Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

LUNT SEEPAGE AREA

Structure dossier · WDID 3001315 · 5 · FLORIDA RIVER · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:56 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1919-12-31 — 968th most senior of the 2277 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: DENNIE DITCH (1910-06-01). Immediately behind: LUNT SPRING NO 2 (1919-12-31).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
46386.255661919-12-311977-12-31 1.00.0 CIRRDOM

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 34 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 120 AF — 353% of that, and 15th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
2011 32 5th lowest of 15 · 94% of median 161 0.1
2012 32 5th lowest of 15 · 94% of median 163 0.1
2013 30 4th lowest of 15 · 88% of median 155 0.1
2014 34 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 170 0.1
2015 29 2nd lowest of 15 · 85% of median 149 0.1
2016 28 1st lowest of 15 · 82% of median 144 0.1
2017 29 2nd lowest of 15 · 85% of median 151 0.1
2018 34 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 175 0.1
2019 33 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median 169 0.1
2020 36 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 186 0.1
2021 107 14th lowest of 15 · 315% of median 181 0.5
2022 80 12th lowest of 15 · 235% of median 185 0.2
2023 103 13th lowest of 15 · 303% of median 173 0.3
2024 76 11th lowest of 15 · 224% of median 155 0.2
2025 120 15th lowest of 15 · 353% of median 147 0.5

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 9047 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 89% of the irrigation seasons in 1978-2025 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.