Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WILLIAMS CREEK LAKE RESERVOIR
Structure dossier · WDID 4003419 · 3 · WILLIAMS CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:24 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 1948-05-15 — 1870th 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: WILLIAMS CREEK LAKE RESERVOIR FEEDER DIT (1948-05-15). Immediately behind: BECKWITH DITCH (1948-07-16).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 35929.0 | 1948-05-15 | 1954-03-20 | 100.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | J307 |
| 58226.0 | 2009-06-01 | 2009-12-31 | 4.4 | 0.0 | A | RECFISAUG | |
| 58655.0 | 2010-08-04 | 2010-12-31 | 3.533 | 0.0 | A | RECFISAUG |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
17CW3013, 10CW0117, 16CW3010, 09CW0078, CA3503, 75CW0223.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
17CW3013 | 1 | 2010-12-31 | S |
10CW0117 | 1 | 2010-12-31 | S |
16CW3010 | 1 | 2009-12-31 | S |
09CW0078 | 1 | 2009-12-31 | S |
CA3503 | 2 | 1954-03-20 | S |
75CW0223 | 1 | 1954-03-20 | S |
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 67 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1995, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st lowest of the 12 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1979 | 47 | 4th lowest of 12 · 70% of median | — | 20 | 1.2 |
| 1983 | 20 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 30% of median | — | 6 | 2.0 |
| 1985 | 74 | 7th lowest of 12 · 110% of median | — | 51 | 0.8 |
| 1986 | 60 | 6th lowest of 12 · 90% of median | — | 16 | 2.0 |
| 1988 | 143 | 11th lowest of 12 · 213% of median | — | 41 | 2.5 |
| 1989 | 100 | 10th lowest of 12 · 149% of median | — | 44 | 1.5 |
| 1990 | 147 | 12th lowest of 12 · 219% of median | — | 46 | 2.0 |
| 1991 | 50 | 5th lowest of 12 · 75% of median | — | 27 | 1.0 |
| 1992 | 92 | 9th lowest of 12 · 137% of median | — | 58 | 1.0 |
| 1993 | 40 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 60% of median | — | 16 | 1.4 |
| 1994 | 90 | 8th lowest of 12 · 134% of median | — | 33 | 1.8 |
| 1995 | 0 | 1st lowest of 12 · 0% of median | — | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2004 | — | no recorded volume | 23 | 0 | — |
| 2005 | — | no recorded volume | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2024 | — | no recorded volume | 70 | 0 | — |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 457 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 4% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2024 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.