Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
FRENCH CREEK ABOVE CONFLUENCE WITH MICHIGAN CREEK
Structure dossier · WDID 2302914 · STREAM GAGE · FRENCH CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:40 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (0576005) — 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.
Current administration
● Fully called out — call at LAST CHANCE DITCH 2 (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1863-12-30).
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 1879-06-20 — 583rd most senior of the 21881 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: 2300668 (1879-06-01). Immediately behind: 2302912 (1879-07-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10763.0 | 1879-06-20 | 1889-10-18 | 482.0 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMCUROTH | |
| 10763.0 | 1879-06-20 | 1889-10-18 | 5.6 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMCUROTH |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
84CW0055.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
84CW0055 | 2 | 1889-10-18 | 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 263 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 411 AF — 156% of that, and 11th lowest of the 14 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | — | no recorded volume | 150 | 0 | — |
| 2011 | 214 | 5th lowest of 14 · 81% of median | 214 | 26 | 5.6 |
| 2012 | 1 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | 1 | 2 | 0.4 |
| 2013 | 320 | 9th lowest of 14 · 122% of median | 320 | 40 | 5.6 |
| 2014 | 524 | 14th lowest of 14 · 199% of median | 524 | 67 | 5.6 |
| 2015 | 515 | 13th lowest of 14 · 196% of median | 515 | 71 | 5.6 |
| 2016 | 193 | 4th lowest of 14 · 73% of median | 193 | 33 | 5.6 |
| 2017 | 415 | 12th lowest of 14 · 158% of median | 415 | 56 | 5.6 |
| 2018 | 62 | 2nd lowest of 14 · 24% of median | 62 | 22 | 3.6 |
| 2019 | 118 | 3rd lowest of 14 · 45% of median | 118 | 26 | 2.6 |
| 2020 | 266 | 8th lowest of 14 · 101% of median | 266 | 30 | 5.6 |
| 2021 | 215 | 6th lowest of 14 · 82% of median | 215 | 36 | 5.6 |
| 2022 | 260 | 7th lowest of 14 · 99% of median | 260 | 47 | 5.6 |
| 2023 | 391 | 10th lowest of 14 · 149% of median | 391 | 67 | 5.6 |
| 2024 | 411 | 11th lowest of 14 · 156% of median | 411 | 59 | 5.6 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 14 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 | 1292 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 17% of the irrigation seasons in 1988-2024 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.