Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LARAMIE RIVER TUNNEL SYS
Structure dossier · WDID 4800576 · 1 · LARAMIE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 05:24 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 1902-08-25 — 50th most senior of the 143 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: RAWAH LOWER SUPPLY DITCH (1902-08-25). Immediately behind: MCINTYRE DITCH LAR R SYS (1902-08-25).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20737.19229 | 1902-08-25 | 1914-02-20 | 300.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMAUG |
Legal record & documents
17 decreed actions on record across
9 court cases:
CA2725, 87CW0332, 18CW3076, 17CW3057, 11CW0265, 07CW0190, 06CW0259, 06CW0258, 03CW0422.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2725 | 1 | 1914-02-20 | S |
87CW0332 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
18CW3076 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
17CW3057 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
11CW0265 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
07CW0190 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
06CW0259 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
06CW0258 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | S |
03CW0422 | 2 | 1914-02-20 | 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 14,354 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 14,354 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 19,333 | 15th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 83 | 257.0 |
| 2011 | 15,596 | 9th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 89 | 219.0 |
| 2012 | 18,414 | 13th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 161 | 166.0 |
| 2013 | 18,851 | 14th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 92 | 196.0 |
| 2014 | 12,942 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 64 | 204.0 |
| 2015 | 9,167 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 77 | 172.0 |
| 2016 | 11,193 | 5th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 113 | 216.0 |
| 2017 | 16,445 | 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 126 | 200.0 |
| 2018 | 13,359 | 7th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 133 | 200.0 |
| 2019 | 9,611 | 4th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 50 | 193.0 |
| 2020 | 18,016 | 11th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 67 | 256.0 |
| 2021 | 9,313 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 124 | 159.0 |
| 2022 | 18,252 | 12th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 97 | 196.0 |
| 2023 | 8,653 | 1st lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 92 | 140.0 |
| 2024 | 14,354 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 136 | 177.0 |
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 (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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1716 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 32% of the irrigation seasons in 1999-2024 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.