Los Pinos River Basin

Division 7 · Water District 31

Auto-mapped

Los Pinos River Basin on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 31 · clicktap anything for its record

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 5. Runoff outlook — Vallecito Reservoir Inflow: even odds of at least 19 kAF over 06-01 to 07-31 — 24% 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
Vallecito	10740	0.1	0.0	—	April 5 (14.8 in)

Vallecito Reservoir Inflow — 06-01 to 07-31 volume, thousand acre-feet (chance the volume is AT LEAST this):

90%	70%	50%	30%	10%	Normal
10	14	19	29	44	79

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: 7 parent disagreements, 10 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 20 streams, 13 agree. Know this water? Tell us →

Stream	This site routes it to	DWR routes it to
Grimes Creek	the mainstem	Vallecito Creek
Ignacio Creek	the mainstem	Rock Creek
Trail Canyon	the mainstem	nan
Tiffany Draw	the mainstem	Spring Creek
Rock Creek	the mainstem	Vallecito Creek
Pump Canyon	the mainstem	nan
Self Arroyo	the mainstem	Dry Creek

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

Bear Creek (11 mi) · Lake Creek (8 mi) · Flint Creek (7 mi) · Red Creek (7 mi) · East Creek (7 mi) · Sierra Vandera Creek (4 mi) · Indian Creek (4 mi) · Lion Creek (4 mi)

Full diagnostic snapshot pending — this district's weekly-style report (system status, active calls, hydrographs, anomaly flags) is produced by the nightly rotation and appears here after its first run. The tabs above are live now.

Reconstruct conditions as of

Evolution of the network

This year, in context

In the weeks around 2026-07-06 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 6 ranked gages are running at a median 44% of their own long-term norm for this window — 6 below a typical year, 0 at or above. Driest relative to its record: LOS PINOS RIVER NEAR IGNACIO, CO, ranking 1st lowest of 27 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 21:16 from 8 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 8 gages with enough record, 0 are trending down and 0 up, and 1 carries a detected shift. The other 7 show no clear signal either way.

What drought has cost here

Since 1994, federal crop insurance has paid $689,401 in drought-caused claims across La Plata county — 18.3% of all insured crop losses there. The worst year was 2002 ($75,597).

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.

Gage	Trend	Change / decade cfs · % of median annual flow	Significance	Years	Changepoint
▸ Spring Creek at La Boca SPRILACO	no clear trend	+0.73 cfs +2.2%	p=0.350	60	~1968

7 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. 6 gage(s) and 36 structure(s) report in 2026, but structure reporting only reached half its modern level around ~1967. 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)
1920s	1	0
1930s	1	0
1940s	1	0
1950s	3	49
1960s	4	24
1970s	4	100
1980s	4	115
1990s	4	124
2000s	5	120
2010s	5	92
2020s	6	32

Mass-balance (network closure) trend

Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 10% of 1201 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 (1951–2026)

Mass-balance kinks computed for every summer month back to 1951 (746 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: 120 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.

Reservoirs now has its own tab: 30 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1951, click-to-chart histories.

Cross-gage pattern fingerprint

Not enough gages with a long enough common-coverage window yet to fingerprint shared patterns.

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.

IGNACIO INTAKE GALLERY (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
TOWN OF IGNACIO PL (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
SP-1301 (return): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
MCCATHRON SPRINGS (return): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
HALLSTED SEPG DITCH NO 2 (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
HALLSTED SEPG DITCH NO 1 (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
DR MORRISON D (IGNACIO) (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
KELSALL PINE RIVER PUMP (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
LAPLAWD PINE RIVER DIVR AP PT 2 (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% of that reach's correction)
KELSALL PUMP (diversion): +1.2 cfs (2% 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_20260707 (imported 2026-08-19) for history, plus the CDSS REST API for current conditions.

Check	State	What was measured
gage freshness	stale	newest gage reading is 55 day(s) old (target 7)
diversion record	expected-lag	newest diversion record is 304 day(s) old (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears)
structure coverage	sparse	10% of schematic structures have data

Independent check: PASS — 100.0000% agreement across 626,697 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 — 99.12% day-level agreement with USGS's own published records for the same gages, across 6 co-listed station(s) and 107,336 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) / 126,363 daily values (1927-10-01–2026-07-06); 204 structure(s) with diversion records; 1037 with decreed rights. Methodology has not yet had independent expert review — treat every figure as an advisory screen, not an administrative or legal conclusion.

179 water-level measurements across 120 monitored well(s) — 86 alluvial, 0 bedrock — plus 4 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 1 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.

30 reservoir(s) with 2,048 storage measurement(s), 1951–2012. Basin storage as of 2011-10-19 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 58,940 AF across 2 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)
▸ VALLECITO RESERVOIR (3103518)	58,751	2010-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ VALLECITO RESERVOIR (3103529)	350	1980-08-07	—	—	dossier →
▸ EMERALD LAKE RESERVOIR (3103516)	220	1951-09-01	—	—	dossier →
▸ WOMMER RESERVOIR NO 1 (3103517)	189	2011-10-19	—	—	dossier →
▸ VALLECITO RESERVOIR (3103532)	90	1980-07-10	—	—	dossier →
▸ BELLFLOWER RETENTION RES (3103520)	60	1990-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ GOSNEY GRAVEL PIT NO. 1 (3103805)	47	2003-10-31	—	—	dossier →
▸ VALLECITO RESERVOIR (3103531)	37	1980-08-07	—	—	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
Vallecito	10740	0.1	0.0	—	April 5 (14.8 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 (1987–2026)

A bad snow year here comes in two flavors (both called snow drought), and the river feels them differently. In 7 of the last 40 winters the snow never came — the pack peaked below 80% of its median. In 2 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 54% of median.

The snow never came: 1988, 2002, 2007, 2015, 2018, 2025, 2026. The snow left early: 2012, 2022.

Computed by this site from 1 SNOTEL site’ full daily records (NRCS AWDB, back to 1987). 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 — Vallecito Reservoir Inflow

NRCS's final issue (2026-06-01) calls it even odds that at least 19 kAF arrives over 06-01 to 07-31 — 24% of a normal season; almost certainly at least 10, probably not more than 44. New forecasts begin in January. How to read these numbers →

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
10	14	19	29	44	79

How good are these forecasts here? (1950–1986)

Grading every April issue against what the river then delivered, measured at this gage’s own record — 37 seasons: the median miss of the 50% forecast is 14%, with a high bias of 1%.

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 →

Decreed rights on this network run from 1868-03-02 to 2025-10-01. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 58% of a median irrigation season and 27% in a dry one. 25 abandonment screens and 102 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: 1122 across 1037 structure(s); 93 structure(s) carry 1 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	319	117	1883-05-15
2015	316	90	1899-05-13
2016	273	94	1888-02-08
2017	297	98	1904-01-02
2018	285	164	1878-05-15
2019	186	53	1880-06-01
2020	240	171	1986-11-23
2021	246	143	1876-11-01
2022	261	161	1888-03-20
2023	198	82	1880-06-01
2024	231	114	1876-10-10
2025	281	169	1888-03-20

Why diversions stopped — call-based explanations

Sustained diversion stops matched to senior administrative calls.

ROBERT MORRISON DITCH (3100547) DWR↗ stopped 2025-10-22 (9+ days) — call at LA PLATA RIVER BASIN curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
CATLIN DITCH (3100545) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-11 (50+ days) — call at SPRING CREEK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
DUNHAM IRRIGATION DITCH (3100550) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-09 (52+ days) — call at SPRING CREEK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
HIGBEE IRRIGATION DITCH (3100516) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-07 (54+ days) — call at SPRING CREEK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
BUHMAN DITCH (3100531) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-19 (73+ days) — call at SPRING CREEK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
BUHMAN DITCH (3100531) DWR↗ stopped 2025-07-01 (12+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
DUNHAM IRRIGATION DITCH (3100550) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-18 (22+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
BUHMAN DITCH (3100531) DWR↗ stopped 2024-09-15 (9+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
HIGBEE IRRIGATION DITCH (3100516) DWR↗ stopped 2024-09-03 (9+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
PALMER DITCH (3100522) DWR↗ stopped 2024-07-06 (117+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
DUNHAM IRRIGATION DITCH (3100550) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-25 (334+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
BUHMAN DITCH (3100531) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-23 (30+ days) — call at CONLEY 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
VALLECITO HYDROELECTRIC (3100844) DWR↗	1979-06-01	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
SPRING CREEK DITCH (3101045) DWR↗	1868-07-25	100.0% / 100.0%	1.8% / 0.0%
ROBERT MORRISON DITCH (3100547) DWR↗	1890-10-01	23.6% / 2.8%	1.8% / 0.0%
KING DITCH (3100519) DWR↗	1881-05-01	54.0% / 22.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
VALLECITO CREEK INSTREAM FLOW WATER RIGH (3101901) DWR↗	2017-03-23	1.8% / 0.0%	1.8% / 0.0%
DR MORRISON DITCH (3101044) DWR↗	1868-07-25	100.0% / 100.0%	19.8% / 0.0%
SCHRODER IRRIGATION DITCH (3100523) DWR↗	1881-09-01	49.8% / 19.2%	1.8% / 0.0%
PORTER DITCH (3100583) DWR↗	1936-06-15	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
WEMINUCHE PASS DITCH (3104637) DWR↗	1934-07-28	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
THOMPSON-EPPERSON DITCH (3100511) DWR↗	1877-12-31	61.2% / 31.3%	11.7% / 0.0%
LOS PINOS RIVER (3101900) DWR↗	1984-07-13	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
PINE R WEMINUCHE PASS D (3104638) DWR↗	1934-10-11	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 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 ~1967 — idleness that begins before then may be unreported use, not nonuse (flagged † below).

EMERALD LAKE RESERVOIR (3103516) DWR↗ (1976-05-12, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1951 — 74 years idle † predates modern reporting era — last recorded activity predates this basin's modern reporting era (~1967) -- early absence of record is weak evidence of nonuse
LEIGH PIPELINE (3100738) DWR↗ (1973-06-01, 0.1 cfs decreed): last active 1969 — 56 years idle
COUCH D NO 1 & PUMP PLT (3100602) DWR↗ (1969-03-01, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 1972 — 53 years idle
GEORGE B JONES DITCH (3100565) DWR↗ (1911-05-01, 2.5 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle
COUCH D NO 2 & PUMP PLT (3100603) DWR↗ (1969-03-01, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle
MONTGOMERY DITCH (3100610) DWR↗ (1920-04-23, 4.0 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle
LOWER WOMMER DITCH NO 1 (3100623) DWR↗ (1900-07-31, 3.0 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle
LOWER WOMMER DITCH NO 2 (3100624) DWR↗ (1900-07-31, 2.0 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle
CALMETT NO 1 PUMP AND PL (3100631) DWR↗ (1952-12-31, 0.7 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle
CURRIE-JACK CREEK PL (3100643) DWR↗ (1965-07-06, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1973 — 52 years idle

Compliance screens (102 advisory flags)

Screened 139 of 1037 structures with rights (151 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.

VALLECITO HYDROELECTRIC (3100844) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 725.0 cfs (max 850.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 720.0 cfs across 40124 recorded day(s).
KING DITCH (3100519) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 116.0 cfs (max 758.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 106.2 cfs across 47452 recorded day(s).
SCHRODER IRRIGATION DITCH (3100523) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 64.9 cfs (max 82.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 63.5 cfs across 44216 recorded day(s).
ROBT MORRISON D HEAIR EX (3100645) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 54.0 cfs (max 56.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 2.5 cfs across 7116 recorded day(s).
THOMPSON-EPPERSON DITCH (3100511) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 45.0 cfs (max 66.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 35.4 cfs across 41129 recorded day(s).
BEAR CREEK AND PINE RIVER DITCH (3100514) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 22.6 cfs (max 110.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 14.0 cfs across 47111 recorded day(s).
CEANABOO DITCH (3100502) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 19.5 cfs (max 26.7) exceeds total decreed absolute 9.8 cfs across 34987 recorded day(s).
LOS PINOS IRRIGATING DITCH (3100512) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 19.0 cfs (max 35.8) exceeds total decreed absolute 11.5 cfs across 73215 recorded day(s).
LA BOCA DITCH (3100507) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 18.0 cfs (max 31.7) exceeds total decreed absolute 14.3 cfs across 22127 recorded day(s).
KIRKPATRICK DITCH (3100535) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 16.5 cfs (max 22.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.5 cfs across 10832 recorded day(s).

Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)

Structure	Senior priority date	Rights	Decreed abs (cfs)	Conditional?
VALLECITO HYDROELECTRIC (3100844) DWR↗	1979-06-01	1	720.0	—
SPRING CREEK DITCH (3101045) DWR↗	1868-07-25	9	321.2	yes
ROBERT MORRISON DITCH (3100547) DWR↗	1890-10-01	6	108.5	—
KING DITCH (3100519) DWR↗	1881-05-01	4	106.2	—
VALLECITO CREEK INSTREAM FLOW WATER RIGH (3101901) DWR↗	2017-03-23	1	92.0	—
DR MORRISON DITCH (3101044) DWR↗	1868-07-25	2	72.6	yes
SCHRODER IRRIGATION DITCH (3100523) DWR↗	1881-09-01	4	63.5	—
PORTER DITCH (3100583) DWR↗	1936-06-15	2	48.0	—
WEMINUCHE PASS DITCH (3104637) DWR↗	1934-07-28	4	40.0	—
THOMPSON-EPPERSON DITCH (3100511) DWR↗	1877-12-31	6	35.4	—
LOS PINOS RIVER (3101900) DWR↗	1984-07-13	1	32.0	—
PINE R WEMINUCHE PASS D (3104638) DWR↗	1934-10-11	3	18.0	—
DRY CREEK DITCH (3100660) DWR↗	1900-12-31	1	15.4	—
LA BOCA DITCH (3100507) DWR↗	1868-07-25	1	14.3	yes
BEAR CREEK AND PINE RIVER DITCH (3100514) DWR↗	1878-05-01	1	14.0	—

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

Water-court filings this month (division-wide)

4 applications in the 2026-07 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 2026-09-30 (30 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 4 filings, with excerpts

Case	What it asks	County	Excerpt
`2026CW3007` 3001335	change of water right	LA PLATA	2026CW3007 La Plata County, AMENDED APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF WATER RIGHT AND NEW WATER RIGHTS. 1. Name and address of Applicants : Gilleland Enterprises, LLC and C&J Gravel Products, Inc. (“Applicants”)c/o John Gilleland 27661 Highway 160 Durango, CO 81301 jo…
`2026CW3016`	reasonable diligence	LA PLATA	2026CW3016 La Plata County, Application for Finding of Reasonable Diligence in the Florida River Watershed; Prior case no. 18CW3047: Applicant: The Bingel-Davis Gratitude Trust, u/a dated April 17, 2025, c/o Kimberly C. Perdue, Southwest Water and Property Law…
`2026CW3017`	—	LA PLATA	2026CW3017 La Plata County, (20CW3008, 13CW3027, 05CW90)…
`2026CW4`	—	ARCHULETA	2026CW4 Archuleta County, Jess E. Ketchum, 320 Stevens Lake Road, Pagosa Springs, CO 81147: Watson Reservoir (Reservoir Pump); Located in the SW 1/4 SE 1/4 of Section 5, T35N, R2W, NMPM, the axis intersects the East abutment at a point approximately 875 ft. No…

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
NORTHERN SAN JUAN BASIN FRUITLAND FORMATION PINE RIVER (10CW6)	37-92-308(4) PLAN PENDING COURT APPLICATION	Pending	—	—	plan file

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

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

Pick a calling right

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

Or enter an administration number directly

Administration number

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