Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BAKER RES
Structure dossier · WDID 2303982 · RESERVOIR · GUERNSEY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:28 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 1878-05-01 — 553rd 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: 2303008 (1878-05-01). Immediately behind: 2303950 (1878-05-20).
Decreed rights (7)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10348.0 | 1878-05-01 | 1889-10-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMSTKAUGRCH | |
| 10348.0 | 1878-05-01 | 1889-10-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMSTKAUGRCH | |
| 11170.0 | 1880-07-31 | 1889-10-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMSTKAUGRCH | |
| 11170.0 | 1880-07-31 | 1889-10-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMSTKAUGRCH | |
| 11414.0 | 1881-04-01 | 1889-10-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMSTKAUGRCH | |
| 11414.0 | 1881-04-01 | 1889-10-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMSTKAUGRCH | |
| 14610.0 | 1889-12-31 | 1913-05-22 | 1314.2 | 0.0 | A | IRRCOMFISDOM |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA1636, 05CW0111.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1636 | 1 | 1913-05-22 | O |
05CW0111 | 3 | 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 10 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 14 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2005, came in at 14 AF — 104% of that, and 6th lowest of the 10 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1985 | 53 | 8th lowest of 10 · 393% of median | 54 | 0.5 |
| 1986 | 66 | 9th lowest of 10 · 489% of median | 68 | 0.5 |
| 1987 | 101 | 10th lowest of 10 · 748% of median | 21 | 3.0 |
| 1988 | 32 | 7th lowest of 10 · 237% of median | 18 | 1.0 |
| 1992 | 3 | 1st lowest of 10 · 22% of median | 7 | 0.2 |
| 1993 | 3 | 1st lowest of 10 · 22% of median | 7 | 0.2 |
| 1996 | 13 | 5th lowest of 10 · 96% of median | 5 | 1.7 |
| 1998 | 7 | 3rd lowest of 10 · 52% of median | 15 | 0.2 |
| 1999 | 7 | 3rd lowest of 10 · 52% of median | 15 | 0.2 |
| 2005 | 14 | 6th lowest of 10 · 104% of median | 15 | 0.5 |
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 | 7 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 225 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 5% of the irrigation seasons in 1985-2005 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.