Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
ADOBE SUMP-ROBB WELL
Structure dossier · WDID 1205022 · 2 · ARKANSAS RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:24 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 1887-07-01 — 294th 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: MCGREGOR DITCH (1887-05-01). Immediately behind: EIGHT MILE DITCH (1888-03-31).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13696.0 | 1887-07-01 | 1905-01-31 | 2.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 348.5 |
| 40351.0 | 1960-06-23 | 1971-12-31 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
W0175, W4108.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W0175 | 1 | 1971-12-31 | O |
W4108 | 1 | 1905-01-31 | 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 40 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1983, came in at 40 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1948 | 38 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 31 | 2.0 |
| 1949 | 15 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 38% of median | 8 | 1.3 |
| 1951 | 198 | 13th lowest of 15 · 495% of median | 116 | 1.9 |
| 1952 | 32 | 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 51 | 0.5 |
| 1953 | 42 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 35 | 2.1 |
| 1955 | 32 | 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 28 | 1.5 |
| 1956 | 12 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 30% of median | 16 | 0.5 |
| 1970 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 1973 | 123 | 11th lowest of 15 · 308% of median | 80 | 1.0 |
| 1974 | 22 | 4th lowest of 15 · 55% of median | 26 | 0.8 |
| 1975 | 182 | 12th lowest of 15 · 455% of median | 94 | 2.0 |
| 1979 | 221 | 14th lowest of 15 · 552% of median | 56 | 2.1 |
| 1980 | 712 | 15th lowest of 15 · 1780% of median | 172 | 2.1 |
| 1982 | 83 | 10th lowest of 15 · 208% of median | 24 | 2.1 |
| 1983 | 40 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 12 | 2.0 |
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 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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1164 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 11% of the irrigation seasons in 1932-1983 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.