Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BOX SPRINGS RES NO 2
Structure dossier · WDID 1703572 · 3 · HORSE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:55 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 1898-10-24 — 58th most senior of the 1909 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: NEESKAH RESERVOIR (1896-08-01). Immediately behind: BOX SPRINGS RES NO 3 (1898-10-24).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20186.17829 | 1898-10-24 | 1927-02-03 | 642.7916 | 0.0 | A | IRR | R8 |
| 20186.18194 | 1899-10-24 | 1927-02-03 | 149.2195 | 0.0 | A | IRR | R7 |
| 20186.18813 | 1901-07-05 | 1927-02-03 | 1457.7594 | 0.0 | A | IRR | R11, R12 |
| 21803.0 | 1909-09-11 | 1927-02-03 | 456.3311 | 0.0 | A | IRR | R44, R45 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
92CW0044, 02/03/1927.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
92CW0044 | 3 | 1927-02-03 | S |
02/03/1927 | 3 | 1927-02-03 | 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 13 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 156 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 47 AF — 30% of that, and 4th lowest of the 10 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1973 | 23 | 3rd lowest of 10 · 15% of median | — | 14 | 1.0 |
| 1974 | 111 | 5th lowest of 10 · 71% of median | — | 30 | 2.0 |
| 1980 | 531 | 9th lowest of 10 · 342% of median | — | 153 | 1.8 |
| 1982 | 11 | 2nd lowest of 10 · 7% of median | — | 2 | 5.5 |
| 1994 | 0 | 1st lowest of 10 · 0% of median | — | 9 | 0.0 |
| 1995 | 1,758 | 10th lowest of 10 · 1130% of median | — | 65 | 184.0 |
| 2009 | 200 | 6th lowest of 10 · 129% of median | — | 5 | 45.7 |
| 2013 | — | no recorded volume | 276 | 0 | — |
| 2014 | — | no recorded volume | 672 | 0 | — |
| 2016 | — | no recorded volume | 16 | 0 | — |
| 2017 | 435 | 7th lowest of 10 · 280% of median | — | 93 | 64.0 |
| 2020 | 490 | 8th lowest of 10 · 315% of median | 138 | 8 | 90.5 |
| 2025 | 47 | 4th lowest of 10 · 30% of median | — | 17 | 5.4 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 10 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 | 396 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 4% of the irrigation seasons in 1973-2025 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.