Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

BOLLINGER A QUEEN DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 4000957 · 1 · COTTONWOOD CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:35 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 1967-06-13 — 2143rd most senior of the 4661 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: DAWES DOM PL (1967-05-10). Immediately behind: GIB HUTCHINS DOM PL (1967-06-19).

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
42897.01967-06-131969-08-11 1.00.0 CIRR L95

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 625 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2010, came in at 426 AF — 68% of that, and 2nd 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)
1996 1,098 15th lowest of 15 · 176% of median 176 4.5
1997 592 5th lowest of 15 · 95% of median 180 2.2
1998 1,001 13th lowest of 15 · 160% of median 137 4.5
1999 802 12th lowest of 15 · 128% of median 145 3.5
2000 625 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 136 2.8
2001 594 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median 117 3.0
2002 312 1st lowest of 15 · 50% of median 156 1.9
2003 592 5th lowest of 15 · 95% of median 159 2.2
2004 662 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 119 3.9
2005 1,037 14th lowest of 15 · 166% of median 156 4.2
2006 735 10th lowest of 15 · 118% of median 118 3.9
2007 777 11th lowest of 15 · 124% of median 141 3.2
2008 545 4th lowest of 15 · 87% of median 127 2.2
2009 432 3rd lowest of 15 · 69% of median 93 3.4
2010 426 2nd lowest of 15 · 68% of median 93 2.4

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 4555 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 59% of the irrigation seasons in 1974-2010 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.