Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

FETCHER FISH POND DIVERSION

Structure dossier · WDID 5801473 · 1 · SAND CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 01:25 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 1966-09-15 — 1184th most senior of the 3097 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: MARSHALL NAY SPG 3 (1962-08-01). Immediately behind: BOWES WELL 2 (1967-01-15).

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
45290.426261966-09-151974-12-31 0.60.0 CRECFIS

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 120 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 172 AF — 143% of that, and 11th 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)
2010 30 1st lowest of 15 · 25% of median 63 0.2
2012 75 4th lowest of 15 · 62% of median 174 0.3
2013 98 5th lowest of 15 · 82% of median 365 0.2
2014 122 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median 321 0.3
2015 120 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 303 0.3
2016 107 7th lowest of 15 · 89% of median 244 0.3
2017 148 10th lowest of 15 · 123% of median 214 0.6
2018 36 2nd lowest of 15 · 30% of median 147 0.3
2019 104 6th lowest of 15 · 87% of median 174 0.3
2020 317 14th lowest of 15 · 264% of median 366 0.9
2021 508 15th lowest of 15 · 423% of median 365 1.4
2022 222 13th lowest of 15 · 185% of median 365 0.5
2023 192 12th lowest of 15 · 160% of median 335 0.6
2024 73 3rd lowest of 15 · 61% of median 245 0.3
2025 172 11th lowest of 15 · 143% of median 304 0.6

How good is our record of it?

Grade A (9/10 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 3985 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 100% of the irrigation seasons in 2010-2025 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.