Navajo River Basin

Division 7 · Water District 77

Auto-mapped

Navajo River Basin on the ground — the ditches, wells, reservoirs and gages of Water District 77 · clicktap anything for its record

Runoff outlook — Navajo R bl Oso Diversion : even odds of at least 7 kAF over 06-01 to 07-31 — 28% 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

Navajo R bl Oso Diversion — 06-01 to 07-31 volume, thousand acre-feet (chance the volume is AT LEAST this):

90%	70%	50%	30%	10%	Normal
4	6	7	10	14	25

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: 4 parent disagreements, 11 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 6 streams, 2 agree. Know this water? Tell us →

Stream	This site routes it to	DWR routes it to
Seguro Canyon	the mainstem	nan
Spring Creek	the mainstem	Little Navajo River
Coyote Creek	the mainstem	nan
Archuleta Creek	the mainstem	Coyote Creek

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

Beaver Creek (5 mi) · Fall Creek (5 mi) · Brooks Creek (4 mi) · Iron Creek (4 mi) · Sheep Creek (4 mi) · Headache Creek (4 mi) · Augustora Creek (4 mi) · Villareal Canyon (3 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 5 ranked gages are running at a median 24% of their own long-term norm for this window — 5 below a typical year, 0 at or above. Driest relative to its record: AZOTEA TUNNEL OUTLET NEAR CHAMA, NM, ranking 1st lowest of 41 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 21:21 from 11 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 11 gages with enough record, 3 are trending down and 0 up, and 3 carry a detected shift. The clearest is Navajo River at Edith, its annual mean flow changing -15.84 cfs per decade (-14.5% of its median annual flow) over 66 years (p<0.0001). The other 6 show no clear signal either way. 1 transbasin gage meters imported or exported water — marked ⇆ below and kept out of these counts, because that flow is an operator's decision, not the basin's hydrology (all transbasin diversions).

Gage	Trend	Change / decade cfs · % of median annual flow	Significance	Years	Changepoint
▸ Navajo River at Edith NAVEDICO	↓ decreasing	-15.84 cfs -14.5%	p<0.001	66	~1970
▸ Navajo River below Oso Diversion Dam near Chromo NAVOSOCO	↓ decreasing	-2.45 cfs -4.9%	p=0.034	55	~1998
▸ ⇆ Little Oso Diversion near Chromo LOSODVCO	↓ decreasing	-0.79 cfs -35.2%	p=0.036	32	—
▸ Little Navajo River at Chromo LITTRACO	↓ decreasing	-7.35 cfs -65.3%	p=0.043	16	—
▸ Little Navajo River below L Oso Div Dam, near Chromo LITNACCO	no clear trend	+2.33 cfs +29.9%	p=0.077	24	~1981

6 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 68 structure(s) report in 2026, but structure reporting only reached half its modern level around ~1969. 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)
1910s	1	0
1920s	1	0
1930s	4	0
1940s	3	0
1950s	3	0
1960s	3	28
1970s	4	61
1980s	4	66
1990s	6	74
2000s	6	78
2010s	6	71
2020s	7	60

Mass-balance (network closure) trend

Structure divrec-history backfill coverage as of the last check: 33% of 230 schematic-relevant structures. Kink count trend: no_trend (p=0.118), kink magnitude trend: no_trend (p=0.129) across 28 qualifying year(s).

Reach gain/loss shifts (1950–2026)

Mass-balance kinks computed for every summer month back to 1950 (789 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.

NAVAJO RIVER AT EDITH, CO.: reach shifted from +33 cfs to +7 cfs summer mean (more losing, p=0.038, 45 yr) [alluvial valley: real alluvial aquifer -- a decades-long shift toward losing is the classic signature of alluvial pumping and urbanization]

Groundwater now has its own tab: 4 monitored well(s), water-table trends, stream corridors, and the advisory depletion screen.

Reservoirs now has its own tab: 17 reservoir(s), end-of-year storage back to 1969, click-to-chart histories.

Cross-gage pattern fingerprint

Over the 30-year window with full coverage (1997–2026), the dominant shared pattern across 3 gage(s) explains 95% 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.

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	33% of schematic structures have data

Independent check: PASS — 100.0000% agreement across 143,293 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 6 co-listed station(s) and 78,459 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.

11 gage(s) / 152,212 daily values (1912-10-01–2026-07-06); 113 structure(s) with diversion records; 187 with decreed rights. Methodology has not yet had independent expert review — treat every figure as an advisory screen, not an administrative or legal conclusion.

9 water-level measurements across 4 monitored well(s) — 2 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 0 well(s) with enough record for a trend test: 0 declining, 0 rising.

Stream corridors — the surface connection

Where a reach's gain or loss has shifted, the wells within two miles of its anchoring gage and what their water table did over the same era.

How the corridor is assembled

For each reach whose gain/loss has shifted (Trends tab): the wells within 2 miles of its anchoring gage, their pooled water-table history over the same era, and an advisory Glover screen of lagged stream depletion from nearby metered pumping. v1 proximity = distance to the reach's anchoring gage; segment-based reach join is a flagged upgrade.

NAVAJO RIVER AT EDITH, CO.: 1 alluvial well(s) nearby

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.

17 reservoir(s) with 1,166 storage measurement(s), 1969–2025. Basin storage as of 2025-09-01 (the record's own end — reservoir records publish ~annually): 30 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)
▸ GOMEZ RESERVOIR (7703699)	38	2011-10-26	—	—	dossier →
▸ SPENCE RESERVOIR (7703512)	20	2025-09-01	—	—	dossier →
▸ GARDNER LAKE RESERVOIR (7703505)	15	2011-10-24	—	—	dossier →
▸ THREE LAKES RES NO 3 (7703515)	10	1984-10-24	—	—	dossier →
▸ SAPPINGTON RESERVOIR (7703696)	10	2025-09-01	—	—	dossier →
▸ KRUGER RESERVOIR NO 2 (7703510)	9	1975-10-01	—	—	dossier →
▸ THREE LAKES RES NO 2 (7703514)	8	1975-10-01	—	—	dossier →
▸ MUDDY CREEK RESERVOIR (7703511)	8	1975-10-01	—	—	dossier →

Snow-water equivalent, WY2026

SNOTEL site	Elev (ft)	SWE (in)	Median (in)	% of median	Typical peak

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.

Runoff outlook — Navajo R bl Oso Diversion

NRCS's final issue (2026-06-01) calls it even odds that at least 7 kAF arrives over 06-01 to 07-31 — 28% of a normal season; almost certainly at least 4, probably not more than 14. Our own record at this gage shows 3 kAF actually delivered (partial record: 36 of 61 days). 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	Observed
4	6	7	10	14	25	3

How good are these forecasts here? (1993–2025)

Grading every April issue against what the river then delivered, measured at this gage’s own record — 32 seasons: the median miss of the 50% forecast is 211%, with a high bias of 211%, and the observed volume landed inside the stated 10–90% band 6% 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 →

Decreed rights on this network run from 1868-03-02 to 2021-06-16. Of the 20 structures with a yield estimate, the median one’s senior right was in priority 2% of a median irrigation season and 0% in a dry one. 13 abandonment screens and 59 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: 241 across 187 structure(s); 95 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.

ENTERPRISE DITCH (7700531) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-26 (35+ days) — call at SPRING CREEK DITCH curtailing 60% of its decreed rate [heuristic-partial]
NEW BOND HOUSE D(BEAVER) (7700502) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-14 (47+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
HIDDEN LAKE DITCH (7700544) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-14 (47+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
LITTLE MUDDY CREEK DITCH (7700554) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-14 (47+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
MONTOYA DITCH (7700560) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-14 (47+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
MUDDY CREEK DITCH (7700561) DWR↗ stopped 2025-09-07 (54+ days) — call at SPRING CREEK DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
ARCHULETA DITCH (7700500) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-31 (61+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
NAVAJO MEADOW DITCH (7700562) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-31 (61+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
NAVAJO MILL & IRG DITCH (7700563) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-31 (61+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
NAVAJO RIVER DITCH (7700564) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-31 (61+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
BRAMWELL IRR DITCH (7700509) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-30 (62+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN DITCH curtailing 100% of its decreed rate [heuristic-strong]
ELMER DITCH NO 1 (7700529) DWR↗ stopped 2025-08-30 (62+ days) — call at HENRY BOLEN 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
NAVAJO RIVER MIN FLOW (7702005) DWR↗	1974-12-04	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
NEW BOND HOUSE D(NAVAJO) (7700597) DWR↗	1966-10-05	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
EAKLOR DITCH (7700524) DWR↗	1889-05-27	29.2% / 11.7%	2.3% / 0.0%
ENTERPRISE DITCH (7700531) DWR↗	1891-05-01	23.3% / 2.8%	1.8% / 0.0%
SOUTH SIDE DITCH (7700579) DWR↗	1915-06-15	4.4% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
MIDLAND DITCH (7700559) DWR↗	1884-06-30	41.4% / 18.2%	2.3% / 0.0%
EAST FORK DITCH (7700527) DWR↗	1966-10-05	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
UPPER CAMP DITCH (7700587) DWR↗	1966-10-05	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
ELMER DITCH NO 1 (7700529) DWR↗	1882-12-31	48.4% / 18.2%	2.3% / 0.0%
LITTLE MUDDY CREEK DITCH (7700554) DWR↗	1966-10-05	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
THREE LAKES INLET DITCH (7700583) DWR↗	1966-10-05	2.3% / 0.0%	2.3% / 0.0%
FITZHUGH DITCH (7700536) DWR↗	1888-06-21	30.1% / 11.7%	2.3% / 0.0%

Abandonment radar (13 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 ~1969 — idleness that begins before then may be unreported use, not nonuse (flagged † below).

BOND HOUSE DITCH (7700508) DWR↗ (1896-05-31, 0.8 cfs decreed): last active 1970 — 55 years idle
HAVENS PIPELINE (7700541) DWR↗ (1946-06-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1974 — 51 years idle
OSTERHOUDT PUMPING STATIONS (7700566) DWR↗ (1945-06-15, 0.2 cfs decreed): last active 1974 — 51 years idle
MUDDY CREEK RESERVOIR (7703511) DWR↗ (1956-07-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1974 — 51 years idle
I R CROWLEY ART WELL NO3 (7705001) DWR↗ (1944-08-01, 0.5 cfs decreed): last active 1976 — 49 years idle
BEAVER CREEK RESERVOIR (7703690) DWR↗ (1949-07-01, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1981 — 44 years idle
OLEN W CROWLEY ART WELL (7705004) DWR↗ (1951-10-08, 1.0 cfs decreed): last active 1981 — 44 years idle
I R CROWLEY ART WELL SYS (7705000) DWR↗ (1932-08-01, 0.5 cfs decreed): last active 1985 — 40 years idle
SPENCE RESERVOIR (7703512) DWR↗ (1963-07-06, 0.0 cfs decreed): last active 1987 — 38 years idle
NO 4 GRAHAM-A C FITZHUGH (7700565) DWR↗ (1914-05-01, 4.0 cfs decreed): last active 1989 — 36 years idle

Compliance screens (59 advisory flags)

Screened 78 of 187 structures with rights (88 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.

ENTERPRISE DITCH (7700531) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 34.1 cfs (max 38.1) exceeds total decreed absolute 24.0 cfs across 18607 recorded day(s).
SOUTH SIDE DITCH (7700579) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 24.0 cfs (max 29.5) exceeds total decreed absolute 21.1 cfs across 15418 recorded day(s).
NAVAJO MEADOW DITCH (7700562) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 21.6 cfs (max 23.4) exceeds total decreed absolute 6.0 cfs across 8412 recorded day(s).
NAVAJO RIVER DITCH (7700564) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 19.9 cfs (max 23.4) exceeds total decreed absolute 7.5 cfs across 9399 recorded day(s).
LITTLE MUDDY CREEK DITCH (7700554) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 18.2 cfs (max 21.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 15.0 cfs across 7376 recorded day(s).
ELMER DITCH NO 1 (7700529) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 16.4 cfs (max 18.8) exceeds total decreed absolute 15.0 cfs across 21486 recorded day(s).
BOND HOUSE DITCH (7700508) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 16.0 cfs (max 16.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 0.8 cfs across 294 recorded day(s).
THREE LAKES INLET DITCH (7700583) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 15.6 cfs (max 23.8) exceeds total decreed absolute 15.0 cfs across 19862 recorded day(s).
EAST FORK DITCH (7700527) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 15.2 cfs (max 21.6) exceeds total decreed absolute 15.0 cfs across 13598 recorded day(s).
UPPER CAMP DITCH (7700587) DWR↗: Observed p99 daily rate 15.2 cfs (max 19.0) exceeds total decreed absolute 15.0 cfs across 15560 recorded day(s).

Seniority (top structures by decreed rate)

Structure	Senior priority date	Rights	Decreed abs (cfs)	Conditional?
NAVAJO RIVER MIN FLOW (7702005) DWR↗	1974-12-04	1	55.0	—
NEW BOND HOUSE D(NAVAJO) (7700597) DWR↗	1966-10-05	1	35.0	yes
EAKLOR DITCH (7700524) DWR↗	1889-05-27	3	34.3	—
ENTERPRISE DITCH (7700531) DWR↗	1891-05-01	6	24.0	yes
SOUTH SIDE DITCH (7700579) DWR↗	1915-06-15	2	21.1	—
MIDLAND DITCH (7700559) DWR↗	1884-06-30	5	19.2	—
EAST FORK DITCH (7700527) DWR↗	1966-10-05	1	15.0	—
ELMER DITCH NO 1 (7700529) DWR↗	1882-12-31	8	15.0	—
LITTLE MUDDY CREEK DITCH (7700554) DWR↗	1966-10-05	1	15.0	—
THREE LAKES INLET DITCH (7700583) DWR↗	1966-10-05	1	15.0	—
UPPER CAMP DITCH (7700587) DWR↗	1966-10-05	1	15.0	—
FITZHUGH DITCH (7700536) DWR↗	1888-06-21	6	13.0	—
WEST RANCH CREEK DITCH (7700592) DWR↗	1916-06-23	2	11.0	—
HEADACHE CREEK DITCH (7700542) DWR↗	1966-10-05	1	10.0	yes
SPRING GULCH DITCH (7700581) DWR↗	1914-12-31	1	10.0	—

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…

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.