Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
THOMPSON RANCH SOUTHWEST DETENTION POND
Structure dossier · WDID 0404173 · 3 · BIG THOMPSON RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:02 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 1861-11-10 — 19th 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: THOMPSON RANCH SOUTHEAST DETENTION POND (1861-11-10). Immediately behind: BIG THOMPSON RIVER (1863-04-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4332.0 | 1861-11-10 | 1883-05-28 | 564.14 | 0.0 | A | STOIRRAUG | |
| 4332.0 | 1861-11-10 | 1883-05-28 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRAUG | |
| 62091.56978 | 2005-12-31 | 2020-12-31 | 9.97 | 0.0 | A | IRRFISOTHWLD |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
20CW3159, 07CW0014.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
20CW3159 | 1 | 2020-12-31 | S |
07CW0014 | 1 | 1883-05-28 | O |
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 9 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 474 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 549 AF — 116% of that, and 7th lowest of the 8 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | — | no recorded volume | 3 | 0 | — |
| 2017 | 355 | 1st lowest of 8 · 75% of median | 357 | 149 | 2.0 |
| 2018 | 412 | 2nd lowest of 8 · 87% of median | 449 | 148 | 2.7 |
| 2019 | 484 | 5th lowest of 8 · 102% of median | 475 | 172 | 2.5 |
| 2020 | 464 | 4th lowest of 8 · 98% of median | 383 | 149 | 2.9 |
| 2021 | 508 | 6th lowest of 8 · 107% of median | 432 | 142 | 3.4 |
| 2022 | 621 | 8th lowest of 8 · 131% of median | 597 | 170 | 3.2 |
| 2023 | 421 | 3rd lowest of 8 · 89% of median | 364 | 114 | 3.8 |
| 2024 | 549 | 7th lowest of 8 · 116% of median | 487 | 155 | 3.1 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 8 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1199 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 70% of the irrigation seasons in 2016-2024 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.