Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BATTERSON LAKE
Structure dossier · WDID 0303801 · 3 · GORDON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:08 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 1973-07-26 — 2274th most senior of the 2961 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: UPPER LONE PINE LAKE (1973-07-26). Immediately behind: RED FEATHER RANCH RES (1973-10-10).
Decreed rights (1)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 45290.45132 | 1973-07-26 | 1974-12-31 | 8.35 | 0.0 | A | RECFISFIRAUGWLD |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
W7632, 95CW0143.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W7632 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | S |
95CW0143 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | 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 13 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 3 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2010, came in at 1 AF — 33% of that, and 2nd lowest of the 13 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1997 | 2 | 4th lowest of 13 · 67% of median | 1 | 57 | 0.0 |
| 1998 | 1 | 2nd lowest of 13 · 33% of median | 1 | 32 | 0.0 |
| 1999 | 4 | 10th lowest of 13 · 133% of median | 3 | 62 | 0.1 |
| 2000 | 3 | 6th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | — | 140 | 0.0 |
| 2001 | 3 | 6th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | — | 89 | 0.0 |
| 2002 | 0 | 1st lowest of 13 · 0% of median | 3 | 31 | 0.0 |
| 2003 | 4 | 10th lowest of 13 · 133% of median | 4 | 184 | 0.0 |
| 2004 | 4 | 10th lowest of 13 · 133% of median | 4 | 154 | 0.0 |
| 2005 | 4 | 10th lowest of 13 · 133% of median | 1 | 40 | 0.1 |
| 2007 | 3 | 6th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | 4 | 93 | 0.0 |
| 2008 | 3 | 6th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | 3 | 93 | 0.0 |
| 2009 | 2 | 4th lowest of 13 · 67% of median | 1 | 183 | 0.0 |
| 2010 | 1 | 2nd lowest of 13 · 33% of median | 1 | 63 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 13 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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1221 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 43% of the irrigation seasons in 1997-2010 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.