Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

HOAGLAND CANAL (SMITH CK)

Structure dossier · WDID 3601020 · 1 · SPRING CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:11 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 1910-04-25 — 245th most senior of the 1247 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: HOAGLAND CANAL (SOUTH SPRING) (1910-04-25). Immediately behind: HOAGLAND CANAL (MARTIN) (1910-04-25).

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
22964.220291910-04-251912-11-16 0.50.0 CIRR 180

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 33 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2018, came in at 12 AF — 36% of that, and 3rd 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)
2004 33 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 34 0.5
2005 62 10th lowest of 15 · 188% of median 45 1.1
2006 133 13th lowest of 15 · 403% of median 101 1.9
2007 187 14th lowest of 15 · 567% of median 84 2.0
2008 71 11th lowest of 15 · 215% of median 40 1.7
2009 613 15th lowest of 15 · 1858% of median 78 10.0
2010 105 12th lowest of 15 · 318% of median 48 1.5
2011 21 6th lowest of 15 · 64% of median 23 0.5
2012 7 2nd lowest of 15 · 21% of median 9 0.5
2013 53 9th lowest of 15 · 161% of median 57 0.5
2014 24 7th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 26 0.5
2015 6 1st lowest of 15 · 18% of median 7 0.5
2016 14 4th lowest of 15 · 42% of median 15 0.5
2017 14 4th lowest of 15 · 42% of median 15 0.5
2018 12 3rd lowest of 15 · 36% of median 16 0.5

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 886 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 19% of the irrigation seasons in 1996-2018 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.