Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SPRING PARK RESERVOIR
Structure dossier · WDID 3803744 · 3 · BLUE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:53 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 1888-04-14 — 235th most senior of the 4788 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: EAGLE DITCH ALTERNATE POINT NO 1 (1888-03-17). Immediately behind: PARADISE DITCH (1888-06-14).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13984.0 | 1888-04-14 | 1889-05-11 | 200.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 188 |
| 25086.22641 | 1911-12-28 | 1918-09-27 | 2780.33 | 0.0 | A | IRRAUG | RES12A |
Legal record & documents
20 decreed actions on record across
10 court cases:
W4005, 01CW0294, CA4033, W3926, CA1997, 94CW0226, 82CW0058, 79CW0151, 05CW0301, 84CW0380.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W4005 | 1 | 1978-12-31 | S |
01CW0294 | 2 | 1978-12-31 | S |
CA4033 | 2 | 1952-10-24 | S |
W3926 | 2 | 1918-09-27 | S |
CA1997 | 1 | 1918-09-27 | S |
94CW0226 | 5 | 1918-09-27 | S |
82CW0058 | 2 | 1918-09-27 | S |
79CW0151 | 2 | 1918-09-27 | S |
05CW0301 | 2 | 1918-09-27 | S |
84CW0380 | 1 | 1889-05-11 | 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 2,248 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 5,701 AF — 254% of that, and 10th lowest of the 10 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 4,296 | 8th lowest of 10 · 191% of median | 1,946 | 185 | 48.8 |
| 2010 | 1,401 | 3rd lowest of 10 · 62% of median | 2,573 | 45 | 26.5 |
| 2011 | 1,606 | 4th lowest of 10 · 72% of median | 2,414 | 44 | 23.9 |
| 2012 | 1,059 | 2nd lowest of 10 · 47% of median | 791 | 56 | 18.3 |
| 2013 | 2,358 | 6th lowest of 10 · 105% of median | 2,086 | 94 | 49.9 |
| 2014 | 2,137 | 5th lowest of 10 · 95% of median | 2,099 | 101 | 42.6 |
| 2015 | — | no recorded volume | 1,643 | 0 | — |
| 2016 | — | no recorded volume | 2,323 | 0 | — |
| 2017 | — | no recorded volume | 545 | 0 | — |
| 2018 | — | no recorded volume | 305 | 0 | — |
| 2019 | — | no recorded volume | 1,875 | 0 | — |
| 2021 | 1,037 | 1st lowest of 10 · 46% of median | — | 99 | 9.0 |
| 2022 | 2,794 | 7th lowest of 10 · 124% of median | 2,664 | 117 | 40.0 |
| 2023 | 4,938 | 9th lowest of 10 · 220% of median | 3,337 | 141 | 55.0 |
| 2024 | 5,701 | 10th lowest of 10 · 254% of median | 3,507 | 115 | 58.0 |
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 (8/10 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 | 3748 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 53% of the irrigation seasons in 1991-2024 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.