Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CENT TELE & UTIL HGT #4
Structure dossier · WDID 1202622 · 1 · BEAVER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:02 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 1861-05-31 — 19th most senior of the 1967 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: CENT TELE & UTIL HGT #3 (1861-05-31). Immediately behind: MINNEQUA CANAL (1861-07-22).
Decreed rights (8)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4169.0 | 1861-05-31 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 9 |
| 7791.0 | 1871-05-01 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 69 |
| 7792.0 | 1871-05-02 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 70 |
| 8404.0 | 1873-01-03 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 108 |
| 9252.0 | 1875-05-01 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 153 |
| 10353.0 | 1878-05-06 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 200 |
| 11809.0 | 1882-05-01 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 268 |
| 12875.0 | 1885-04-01 | 1894-02-03 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 318 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
W4222.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W4222 | 11 | 1894-02-03 | 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 13 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 30 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 176 AF — 587% of that, and 13th lowest of the 13 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 28 | 5th lowest of 13 · 93% of median | 29 | 0.7 |
| 2004 | 44 | 11th lowest of 13 · 147% of median | 29 | 1.0 |
| 2005 | 39 | 10th lowest of 13 · 130% of median | 43 | 0.6 |
| 2007 | 31 | 8th lowest of 13 · 103% of median | 32 | 0.6 |
| 2008 | 0 | 1st lowest of 13 · 0% of median | 61 | 0.0 |
| 2009 | 0 | 1st lowest of 13 · 0% of median | 304 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 30 | 7th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | 20 | 1.9 |
| 2020 | 28 | 5th lowest of 13 · 93% of median | 9 | 2.0 |
| 2021 | 38 | 9th lowest of 13 · 127% of median | 22 | 1.1 |
| 2022 | 0 | 1st lowest of 13 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2023 | 52 | 12th lowest of 13 · 173% of median | 16 | 2.0 |
| 2024 | 5 | 4th lowest of 13 · 17% of median | 6 | 0.5 |
| 2025 | 176 | 13th lowest of 13 · 587% of median | 66 | 1.8 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 13 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 | 8 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 639 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 13% of the irrigation seasons in 2003-2025 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.