Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KINNICK WASTE & SEEP D
Structure dossier · WDID 6000662 · 1 · SOUTH FORK SAN MIGUEL RI · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:48 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 1900-05-01 — 810th most senior of the 2893 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: LAST CHANCE DITCH (1899-04-01). Immediately behind: KINNICK DITCH NO 1 (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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30604.18383 | 1900-05-01 | 1939-11-01 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRMUNCOMDOMSTKAUG | 241 |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
W1561, CA4641, 98CW0171, 80CW0405.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1561 | 2 | 1939-11-01 | S |
CA4641 | 1 | 1939-11-01 | S |
98CW0171 | 2 | 1939-11-01 | S |
80CW0405 | 2 | 1939-11-01 | 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 116 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 138 AF — 119% of that, and 11th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 162 | 13th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 180 | 0.9 |
| 2011 | 112 | 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 194 | 0.8 |
| 2012 | 86 | 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 195 | 0.6 |
| 2013 | 32 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 174 | 0.2 |
| 2014 | 87 | 6th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 179 | 0.6 |
| 2015 | 117 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 193 | 0.6 |
| 2016 | 150 | 12th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 202 | 1.0 |
| 2017 | 62 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 53% of median | 155 | 0.6 |
| 2018 | 28 | 1st lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 105 | 0.5 |
| 2019 | 116 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 168 | 0.9 |
| 2020 | 74 | 4th lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 128 | 1.1 |
| 2021 | 131 | 10th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 171 | 1.0 |
| 2022 | 208 | 15th lowest of 15 · 179% of median | 202 | 1.0 |
| 2023 | 169 | 14th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 171 | 1.6 |
| 2024 | 138 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 197 | 0.9 |
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 | 3098 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 29% of the irrigation seasons in 1974-2024 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.