Hydrohistorian
Disappointment Creek Basin on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 69 · clicktap anything for its record
Browse this district’s ditches, gages, reservoirs, wells and springs as a list.
The Disappointment Creek is near normal for late September -- 97% of normal flow, its 2nd-wettest such week in 30 years of record. 17 calls stand against it right now; the most senior right calling dates to 1876.
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.
Schematic
Historical
Evolution of the network
Trends
This year, in context
In the weeks around 1986-09-30 (the newest reading on file), flows at the 1 ranked gage are running at a median 494% of their own long-term norm for this window — 0 below a typical year, 1 at or above. Driest relative to its record: DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK NEAR DOVE CREEK, CO., ranking 25th lowest of 30 years.
How this comparison is made
Each gage's mean flow over the 3 days either side of 1986-09-30, 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 2026-08-30 21:20 from 2 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 2 gages with enough record, 0 are trending down and 1 up. The clearest is Disappointment Creek near Dove Creek, its annual mean flow changing +7.00 cfs per decade (+46.3% of its median annual flow) over 28 years (p=0.0256). The other 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
▸
Disappointment Creek near Dove Creek DISDOVCO |
↑ increasing | +7.00 cfs +46.3% | p=0.026 | 28 | — |
1 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. 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 |
Mass-balance (network closure) trend
Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 33% of 57 schematic-relevant structures. 7 year(s) clear the 30% coverage gate so far (1994–2001) -- 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.
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 14579 day(s) old (target 7) |
| diversion record | expected-lag | newest diversion record is 312 day(s) old (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears) |
| structure coverage | sparse | 33% 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.
Groundwater
6 water-level measurements across 3 monitored well(s) — 3 alluvial, 0 bedrock — plus 0 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.
Reservoirs
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).
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) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ▸ BELMAR RESERVOIR (6903529) | 177 | 2025-10-23 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ MORRISON RESERVOIR (6903532) | 67 | 2025-10-23 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ DUNHAM RESERVOIR (6903530) | 29 | 2025-10-23 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ GARNER RESERVOIR (6903531) | 17 | 2025-10-23 | — | — | dossier → |
| ▸ NORTH DRAW RESERVOIR (6903533) | 3 | 2025-10-23 | — | — | dossier → |
Drought
Right now
This is the 29th-driest week 39 in 30 years of record at DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK NEAR DOVE CREEK, CO. (as of 1986-09-22; this week’s flow sits at the 97th percentile for the date). On this week’s US Drought Monitor, Dolores County is 75% in D2 severe drought (2026-09-01).
Every year since 1957, week by week
Each thin row is a year at DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK NEAR DOVE CREEK, 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 Dolores, San Miguel 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.
This basin’s droughts, by its own record
| Drought | Span | Weeks | Trough percentile | Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| unnamed dry spell | 1978-11-20 → 1979-04-30 | 23 | 15th (1979-01-08) | 0 weeks |
| the 1977 drought | 1977-01-17 → 1977-12-19 | 48 | 3rd (1977-05-30) | 27 weeks |
| unnamed dry spell | 1972-07-24 → 1972-12-11 | 20 | 23rd (1972-09-11) | 0 weeks |
| unnamed dry spell | 1969-01-27 → 1969-06-23 | 21 | 17th (1969-03-10) | 8 weeks |
| unnamed dry spell | 1968-02-05 → 1968-07-22 | 24 | 23rd (1968-03-18) | 56 weeks |
| the 1963-64 drought | 1964-01-20 → 1964-09-21 | 35 | 15th (1964-03-23) | 38 weeks |
| unnamed dry spell | 1960-10-24 → 1961-09-25 | 48 | 24th (1961-02-06) | 5 weeks |
| unnamed dry spell | 1959-05-18 → 1959-12-07 | 29 | 23rd (1959-07-20) | 99 weeks |
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 $4,167,411 in drought-caused claims across Dolores, San Miguel counties — 24.2% of all insured crop losses there. The worst year was 2002 ($542,259).
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.
Legal
Decreed rights on this network run from 1883-03-01 to 2019-09-18. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 4% of a median irrigation season and 0% in a dry one. 15 abandonment screens and 12 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: 74 across 55 structure(s); 0 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 | 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.
- CLARK DITCH (6900501) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-25 (59+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- KNIGHT-EMBLING DITCH (6900512) DWR↗ stopped 2025-07-14 (101+ days) — call at CONLEY DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- EVANS DITCH (6900504) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-17 (128+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- HORSESHOE DITCH (6900510) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-17 (128+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- YOUNG DITCH (6900527) DWR↗ stopped 2025-06-17 (128+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- CLARK DITCH (6900501) DWR↗ stopped 2024-08-27 (294+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- KNIGHT-EMBLING DITCH (6900512) DWR↗ stopped 2024-07-22 (56+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- MELVIN A IRR DITCH (6900513) DWR↗ stopped 2024-07-15 (465+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- YOUNG DITCH (6900527) DWR↗ stopped 2024-07-15 (302+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- EVANS DITCH (6900504) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-24 (323+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- HORSESHOE DITCH (6900510) DWR↗ stopped 2024-06-24 (323+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
- YOUNG DITCH NO 2 AP (6900545) DWR↗ stopped 2024-05-27 (514+ days) — call at CARPENTER AND MITCHELL D [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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| DISAPPOINTMENT DITCH (6900503) DWR↗ | 1886-03-06 | 23.3% / 2.8% | 4.4% / 0.0% |
| HORSESHOE DITCH (6900510) DWR↗ | 1908-01-25 | 4.4% / 0.0% | 4.4% / 0.0% |
| DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (UP (6901900) DWR↗ | 2019-09-18 | 1.8% / 0.0% | 1.8% / 0.0% |
| MORRISON DITCH (6900515) DWR↗ | 1960-08-24 | 2.3% / 0.0% | 2.3% / 0.0% |
| DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (LO (6901901) DWR↗ | 2019-09-18 | 1.8% / 0.0% | 1.8% / 0.0% |
| KNIGHT-EMBLING DITCH (6900512) DWR↗ | 1885-05-30 | 23.3% / 2.8% | 2.3% / 0.0% |
| GARNER DITCH (6900506) DWR↗ | 1960-06-23 | 2.3% / 0.0% | 2.3% / 0.0% |
| PINE ARROYA DITCH (6900520) DWR↗ | 1883-06-21 | 23.3% / 2.8% | 4.4% / 0.0% |
| DAWSON-HAMMOND DITCH (6900502) DWR↗ | 1885-06-30 | 23.3% / 2.8% | 4.4% / 0.0% |
| YOUNG DITCH (6900527) DWR↗ | 1912-04-01 | 4.4% / 0.0% | 4.4% / 0.0% |
| NORTH DRAW DITCH (6900518) DWR↗ | 1938-08-01 | 2.3% / 0.0% | 2.3% / 0.0% |
| EVANS DITCH (6900504) DWR↗ | 1915-06-20 | 4.4% / 0.0% | 1.8% / 0.0% |
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) DWR↗ (1902-04-30, 0.3 cfs decreed): last active 1974 — 51 years idle
- NORTH DRAW DITCH (6900518) DWR↗ (1938-08-01, 4.0 cfs decreed): last active 1988 — 37 years idle
- NORTHSIDE DITCH (6900519) DWR↗ (1893-06-30, 0.2 cfs decreed): last active 2003 — 22 years idle
- DORA DITCH (6900532) DWR↗ (1982-08-11, 2.0 cfs decreed): last active 2004 — 21 years idle
- MELVIN A WASTE-WATER D (6900514) DWR↗ (1938-04-01, 1.5 cfs decreed): last active 2005 — 20 years idle
- DISAPPOINTMENT DITCH (6900503) DWR↗ (1886-03-06, 19.9 cfs decreed): last active 2006 — 19 years idle
- HENRY M KNIGHT DITCH (6900508) DWR↗ (1883-03-01, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 2006 — 19 years idle
- DUNHAM RESERVOIR (6903530) DWR↗ (1966-07-14, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 2008 — 17 years idle
- GARNER RESERVOIR (6903531) DWR↗ (1960-06-23, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 2008 — 17 years idle
- NORTH DRAW RESERVOIR (6903533) DWR↗ (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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) DWR↗: 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) | Decreed abs (AF) | Conditional? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DISAPPOINTMENT DITCH (6900503) DWR↗ | 1886-03-06 | 3 | 19.9 | 0 | — |
| HORSESHOE DITCH (6900510) DWR↗ | 1908-01-25 | 1 | 15.0 | 0 | — |
| DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (UP (6901900) DWR↗ | 2019-09-18 | 1 | 14.0 | 0 | — |
| MORRISON DITCH (6900515) DWR↗ | 1960-08-24 | 1 | 13.4 | 0 | — |
| DISAPPOINTMENT CREEK (LO (6901901) DWR↗ | 2019-09-18 | 1 | 9.8 | 0 | — |
| KNIGHT-EMBLING DITCH (6900512) DWR↗ | 1885-05-30 | 6 | 7.4 | 0 | — |
| GARNER DITCH (6900506) DWR↗ | 1960-06-23 | 1 | 6.8 | 0 | — |
| PINE ARROYA DITCH (6900520) DWR↗ | 1883-06-21 | 3 | 6.1 | 0 | — |
| DAWSON-HAMMOND DITCH (6900502) DWR↗ | 1885-06-30 | 3 | 5.5 | 0 | — |
| NORTH DRAW DITCH (6900518) DWR↗ | 1938-08-01 | 1 | 4.0 | 0 | — |
| YOUNG DITCH (6900527) DWR↗ | 1912-04-01 | 1 | 4.0 | 0 | — |
| EVANS DITCH (6900504) DWR↗ | 1915-06-20 | 3 | 3.8 | 0 | yes |
| THOMAS DITCH (6900525) DWR↗ | 1923-06-01 | 1 | 2.5 | 0 | — |
| MELVIN A IRR DITCH (6900513) DWR↗ | 1938-04-01 | 1 | 2.2 | 0 | — |
| DORA DITCH (6900532) DWR↗ | 1982-08-11 | 1 | 2.0 | 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 (25 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… |
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.
Topology cross-check: 0 parent disagreements, 8 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 1 streams, 1 agree. Know this water? Tell us →
Sizable streams DWR maps here that this network does not carry:
Spring Creek (17 mi) · Ryman Creek (12 mi) · Hunt Creek (8 mi) · McKinney Draw (7 mi) · Pine Arroyo (6 mi) · Rabbit Creek (6 mi) · Bear Creek (5 mi) · Dugout Wash (4 mi)