

Snow-water equivalent, WY2026

No snow on the ground — normal for the date; the snow year begins in October. The chart shows the full water year just ending.

SNOTEL site	Elev (ft)	SWE (in)	Median (in)	% of median	Typical peak
Burro Mountain	9290	0.0	0.0	—	April 13 (16.6 in)
Ripple Creek	10340	0.0	0.0	—	April 25 (29.3 in)
Trapper Lake	9750	0.0	—	—	—

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 (1981–2026)

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 9 of the last 46 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. This year was one of the dry ones: the pack peaked at 48% of median.

The snow never came: 1990, 2002, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2021, 2022, 2026. The snow left early: 1981.

Computed by this site from 3 SNOTEL sites’ full daily records (NRCS AWDB, back to 1981). 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 — White R nr Meeker

NRCS's final issue (2026-06-01) calls it even odds that at least 20 kAF arrives over 06-01 to 07-31 — 16% of a normal season; almost certainly at least 8, probably not more than 49. Our own record at this gage shows 11 kAF actually delivered (partial record: 36 of 61 days). New forecasts begin in January. How to read these numbers →

We test a record-based adjustment of the April benchmark at every graded point. Here it did not beat NRCS over 44 replayed seasons (18% typical miss unadjusted vs 18% adjusted), so none is shown — NRCS’s own forecast, unadjusted, is the best April benchmark available for this river. Why we test →

90% chance of at least	70% chance of at least	50% chance of at least	30% chance of at least	10% chance of at least	Normal	Observed
8	14	20	32	49	122	11

How good are these forecasts here? (1950–2025)

Grading every April issue against what the river then delivered, measured at this gage’s own record — 75 seasons: the median miss of the 50% forecast is 15%, with a low bias of 2%, and the observed volume landed inside the stated 10–90% band 75% 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 (1981–2025)

Across 45 measured years, the season’s water has closely followed the April snowpack: a year opening April with 80% of median snow has typically gone on to deliver about 67% of a normal season (a snow-to-runoff elasticityHow strongly one number moves with another. A snow-to-runoff elasticity of 1.5 means a 10% shortfall in April snowpack has typically become a 15% shortfall in the season's water. of 1.2). In warm, early-melt years the river delivered a median of 53% of a normal season, against 106% 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.

Right now

This is the 3rd-driest week 27 in 122 years of record at WHITE RIVER NEAR MEEKER, CO. (as of 2026-06-29; this week’s flow sits at the 2nd percentile for the date). On this week’s US Drought Monitor, Garfield County is 48% in D4 exceptional drought (2026-08-25). The law agrees: the most senior active call leaves 98% of this district’s decreed flow rights junior to the calling right this week.

Every year since 1901, week by week

Each thin row is a year at WHITE RIVER NEAR MEEKER, 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.

The Drought Monitor’s view since 2000

Mean share of area in each class across Garfield, Rio Blanco 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 2002 — 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 (223 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	Recovery
unnamed dry spell	2025-08-04 → 2026-07-06	48	12th (2025-11-10)	not yet
the 2020-22 drought	2020-08-17 → 2023-06-26	149	5th (2021-10-11)	1 week
the 2018 drought	2017-10-23 → 2019-07-08	89	7th (2018-11-19)	2 weeks
the 2012-13 drought	2012-09-03 → 2014-04-21	85	5th (2012-11-19)	13 weeks
the 2002 drought	2004-06-28 → 2005-02-07	32	23rd (2004-10-11)	10 weeks
the 2002 drought	2002-07-08 → 2004-05-31	99	3rd (2002-12-09)	46 weeks
unnamed dry spell	1994-08-08 → 1995-08-14	53	10th (1994-11-14)	0 weeks
unnamed dry spell	1992-01-20 → 1993-06-14	73	17th (1993-02-08)	1 week
unnamed dry spell	1989-10-09 → 1991-07-22	93	12th (1990-10-15)	100 weeks
the 1981 drought	1981-01-26 → 1982-02-22	56	14th (1981-06-29)	18 weeks
the 1977 drought	1976-11-15 → 1978-07-31	89	3rd (1977-11-14)	0 weeks
unnamed dry spell	1966-09-05 → 1968-09-23	107	6th (1968-03-18)	32 weeks
the 1963-64 drought	1963-09-30 → 1964-09-21	51	9th (1964-03-23)	44 weeks
unnamed dry spell	1961-02-27 → 1961-11-20	38	20th (1961-07-10)	1 week

Detected mechanically: the 26-week smoothed percentile below the 30th for at least 20 weeks; recovered on regaining the 50th. 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 $12,617 in drought-caused claims across Garfield, Rio Blanco counties — 0.1% of all insured crop losses there. The worst year was 2021 ($5,470).

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.

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.

Decreed rights on this network run from 1880-05-01 to 2023-01-24. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 11% of a median irrigation season and 1% in a dry one. 25 abandonment screens and 522 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: 4401 across 3293 structure(s); 504 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: 1 of 3 measures (days under call, calls set, seniority 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	204	38	1882-04-01
2015	215	27	1882-04-01
2016	198	56	1882-04-01
2017	185	73	1883-06-30
2018	197	95	1882-04-01
2019	177	30	1882-04-01
2020	204	109	1882-04-01
2021	250	158	1882-04-01
2022	249	87	1882-04-01
2023	365	50	1904-01-02
2024	306	75	1882-04-01
2025	186	97	1882-04-01

Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations

Sustained diversion stops matched to senior administrative calls.

• BLAIR DITCH (4300546) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-08-22 (11+ days) — call at SLATER FORK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BIG FISH CREEK DITCH (4300540) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-08-18 (14+ days) — call at SLATER FORK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• B P FRANKLIN DITCH 1 (4300515) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-07-31 (19+ days) — call at METZ & REIGAN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BARBOUR NORTH SIDE D (4300526) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-07-08 (33+ days) — call at METZ & REIGAN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BLAIR DITCH (4300546) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-07-03 (18+ days) — call at HOME DITCH NO 2 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• B P FRANKLIN DITCH 1 (4300515) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-06-30 (9+ days) — call at HOME DITCH NO 2 curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BOIES DITCH (4300548) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-06-15 (77+ days) — call at METZ & REIGAN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BLAIR DITCH (4300546) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-06-04 (5+ days) — call at METZ & REIGAN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BLAIR DITCH (4300546) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-05-19 (6+ days) — call at METZ & REIGAN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• B M & H DITCH 1 (4300513) DWR↗☆ stopped 2025-05-12 (6+ days) — call at METZ & REIGAN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BLAIR DITCH (4300546) DWR↗☆ stopped 2024-09-03 (15+ days) — call at SIMON DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
• BLACK EAGLE D NO 2 (4300544) DWR↗☆ stopped 2024-07-26 (27+ days) — call at NICKELL DITCH curtailing 66% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]

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
TAYLOR DRAW PWR CONDUIT (4302571) DWR↗☆	1962-07-03	7.5% / 0.0%	7.5% / 0.0%
HIGHLAND DITCH (4300694) DWR↗☆	1886-05-01	21.9% / 5.6%	7.5% / 0.0%
WHITE RIVER MSF (4301845) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	7.5% / 0.0%	7.5% / 0.0%
MEEKER POWER DITCH (4300809) DWR↗☆	1911-03-15	15.4% / 2.3%	13.6% / 0.0%
OAK RIDGE PARK DITCH (4300848) DWR↗☆	1887-12-20	17.6% / 5.6%	7.5% / 0.0%
MILLER CREEK DITCH (4300819) DWR↗☆	1896-06-01	15.4% / 2.3%	7.5% / 0.0%
NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER MSF MARVINE CREEK (4302338) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	7.5% / 0.0%	7.5% / 0.0%
NIBLOCK DITCH (4300842) DWR↗☆	1885-03-08	23.6% / 5.6%	7.5% / 0.0%
POWELL PARK DITCH (4300883) DWR↗☆	1880-05-01	100.0% / 100.0%	7.5% / 0.0%
SOUTH FORK WHITE R MSF (4302344) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	7.5% / 0.0%	7.5% / 0.0%
NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER ( (4303358) DWR↗☆	2019-01-29	7.5% / 0.0%	7.5% / 0.0%
NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER MSF RIPPLE CK TO (4302339) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	7.5% / 0.0%	7.5% / 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).

• MACLEAR NO 2 DITCH (4300786) DWR↗☆ (1935-07-01, 0.8 cfs decreed): last active 1966 — 59 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• STORY SPRING 2 (4301138) DWR↗☆ (1986-10-10, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1968 — 57 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• GRIFFITH DITCH NO 1 (4300667) DWR↗☆ (1887-05-01, 0.3 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• SYLVAN SPRING (4301153) DWR↗☆ (1987-05-23, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• MOO POND SPRING (4301154) DWR↗☆ (1987-05-23, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• FEED YARD SPRING 2 (4301155) DWR↗☆ (1970-04-17, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• FEED YARD SPRING 3 (4301156) DWR↗☆ (1972-05-10, 0.2 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• FEED YARD SPRING 4 (4301157) DWR↗☆ (1974-10-04, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• ROJO SPRING PL 1 (4301158) DWR↗☆ (1955-06-25, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
• ROJO SPRING PL 2 (4301159) DWR↗☆ (1955-06-25, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1974) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse

Compliance screens (522 advisory flags)

Screened 732 of 3293 structures with rights (850 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.

• FULTON IRR & FEEDER D (4300649) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 140.0 cfs (max 160.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 2.0 cfs across 13913 recorded day(s).
• MILLER CREEK DITCH (4300819) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 125.0 cfs (max 141.4) exceeds total decreed absolute 124.0 cfs across 25315 recorded day(s).
• POWELL PARK DITCH (4300883) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 90.0 cfs (max 118.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 82.6 cfs across 41741 recorded day(s).
• STEWART SPRING 1 (4301073) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 67.0 cfs (max 90.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 0.0 cfs across 1420 recorded day(s).
• MCCARTHY SPRING 1 (4301074) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 63.1 cfs (max 84.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 0.0 cfs across 1396 recorded day(s).
• MCDOWELL NO 2 DITCH (4301855) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 62.9 cfs (max 67.9) exceeds total decreed absolute 5.0 cfs across 5491 recorded day(s).
• OLD AGENCY DITCH (4300849) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 62.5 cfs (max 267.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 35.4 cfs across 21498 recorded day(s).
• RAINBOW LAKE DITCH (4300888) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 55.0 cfs (max 55.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 35.0 cfs across 35384 recorded day(s).
• LOWLAND DITCH (4300777) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 46.0 cfs (max 46.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 8.4 cfs across 13400 recorded day(s).
• SOUTH SIDE HIGHLINE D (4300935) DWR↗☆: Observed p99 daily rate 38.1 cfs (max 57.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 33.0 cfs across 26338 recorded day(s).

Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)

Structure	Senior priority date	Rights	Decreed abs (cfs)	Decreed abs (AF)	Conditional?
TAYLOR DRAW PWR CONDUIT (4302571) DWR↗☆	1962-07-03	2	745.0	0	yes
HIGHLAND DITCH (4300694) DWR↗☆	1886-05-01	7	249.0	0	—
WHITE RIVER MSF (4301845) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	1	200.0	0	—
MEEKER POWER DITCH (4300809) DWR↗☆	1911-03-15	3	180.0	0	—
OAK RIDGE PARK DITCH (4300848) DWR↗☆	1887-12-20	7	133.0	0	—
MILLER CREEK DITCH (4300819) DWR↗☆	1896-06-01	5	124.0	0	yes
NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER MSF MARVINE CREEK (4302338) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	1	120.0	0	—
NIBLOCK DITCH (4300842) DWR↗☆	1885-03-08	10	99.0	0	yes
POWELL PARK DITCH (4300883) DWR↗☆	1880-05-01	4	82.6	0	—
SOUTH FORK WHITE R MSF (4302344) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	1	80.0	0	—
NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER ( (4303358) DWR↗☆	2019-01-29	1	74.0	0	—
NORTH FORK WHITE RIVER MSF RIPPLE CK TO (4302339) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	1	70.0	0	—
COAL CREEK MESA DITCH (4300578) DWR↗☆	1883-05-14	9	63.0	0	—
MARVINE CREEK MINIMUM STREAM FLOW (4302334) DWR↗☆	1977-11-15	1	40.0	0	—
OLD AGENCY DITCH (4300849) DWR↗☆	1884-04-20	5	35.4	0	—

No inventory or legal-document changes detected since the daily watch began.

Water-court filings this month (division-wide)

5 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 (61 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 5 filings, with excerpts

Case	What it asks	County	Excerpt
2026CW10	—	ROUTT	2026CW10 Routt County Application for Absolute Water Rights (Storage). Applicant: Wilton Earle 785 Valley View Drive Craig, CO 81625; 970-824-6258; rettae74@gmail.com.; Logan Earle 785 Valley View Drive Craig, CO 81625; 970-620-5288; earlelogan679@gmail.com St…
2026CW11	—	RIO BLANCO	2026CW11 Rio Blanco County Application for Simple Change in Surface Point of Diversion. Applicants: John and Diana Hartman, 2804 E Main Street, Rangely, CO 81648, 970-618-0088, dgrantelk@gmail.com Structure: Calvat Ditch. Original Decree: CA099. Case: 11/26/19…
2026CW3009	reasonable diligence	—	2026CW3009 ROUTT AND RIO BLANCO COUNTIES, Prima Ranches LLC, c/o David Harbaugh, 3575 E Cherry Creek North Drive, Denver, CO 80209, (303) 478-8997. Please address all correspondence to: Geoffrey M. Williamson, Katherine Carter, Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti LLP…
2026CW3010	change of water right, plan for augmentation, new underground right	ROUTT	2026CW3010 ROUTT COUNTY Water Division: 6. DISTRICT COURT, WATER DIVISION SIX, STATE OF COLORADO, Routt County Combined Court, 1955 Shield Drive, Unit 200, Steamboat Springs, CO 80487. CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR WATER RIGHTS OF SIDNEY PEAK RANCH OWNERS’ AS…
2026CW3011	change of water right	RIO BLANCO	2026CW3011 RIO BLANCO COUNTY – WHITE RIVER. Mahogany Ranch, LLC, c/o Kevin L. Patrick, and John M. Sittler, Patrick, Miller & Noto, P.C., 229 Midland Ave., Basalt, CO 81621. (970) 920-1030. APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF WATER RIGHT. Summary of Application: Applica…

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.

Pick a calling right

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

Or enter an administration number directly

Administration number
Simulate

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