← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

FOSTER IRG D NO 4

Structure dossier · WDID 6200604 · 1 · CEBOLLA CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:55 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 1876-06-015th most senior of the 1980 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: BIG DITCH (1876-06-01). Immediately behind: RIGNEY D AKA GONER D (1877-06-01).

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
9649.01876-06-011904-03-28 1.180.0 CIRR 5

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 352 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,111 AF — 316% of that, and 14th 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)
2009 87 3rd lowest of 15 · 25% of median 48 1.5
2010 219 6th lowest of 15 · 62% of median 84 2.9
2011 850 12th lowest of 15 · 242% of median 65 9.2
2012 676 9th lowest of 15 · 192% of median 60 6.1
2013 709 10th lowest of 15 · 201% of median 96 5.8
2014 1,674 15th lowest of 15 · 476% of median 89 12.5
2015 206 5th lowest of 15 · 58% of median 51 2.3
2017 345 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median 46 6.9
2018 1,047 13th lowest of 15 · 297% of median 78 9.0
2019 765 11th lowest of 15 · 217% of median 51 12.4
2020 352 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 41 5.9
2021 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 7 0.0
2022 190 4th lowest of 15 · 54% of median 17 6.0
2023 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 4 0.0
2024 1,111 14th lowest of 15 · 316% of median 77 11.3

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 3085 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.