Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
J B SMITH RES
Structure dossier · WDID 0203922 · RESERVOIR · TODD CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:46 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 1907-05-01 — 1026th 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: 0807386 (1907-04-01). Immediately behind: VANDERHOOF WELL 12721 (1907-05-31).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20939.0 | 1907-05-01 | 1936-05-13 | 263.6 | 0.0 | A | IRRDOM | |
| 25050.20939 | 1907-05-01 | 1924-11-12 | 150.0 | 150.0 | A | IRR | |
| 59900.0 | 2013-12-31 | 2013-12-31 | 0.0 | 325.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECDOMAUG |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
16CW3019, 13CW3181, CA60052, CA54658.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
16CW3019 | 1 | 2016-12-31 | S |
13CW3181 | 1 | 2013-12-31 | S |
CA60052 | 1 | 1936-05-13 | 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 10 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 486 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 167 AF — 34% of that, and 2nd lowest of the 10 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 441 | 5th lowest of 10 · 91% of median | 508 | 158 | 5.1 |
| 2016 | 639 | 9th lowest of 10 · 132% of median | — | 269 | 4.3 |
| 2017 | 703 | 10th lowest of 10 · 145% of median | — | 153 | 7.1 |
| 2018 | 309 | 4th lowest of 10 · 64% of median | 12 | 68 | 8.3 |
| 2019 | 530 | 6th lowest of 10 · 109% of median | 860 | 125 | 8.9 |
| 2020 | 624 | 8th lowest of 10 · 128% of median | 2,066 | 46 | 10.0 |
| 2021 | 209 | 3rd lowest of 10 · 43% of median | 825 | 68 | 4.8 |
| 2022 | 582 | 7th lowest of 10 · 120% of median | 0 | 183 | 8.9 |
| 2023 | 88 | 1st lowest of 10 · 18% of median | 8 | 365 | 3.1 |
| 2024 | 167 | 2nd lowest of 10 · 34% of median | 1,172 | 305 | 2.7 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 10 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade A (9/10 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1740 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 85% of the irrigation seasons in 2015-2024 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.