Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
THORNTON GOLF COURSE PL
Structure dossier · WDID 0200880 · PIPELINE · BIG DRY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:07 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (0576005) — 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.
Current administration
● Fully called out — call at LOWER LATHAM DITCH (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1877-11-14).
● Fully called out — call at WESTERN MUTUAL DITCH (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1871-08-09).
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 1987-12-10 — 10197th most senior of the 21881 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: 0808834 (1987-12-08). Immediately behind: 0203830 (1987-12-10).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50382.0 | 1987-12-10 | 1987-12-31 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECOTH | |
| 53691.0 | 1996-12-31 | 1996-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | MUNALL | |
| 56611.0 | 2004-12-29 | 2004-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | MUN | |
| 56611.0 | 2004-12-29 | 2004-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | MUN |
Legal record & documents
65 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
22CW3090, 04CW0350, 96CW1116, 96CW0244, 87CW0333.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
22CW3090 | 1 | 2004-12-31 | S |
04CW0350 | 1 | 2004-12-31 | S |
96CW1116 | 5 | 1996-12-31 | S |
96CW0244 | 29 | 1987-12-31 | S |
87CW0333 | 29 | 1987-12-31 | 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 195 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 233 AF — 120% of that, and 13th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
| 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 | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 212 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 147 | 3.0 |
| 2011 | 1 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.7 |
| 2012 | 252 | 15th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 182 | 2.8 |
| 2013 | 170 | 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 128 | 2.3 |
| 2014 | 211 | 10th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 155 | 1.9 |
| 2015 | 180 | 6th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 130 | 3.2 |
| 2016 | 195 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 154 | 1.4 |
| 2017 | 7 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 4% of median | 15 | 1.6 |
| 2018 | 213 | 12th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 159 | 2.2 |
| 2019 | 166 | 4th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 146 | 1.6 |
| 2020 | 235 | 14th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 185 | 3.3 |
| 2021 | 186 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 149 | 1.6 |
| 2022 | 208 | 9th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 220 | 3.3 |
| 2023 | 152 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 365 | 1.6 |
| 2024 | 233 | 13th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 305 | 1.7 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (8/10 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 | 5012 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 74% of the irrigation seasons in 1993-2024 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.