Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
TROUTVALE RES
Structure dossier · WDID 2003569 · 3 · SOUTH CLEAR CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:14 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 1911-09-01 — 1186th 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: TROUTVALE RES SUPPLY D (1911-09-01). Immediately behind: W0334 WELL NO 04 (1911-12-31).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22523.0 | 1911-09-01 | 1916-09-13 | 510.3 | 0.0 | A | FIS | 3 |
| 22523.0 | 1911-09-01 | 1916-09-13 | 510.3 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 1916-87B |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
09/13/1916.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
09/13/1916 | 2 | 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 12 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 178 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2008, came in at 59 AF — 33% of that, and 1st lowest of the 8 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1986 | 246 | 6th lowest of 8 · 138% of median | — | 8 | 31.0 |
| 1991 | — | no recorded volume | 295 | 0 | — |
| 1992 | — | no recorded volume | 297 | 0 | — |
| 1994 | 298 | 7th lowest of 8 · 167% of median | — | 2 | 150.2 |
| 1995 | 73 | 2nd lowest of 8 · 41% of median | 73 | 2 | 36.8 |
| 1996 | 212 | 5th lowest of 8 · 119% of median | — | 2 | 107.0 |
| 1997 | 298 | 7th lowest of 8 · 167% of median | 216 | 8 | 109.1 |
| 1998 | 132 | 3rd lowest of 8 · 74% of median | 430 | 34 | 2.0 |
| 2002 | — | no recorded volume | 144 | 0 | — |
| 2003 | 144 | 4th lowest of 8 · 81% of median | 144 | 2 | 72.6 |
| 2008 | 59 | 1st lowest of 8 · 33% of median | 59 | 6 | 17.1 |
| 2010 | — | no recorded volume | 25 | 0 | — |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 8 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 | fragment | 64 measured day(s) on file (under 180 -- a season, not a history) |
| record continuity | unknown | record too short to assess continuity (needs 2+ years of span and 180+ 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.