Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
THOMPSON PUMP NO 2
Structure dossier · WDID 5101149 · 8 · COLORADO RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:38 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 1900-01-01 — 475th most senior of the 2208 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: THOMPSON PUMP NO 1 (1900-01-01). Immediately behind: WEIMER DITCH (1900-06-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 34241.18263 | 1900-01-01 | 1952-11-07 | 13.84 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 449D |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
W1709, 84CW0199, 80CW0258.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1709 | 1 | 1952-11-07 | S |
84CW0199 | 1 | 1952-11-07 | S |
80CW0258 | 1 | 1952-11-07 | 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 931 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 60 AF — 6% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 4,161 | 15th lowest of 15 · 447% of median | 155 | 13.8 |
| 2006 | 3,184 | 14th lowest of 15 · 342% of median | 136 | 13.8 |
| 2007 | 3,130 | 13th lowest of 15 · 336% of median | 127 | 13.8 |
| 2008 | 1,451 | 11th lowest of 15 · 156% of median | 58 | 13.8 |
| 2009 | 575 | 6th lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 23 | 13.8 |
| 2010 | 381 | 5th lowest of 15 · 41% of median | 20 | 12.0 |
| 2011 | 748 | 7th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 31 | 13.0 |
| 2013 | 1,560 | 12th lowest of 15 · 168% of median | 59 | 13.8 |
| 2014 | 958 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 38 | 13.8 |
| 2015 | 219 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 9 | 13.8 |
| 2016 | 931 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 37 | 13.8 |
| 2019 | 1,345 | 10th lowest of 15 · 144% of median | 69 | 12.0 |
| 2020 | 317 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 24 | 12.0 |
| 2023 | 377 | 4th lowest of 15 · 40% of median | 30 | 10.0 |
| 2024 | 60 | 1st lowest of 15 · 6% of median | 17 | 10.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-142 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.003).
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 | 1828 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 22% of the irrigation seasons in 1986-2024 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.