Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PROSPECT RES
Structure dossier · WDID 0103609 · 3 · PROSPECT CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:19 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 1910-11-21 — 561st 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: WILL WELL 1-81874 (1910-09-28). Immediately behind: WOLFE/MALMO WELL 2 (1910-12-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22239.0 | 1910-11-21 | 1918-08-02 | 5970.2 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 26302.2237 | 1911-04-01 | 1936-01-13 | 1500.0 | 4407.0 | A | IRR | |
| 26498.0 | 1922-07-20 | 1924-11-12 | 0.0 | 1690.03 | A | IRR | |
| 55668.0 | 2002-05-31 | 2002-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR |
Legal record & documents
6 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 | 2 | 1936-01-13 | S |
CA54658 | 2 | 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 7,324 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 10,036 AF — 137% of that, and 8th 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 | 10,784 | 0 | — |
| 2010 | — | no recorded volume | 10,808 | 0 | — |
| 2011 | — | no recorded volume | 7,359 | 0 | — |
| 2012 | 7,041 | 6th lowest of 12 · 96% of median | 6,645 | 78 | 204.9 |
| 2013 | 952 | 1st lowest of 12 · 13% of median | — | 21 | 160.8 |
| 2014 | 13,240 | 12th lowest of 12 · 181% of median | 11,859 | 152 | 165.0 |
| 2015 | 3,522 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 48% of median | 12,655 | 68 | 94.4 |
| 2016 | 10,749 | 9th lowest of 12 · 147% of median | 10,532 | 207 | 166.3 |
| 2017 | 10,822 | 10th lowest of 12 · 148% of median | 8,902 | 187 | 230.9 |
| 2018 | 4,985 | 4th lowest of 12 · 68% of median | 5,955 | 82 | 110.6 |
| 2019 | 10,852 | 11th lowest of 12 · 148% of median | 10,620 | 172 | 207.5 |
| 2020 | 7,608 | 7th lowest of 12 · 104% of median | 5,540 | 93 | 144.8 |
| 2022 | 3,046 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 42% of median | 2,668 | 49 | 139.2 |
| 2023 | 5,795 | 5th lowest of 12 · 79% of median | 4,869 | 75 | 138.7 |
| 2024 | 10,036 | 8th lowest of 12 · 137% of median | 18,658 | 252 | 88.3 |
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 | 1436 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 19% 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.