Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LOWER BOULDER EXT RES
Structure dossier · WDID 0604182 · RESERVOIR · BOULDER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:57 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (96d5528) — 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: no administrative call record for this basin.
Where it sits in line
Priority 1892-02-01 — 173rd most senior of the 1867 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: THOMAS RES (1891-05-01). Immediately behind: MESA RES (1893-12-04).
On MAINSTEM at river mile 29.0, it is 70th of 78 down the reach. Immediately upstream: STROMQUIST POND 5. Immediately downstream: STROMQUIST POND 4.
Position on the modelled network, not a claim about whose water this is — a stream carries water from many rights at once, and diverted water returns to it.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20188.15372 | 1892-02-01 | 1907-03-13 | 768.0 | 0.0 | A | MUNCOMINDFIRDOM | |
| 60996.55898 | 2003-01-16 | 2017-12-31 | 177.32 | 184.68 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISAUGWLD |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
17CW3216, CA4842.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
17CW3216 | 3 | 2017-12-31 | S |
CA4842 | 1 | 1907-03-13 | 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 424 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 516 AF — 122% of that, and 7th lowest of the 11 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 | 52 | 1st lowest of 11 · 12% of median | — | 3 | 15.0 |
| 2013 | 67 | 2nd lowest of 11 · 16% of median | — | 8 | 6.1 |
| 2014 | 175 | 4th lowest of 11 · 41% of median | — | 9 | 12.0 |
| 2015 | 424 | 6th lowest of 11 · 100% of median | — | 22 | 22.0 |
| 2016 | 169 | 3rd lowest of 11 · 40% of median | — | 21 | 8.1 |
| 2017 | 627 | 9th lowest of 11 · 148% of median | — | 24 | 20.0 |
| 2018 | 900 | 10th lowest of 11 · 212% of median | — | 45 | 17.0 |
| 2019 | 379 | 5th lowest of 11 · 89% of median | — | 18 | 20.0 |
| 2020 | 553 | 8th lowest of 11 · 130% of median | — | 43 | 15.0 |
| 2021 | 2,094 | 11th lowest of 11 · 494% of median | 41 | 47 | 34.2 |
| 2022 | — | no recorded volume | 539 | 0 | — |
| 2023 | 516 | 7th lowest of 11 · 122% of median | 497 | 14 | 20.0 |
| 2024 | — | no recorded volume | 514 | 0 | — |
| 2025 | — | no recorded volume | 360 | 0 | — |
| 2026 | — | no recorded volume | 0 | 0 | — |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 11 recorded years (+69 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.013).
Its reference gage, RURAL DITCH: no clear flow trend.
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | current | 525 measured days, newest -80 day(s) before the data's end (DWR publishes ~1 year in arrears) |
| record continuity | sparse | 5% of the irrigation seasons in 1976-2026 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.