Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
GUNNISON RIVER WHITEWATER COURSE
Structure dossier · WDID 5901327 · R · GUNNISON RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:10 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 1998-10-20 — 2059th most senior of the 2360 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: SAWMILL DITCH (1996-10-16). Immediately behind: BUTTE PASTURE POND (1999-03-17).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 55517.54349 | 1998-10-20 | 2002-12-31 | 1200.0 | 0.0 | C | REC |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
12CW0004, 07CW0071, 02CW0038.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
12CW0004 | 1 | 2002-12-31 | S |
07CW0071 | 1 | 2002-12-31 | S |
02CW0038 | 1 | 2002-12-31 | 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 13 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 360,725 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2018, came in at 145,940 AF — 40% of that, and 2nd lowest of the 13 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 360,725 | 7th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | 182 | 2819.0 |
| 2007 | 271,521 | 5th lowest of 13 · 75% of median | 184 | 1555.0 |
| 2008 | 540,218 | 12th lowest of 13 · 150% of median | 181 | 4597.0 |
| 2009 | 466,466 | 9th lowest of 13 · 129% of median | 184 | 16620.0 |
| 2010 | 259,156 | 4th lowest of 13 · 72% of median | 184 | 3504.0 |
| 2011 | 549,677 | 13th lowest of 13 · 152% of median | 154 | 4360.0 |
| 2012 | 125,256 | 1st lowest of 13 · 35% of median | 184 | 7098.0 |
| 2013 | 216,257 | 3rd lowest of 13 · 60% of median | 154 | 1890.0 |
| 2014 | 477,181 | 10th lowest of 13 · 132% of median | 184 | 4280.0 |
| 2015 | 422,666 | 8th lowest of 13 · 117% of median | 184 | 4590.0 |
| 2016 | 326,359 | 6th lowest of 13 · 90% of median | 184 | 3120.0 |
| 2017 | 538,332 | 11th lowest of 13 · 149% of median | 184 | 4490.0 |
| 2018 | 145,940 | 2nd lowest of 13 · 40% of median | 184 | 1030.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 13 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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
| 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 | 2327 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 87% of the irrigation seasons in 2006-2018 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.