Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
JUNIPER MOUNTAIN TUNNEL AND IRRIGATION D
Structure dossier · WDID 4400675 · 1 · YAMPA RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:46 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 1890-04-02 — 196th most senior of the 3562 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: DUBEAU & DUNCKLEY DITCH (1889-08-15). Immediately behind: CAMP CK DITCH (1890-05-01).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19250.14702 | 1890-04-02 | 1902-09-18 | 14.17 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 57 |
| 19250.17107 | 1896-11-01 | 1902-09-18 | 9.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 81 |
| 19250.18108 | 1899-07-30 | 1902-09-18 | 2.67 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 100 |
| 27850.20069 | 1904-12-12 | 1926-07-26 | 5.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 109A.5 |
| 40421.28488 | 1927-12-31 | 1972-05-30 | 35.88 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOMSTK | 9 |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA2259, CA0411, 12/28/1926, 04/20/1927.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2259 | 1 | 1972-05-30 | S |
CA0411 | 1 | 1926-07-26 | S |
12/28/1926 | 2 | 1902-09-18 | S |
04/20/1927 | 1 | 1902-09-18 | 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 2,032 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 7,249 AF — 357% of that, and 15th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
| 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 | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 3,074 | 13th lowest of 15 · 151% of median | 84 | 30.0 |
| 2012 | 966 | 4th lowest of 15 · 48% of median | 115 | 10.0 |
| 2013 | 2,581 | 12th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 122 | 14.0 |
| 2014 | 4,438 | 14th lowest of 15 · 218% of median | 130 | 25.3 |
| 2015 | 2,053 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 147 | 10.0 |
| 2016 | 1,806 | 7th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 123 | 10.4 |
| 2017 | 2,032 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 134 | 19.3 |
| 2018 | 822 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 40% of median | 139 | 4.3 |
| 2019 | 1,556 | 5th lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 62 | 13.8 |
| 2020 | 2,074 | 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 48 | 26.7 |
| 2021 | 2,571 | 11th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 118 | 30.3 |
| 2022 | 1,598 | 6th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 87 | 14.0 |
| 2023 | 33 | 1st lowest of 15 · 2% of median | 4 | 16.6 |
| 2024 | 680 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 63 | 10.0 |
| 2025 | 7,249 | 15th lowest of 15 · 357% of median | 89 | 60.1 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 8783 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 44% of the irrigation seasons in 1932-2025 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.