Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HORSE CREEK RES
Structure dossier · WDID 0103592 · 3 · HORSE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:51 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — every figure regenerates from this named code version and data image.
Where it sits
Location as DWR records it. Faint dots are the neighbouring water; click any to open it.
Which of its rights are out of priority?
Not computable for this structure: this structure is not on the modelled flow network, so no reference gage can honestly stand in for it.
Where it sits in line
Priority 1911-03-17 — 569th most senior of the 7705 structures with decreed rights in this water districtDWR's administrative subdivision of a river basin; the unit calls are usually stated in..
Under prior appropriationColorado's rule for sharing water: first in time, first in right. Age decides, not proximity or need., everything ahead of it in this line is satisfied in full before it receives any water. Immediately ahead: WILLIAMS WELL 45993 (1910-12-31). Immediately behind: HANSEN WELL NO 16368 (1911-07-11).
Decreed rights (4)
| Admin noDWR's numeric encoding of a water right's seniority. Smaller is more senior; the integer part counts days from 1849-12-31 to the date that ranks the right. | AppropriatedWhen water was first put to beneficial use. It sets seniority unless a prior adjudication date is later. | AdjudicatedWhen the water court confirmed the right. A use decreed in 1975 was not a decreed use in 1955, however old the appropriation is. | AbsoluteA right actually put to use, as opposed to conditional -- a placeholder for a use not yet made. | ConditionalA right reserving a place in line for a use not yet made; it must be diligently pursued or it lapses. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22355.0 | 1911-03-17 | 1918-08-02 | 16965.1 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 26302.21292 | 1908-04-18 | 1936-01-13 | 729.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 26498.0 | 1922-07-20 | 1924-11-12 | 0.0 | 2550.0 | A | IRR | |
| 55668.0 | 2002-05-31 | 2002-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
12CW0306, 02CW0105A, CA8492, CA54658.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
12CW0306 | 1 | 2002-12-31 | O |
02CW0105A | 1 | 2002-12-31 | O |
CA8492 | 1 | 1936-01-13 | S |
CA54658 | 4 | 1924-11-12 | S |
DWR's own records for this structure: net amounts · transactions & adjudication history · scanned decrees (search a case number there for the imaged document). On this site: the district's full legal picture →
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 16,932 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 37,916 AF — 224% of that, and 10th lowest of the 12 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| Year | Diverted (AFA volume: one acre covered a foot deep, about 326,000 gallons -- roughly a suburban household's outdoor use for a year.) | Compared with its own record | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | — | no recorded volume | 38,573 | 0 | — |
| 2010 | — | no recorded volume | 35,211 | 0 | — |
| 2011 | — | no recorded volume | 25,129 | 0 | — |
| 2012 | 8,456 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 50% of median | 23,425 | 40 | 315.3 |
| 2013 | 20,450 | 7th lowest of 12 · 121% of median | 175 | 94 | 272.8 |
| 2014 | 13,414 | 6th lowest of 12 · 79% of median | 55,124 | 106 | 492.6 |
| 2015 | 6,527 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 38% of median | 40,643 | 71 | 255.4 |
| 2016 | 9,073 | 4th lowest of 12 · 54% of median | 34,702 | 97 | 183.2 |
| 2017 | 42,976 | 12th lowest of 12 · 254% of median | 37,468 | 259 | 338.4 |
| 2018 | 3,439 | 1st lowest of 12 · 20% of median | 28,323 | 20 | 185.8 |
| 2019 | 40,289 | 11th lowest of 12 · 238% of median | 40,069 | 212 | 282.1 |
| 2020 | 27,815 | 9th lowest of 12 · 164% of median | 27,878 | 138 | 259.1 |
| 2022 | 10,632 | 5th lowest of 12 · 63% of median | 14,492 | 63 | 196.2 |
| 2023 | 24,371 | 8th lowest of 12 · 144% of median | 19,676 | 129 | 270.3 |
| 2024 | 37,916 | 10th lowest of 12 · 224% of median | 40,245 | 305 | 263.8 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (7/10 points) — the components below are the finding; the letter alone is not.
The rubric, component by component
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | complete | name, type, and water source all on file |
| decreed rights | on file | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1534 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 20% of the irrigation seasons in 1989-2024 carry measured days |
| published-record stability | stable | no upstream revisions recorded against this structure |
Advisory reading aid on public data — not an administrative or legal conclusion, not a title opinion, and not a substitute for DWR administration or an engineer's analysis. Methodology review status is disclosed at hydrohistorian's basin pages.