Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RIST BENSON RES
Structure dossier · WDID 0404138 · 3 · BIG THOMPSON RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:54 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 1903-04-26 — 221st most senior of the 1296 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: COLEMAN RES (1901-11-23). Immediately behind: STEAD PL NO 2 (1904-06-01).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29675.19473 | 1903-04-26 | 1939-11-14 | 373.8 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 29675.29584 | 1930-12-31 | 1939-11-14 | 117.6 | 0.0 | A | IRR |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA10077.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA10077 | 2 | 1939-11-14 | 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 89 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 71 AF — 80% of that, and 7th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 69 | 6th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 7 | 11.0 |
| 2004 | 91 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 12 | 12.0 |
| 2005 | 28 | 1st lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 9 | 2.0 |
| 2006 | 52 | 4th lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 13 | 3.0 |
| 2007 | 89 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 15 | 5.0 |
| 2008 | 60 | 5th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 8 | 5.0 |
| 2009 | 48 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 7 | 5.0 |
| 2016 | 109 | 11th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 18 | 5.0 |
| 2017 | 113 | 12th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 14 | 9.0 |
| 2018 | 103 | 10th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 13 | 10.0 |
| 2019 | 152 | 14th lowest of 15 · 171% of median | 14 | 12.0 |
| 2021 | 187 | 15th lowest of 15 · 210% of median | 7 | 20.0 |
| 2022 | 50 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 7 | 5.0 |
| 2023 | 121 | 13th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 5 | 25.0 |
| 2024 | 71 | 7th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 11 | 5.0 |
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 (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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | fragment | 170 measured day(s) on file (under 180 -- a season, not a history) |
| record continuity | unknown | record too short to assess continuity (needs 2+ years of span and 180+ 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.