Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
FRENCH CREEK DIVERSION
Structure dossier · WDID 1000574 · 7 · FRENCH CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:16 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 1861-03-20 — 5th most senior of the 2864 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: CASCADE CREEK DIVERSION (1861-03-20). Immediately behind: HARMES DITCH (1861-03-20).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4097.0 | 1861-03-20 | 1882-03-06 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | MUN | 2 |
| 4282.0 | 1861-09-21 | 1882-03-06 | 0.9 | 0.0 | C | MUN | 5 |
| 4474.0 | 1862-04-01 | 1882-03-06 | 1.125 | 0.0 | C | MUN | 7 |
| 5479.0 | 1864-12-31 | 1882-03-06 | 0.75 | 0.0 | C | MUN | 23 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA37641, CA19304, CA13801-S.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA37641 | 1 | 1882-03-06 | O |
CA19304 | 2 | 1882-03-06 | O |
CA13801-S | 1 | 1882-03-06 | 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 584 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 662 AF — 113% of that, and 9th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 715 | 10th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 334 | 6.2 |
| 2012 | 366 | 7th lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 366 | 1.7 |
| 2013 | 793 | 12th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 365 | 4.1 |
| 2014 | 854 | 13th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 365 | 4.7 |
| 2015 | 1,211 | 15th lowest of 15 · 207% of median | 243 | 11.0 |
| 2016 | 79 | 5th lowest of 15 · 14% of median | 31 | 10.0 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 60 | 0.0 |
| 2018 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 364 | 0.2 |
| 2019 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 213 | 0.0 |
| 2020 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 91 | 0.0 |
| 2021 | 252 | 6th lowest of 15 · 43% of median | 365 | 2.4 |
| 2022 | 584 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 365 | 2.8 |
| 2023 | 761 | 11th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 365 | 3.2 |
| 2024 | 1,150 | 14th lowest of 15 · 197% of median | 366 | 7.2 |
| 2025 | 662 | 9th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 304 | 2.4 |
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 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 19197 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1959-2025 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.