Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WILLOW PARK FEEDER D
Structure dossier · WDID 2001876 · 1 · WILLOW CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:58 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 1875-09-21 — 101st most senior of the 8016 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: POOLE BACHLE D (1875-07-01). Immediately behind: W2021 WELL NO 01 (1875-10-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9395.0 | 1875-09-21 | 1896-05-01 | 1.2 | 0.0 | C | AUG | 102 |
| 9669.0 | 1876-06-21 | 1896-05-01 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 122 |
| 10377.0 | 1878-05-30 | 1896-05-01 | 0.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 152 |
| 19456.18047 | 1899-05-30 | 1916-09-13 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1916-45 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
96CW0014.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
96CW0014 | 4 | 1916-09-13 | O, 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 470 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 523 AF — 111% of that, and 10th 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 | 304 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 183 | 1.1 |
| 2012 | 379 | 5th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 209 | 1.8 |
| 2013 | 470 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 196 | 1.8 |
| 2014 | 715 | 15th lowest of 15 · 152% of median | 197 | 2.9 |
| 2015 | 700 | 14th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 209 | 1.8 |
| 2016 | 565 | 11th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 211 | 3.0 |
| 2017 | 464 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 162 | 1.8 |
| 2018 | 204 | 1st lowest of 15 · 43% of median | 92 | 1.8 |
| 2019 | 475 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 196 | 2.5 |
| 2020 | 577 | 12th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 191 | 2.1 |
| 2021 | 378 | 4th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 150 | 1.7 |
| 2022 | 442 | 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 180 | 1.8 |
| 2023 | 329 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 151 | 1.6 |
| 2024 | 696 | 13th lowest of 15 · 148% of median | 196 | 2.2 |
| 2025 | 523 | 10th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 182 | 1.7 |
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 | 4791 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 81% of the irrigation seasons in 1998-2025 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.