Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HANNA RANCH WELL NO 7
Structure dossier · WDID 1005620 · 2 · FOUNTAIN CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:21 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 1964-02-27 — 842nd 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: WIDEFIELD C NO 4 (1964-02-18). Immediately behind: WIDEFIELD WELL NO 4 (1964-03-24).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 41695.0 | 1964-02-27 | 1972-12-31 | 2.39 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNINDDOM | |
| 46386.41695 | 1964-02-27 | 1977-12-31 | 2.39 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNINDDOM | |
| 55514.0 | 2001-12-28 | 2001-12-31 | 0.0 | 2.39 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDFIRDOMAUG | |
| 62087.0 | 2019-12-27 | 2019-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMSTK |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
19CW3081, 10CW0099, 01CW0146, W4376, W1528.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
19CW3081 | 1 | 2019-12-31 | O |
10CW0099 | 1 | 2001-12-31 | S |
01CW0146 | 2 | 2001-12-31 | S |
W4376 | 1 | 1977-12-31 | S |
W1528 | 1 | 1972-12-31 | 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 12 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 0 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2005, came in at 0 AF — —% of that, and 1st lowest of the 12 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | 9 | 12th lowest of 12 · —% of median | 54 | 2.4 |
| 1994 | 6 | 10th lowest of 12 · —% of median | 249 | 0.1 |
| 1995 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 6 | 0.0 |
| 1996 | 2 | 9th lowest of 12 · —% of median | 2 | 0.9 |
| 1997 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 4 | 0.0 |
| 1998 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 19 | 0.0 |
| 2000 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 18 | 0.0 |
| 2001 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 25 | 0.0 |
| 2002 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 81 | 0.0 |
| 2003 | 8 | 11th lowest of 12 · —% of median | 24 | 2.0 |
| 2004 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 4 | 0.0 |
| 2005 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · —% of median | 20 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 506 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 20% of the irrigation seasons in 1993-2005 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.