← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

N MID MET DRAW DIV DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 6100553 · 1 · WEST PARADOX CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:33 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 1968-07-0175th most senior of the 166 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: KRISTEN SPRING POND (1950-06-01). Immediately behind: TUCKER WELL NO 1 (1972-09-15).

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
44925.432811968-07-011973-12-31 3.00.0 CIRRSTK

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 105 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1994, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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)
1976 42 4th lowest of 15 · 40% of median 42 0.5
1980 60 6th lowest of 15 · 57% of median 61 0.5
1981 69 7th lowest of 15 · 66% of median 73 0.5
1982 121 9th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 61 1.0
1983 645 15th lowest of 15 · 614% of median 290 2.0
1984 371 13th lowest of 15 · 353% of median 167 1.5
1986 105 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 76 1.0
1987 457 14th lowest of 15 · 435% of median 264 1.5
1988 368 12th lowest of 15 · 350% of median 225 2.0
1989 132 10th lowest of 15 · 126% of median 118 0.8
1990 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 5 0.0
1991 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 9 0.0
1992 45 5th lowest of 15 · 43% of median 31 1.1
1993 326 11th lowest of 15 · 310% of median 95 3.5
1994 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 4 0.0

How good is our record of it?

Grade B (8/10 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 8594 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 64% of the irrigation seasons in 1932-1994 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.