Disappointment Creek Basin

Division 7 · Water District 69

Draft - NLDI/CDSS verified

Bootstrap review report — d7_wd69_disappointment_creek_basin

Generated 2026-08-17 09:00 UTC for Division 7 / Water District 69.

This is a review checklist, not a finished config. Everything below is a suggestion from live DWR data — confirm or correct each section in config.yaml before running this basin for real.

1. Stream-name patterns

Assumed mainstem pattern: DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (highest-count waterSource value). Candidates below by structure count — decide which are real tributaries worth their own centerline vs. noise, and add them to longitudinal.tributary_stream_patterns in priority order (more-specific names, e.g. "WEST FORK X", must precede substrings of themselves, e.g. "X").

waterSource	structure count
DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (assumed mainstem)	14
MORRISON CREEK	7

2. Diversion / return classification

Auto-classified from structureType + name patterns: 29 diversions, 0 returns, 1 unclassified (neither pattern matched — these render as neither on the schematic unless added to return_flow_wdids/force_diversion_wdids or a type is added to the diversion/return type lists).

This layer needs the least manual work — it's the same heuristic the engine uses at runtime. Spot-check a sample rather than reviewing every row; if you have a water-year accounting spreadsheet for this basin, cross-reference it against the 'other' bucket specifically (that's where a real augmentation return with an unusual DWR structureType will hide).

2b. Cross-checked against decreed water rights (CDSS)

1 structure(s) have a decreed water right (CDSS waterrights/netamount) that disagrees with the structureType/name-pattern classification above. Same-agency evidence (DWR/HydroBase), not independent of DWR the way the NLDI topology check is — worth a glance, not an automatic correction.

wdid	structure	currently	decreed uses suggest	decreed uses
6905000	JOES WELL	other	diversion	Domestic, Irrigation, Stock

3. Suspected nested tributaries

None flagged — every tributary candidate is clearly closer to the mainstem than to any other tributary.

4. Gage placement risk

None — every gage with a resolvable position is within the placement cutoff.

2 more gage(s) pass but are within 2x the cutoff distance — worth a glance if the structure dataset changes later.

Next steps

Fill in tributary_stream_patterns from section 1.
Resolve section 3's flags (or confirm none apply).
Resolve section 4's at-risk gages.
Cross-reference return_flow_wdids/force_diversion_wdids against any local accounting source you have for this basin.
Review the rendered schematic for this district before relying on it.

Reconstruct conditions as of

Evolution of the network

Computed 2026-08-20 09:39 from 2 gage(s) with cached period-of-record data. Statistical tests (Mann-Kendall trend, Pettitt changepoint) require at least 8 years spanning at least 10 years of record -- gages below that report no signal, not "no change."

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_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 14569 day(s) old (target 7)
diversion record	expected-lag	newest diversion record is 301 day(s) old (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears)
structure coverage	sparse	28% of schematic structures have data

Independent check: PASS — 100.0000% agreement across 87,070 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 — 100.00% day-level agreement with USGS's own published records for the same gages, across 2 co-listed station(s) and 11,961 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.

2 gage(s) / 12,601 daily values (1942-10-01–1986-09-30); 34 structure(s) with diversion records; 55 with decreed rights. Methodology has not yet had independent expert review — treat every figure as an advisory screen, not an administrative or legal conclusion.

Read this first: the measurement network itself evolved

This basin was not always measured the way it is today — the API-era record is dense and recent, the early record sparse. 0 gage(s) and 15 structure(s) report in 2025, 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)
1940s	1	0
1950s	1	10
1960s	1	11
1970s	1	20
1980s	1	22
1990s	0	20
2000s	0	18
2010s	0	16
2020s	0	15

Gage flow trend & changepoints

Every located gage with a period of record — dot size scales with the strength of its flow trend (|Sen slope| in %/decade, the same statistic as the table below), color with direction. An amber ring marks a detected Pettitt changepoint. Click a gage to chart its trend and shift.

Gage	Trend	Change / decade	Significance	Years	Changepoint
▸ DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK NEAR DOVE CREEK, CO. DISDOVCO	↑ increasing	+68.6%	p=0.005	29	~1978

1 other gage(s) show no significant trend or changepoint (not shown).

Mass-balance (network closure) trend

Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 28% of 50 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 (–)

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: 3 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.

Reservoirs now has its own tab: 5 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.

The basin's aquifer story, from 6 water-level measurements across 3 monitored well(s) (3 alluvial, 0 bedrock, rest unclassified) — plus 0 administered well(s) reporting metered pumping through diversion records. Observation wells and pumping wells are different populations and are never conflated. Click a well to chart its record.

Well map

Every monitored well with a location — hover for identity, click to chart its water-level record below. ● alluvial ● bedrock / confined (Denver Basin, High Plains, etc. — one-way, no human-timescale recharge) ● unclassified — marker size scales with the strength of the well's water-level trend (|Sen slope| in ft/decade — the same Mann-Kendall/Sen statistic as the trends table below); the smallest, faintest dots have too little record to test.

3D aquifer x-ray

Every aquifer unit as its own 3D head surface — alluvial water table on top, Denver Basin members (Dawson, Denver, Arapahoe, Laramie–Fox Hills) stacked beneath where measured — interpolated from measured water levels and animated through time. Units are never mixed; surfaces exist only inside each unit's well coverage (no extrapolation); thin epochs are suppressed with their reason shown. Vertical scale exaggerated for readability; z is head elevation in feet. Advisory — measured heads, not a calibrated 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.

5 reservoir(s) with 1,502 storage measurement(s), 1975–2026. Basin storage as of 2025-10-23 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 293 AF across 5 reservoir(s). 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?

Each reservoir drawn as a vessel: bubble size ∝ its record-high storage, fill level = 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 of its own record high otherwise (a wrong capacity would be worse than an honest record high, so only confident joins upgrade). Hover for numbers, click to chart its history below the map. A dashed teal ring marks reservoirs reporting live DWR telemetry — their fill reflects yesterday's storage, drawn as a dotted tail on charts and treated as provisional until the next verified HydroBase snapshot supersedes it. ● <25% ● 25–60% ● 60–90% ● >90%

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 reservoir to chart its full storage history.

Reservoir	Last recorded storage (AF)	As of
▸ BELMAR RESERVOIR (6903529)	177	2025-10-23
▸ MORRISON RESERVOIR (6903532)	67	2025-10-23
▸ DUNHAM RESERVOIR (6903530)	29	2025-10-23
▸ GARNER RESERVOIR (6903531)	17	2025-10-23
▸ NORTH DRAW RESERVOIR (6903533)	3	2025-10-23

Decrees, seniority, and administrative calls connected to this basin's flow network. Advisory reading aids on public DWR data — not administrative or legal conclusions. Rights on file: 74 across 55 structure(s); 0 structure(s) carry 0 court-case references.

Abandonment radar (15 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).

SOUTHSIDE DITCH (6900523) (1902-04-30, 0.3 cfs decreed): last active 1974 — 51 years idle
NORTH DRAW DITCH (6900518) (1938-08-01, 4.0 cfs decreed): last active 1988 — 37 years idle
NORTHSIDE DITCH (6900519) (1893-06-30, 0.2 cfs decreed): last active 2003 — 22 years idle
DORA DITCH (6900532) (1982-08-11, 2.0 cfs decreed): last active 2004 — 21 years idle
MELVIN A WASTE-WATER D (6900514) (1938-04-01, 1.5 cfs decreed): last active 2005 — 20 years idle
DISAPPOINTMENT DITCH (6900503) (1886-03-06, 19.9 cfs decreed): last active 2006 — 19 years idle
HENRY M KNIGHT DITCH (6900508) (1883-03-01, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 2006 — 19 years idle
DUNHAM RESERVOIR (6903530) (1966-07-14, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 2008 — 17 years idle
GARNER RESERVOIR (6903531) (1960-06-23, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 2008 — 17 years idle
NORTH DRAW RESERVOIR (6903533) (1938-08-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 2008 — 17 years idle

Compliance screens (12 advisory flags)

Screened 20 of 55 structures with rights (27 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.

HORSESHOE DITCH (6900510): Observed p99 daily rate 19.0 cfs (max 22.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 15.0 cfs across 11445 recorded day(s).
PINE ARROYA DITCH (6900520): Observed p99 daily rate 12.0 cfs (max 12.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.1 cfs across 8606 recorded day(s).
YOUNG DITCH (6900527): Observed p99 daily rate 9.0 cfs (max 10.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 4.0 cfs across 7058 recorded day(s).
KNIGHT-EMBLING DITCH (6900512): Observed p99 daily rate 8.0 cfs (max 9.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 7.4 cfs across 20645 recorded day(s).
JOHNSON AND DAVIS DITCH (6900511): Observed p99 daily rate 6.0 cfs (max 6.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 1.3 cfs across 1708 recorded day(s).
EVANS DITCH (6900504): Observed p99 daily rate 5.5 cfs (max 6.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 3.8 cfs across 7830 recorded day(s).
HENRY M KNIGHT DITCH (6900508): Observed p99 daily rate 3.0 cfs (max 3.8) exceeds total decreed absolute 1.0 cfs across 4823 recorded day(s).
DORA DITCH (6900532): Observed p99 daily rate 2.7 cfs (max 2.7) exceeds total decreed absolute 2.0 cfs across 946 recorded day(s).
CLARK DITCH (6900501): Observed p99 daily rate 2.5 cfs (max 3.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 1.2 cfs across 7587 recorded day(s).
YOUNG DITCH NO 2 (6900528): Observed p99 daily rate 1.8 cfs (max 5.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 0.5 cfs across 9466 recorded day(s).

Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)

Structure	Senior priority date	Rights	Decreed abs (cfs)	Conditional?
DISAPPOINTMENT DITCH (6900503)	1886-03-06	3	19.9	—
HORSESHOE DITCH (6900510)	1908-01-25	1	15.0	—
DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (UP (6901900)	2019-09-18	1	14.0	—
MORRISON DITCH (6900515)	1960-08-24	1	13.4	—
DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (LO (6901901)	2019-09-18	1	9.8	—
KNIGHT-EMBLING DITCH (6900512)	1885-05-30	6	7.4	—
GARNER DITCH (6900506)	1960-06-23	1	6.8	—
PINE ARROYA DITCH (6900520)	1883-06-21	3	6.1	—
DAWSON-HAMMOND DITCH (6900502)	1885-06-30	3	5.5	—
NORTH DRAW DITCH (6900518)	1938-08-01	1	4.0	—
YOUNG DITCH (6900527)	1912-04-01	1	4.0	—
EVANS DITCH (6900504)	1915-06-20	3	3.8	yes
THOMAS DITCH (6900525)	1923-06-01	1	2.5	—
MELVIN A IRR DITCH (6900513)	1938-04-01	1	2.2	—
DORA DITCH (6900532)	1982-08-11	1	2.0	—

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

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.