Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SOUTH PLATTE D RCHRG A
Structure dossier · WDID 6402504 · RA · SOUTH PLATTE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:11 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 1974-03-15 — 1542nd most senior of the 2052 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: SMYTH SEC 5 DITCH (1973-08-22). Immediately behind: LEWIS WELL 10603 (1974-07-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 45364.0 | 1974-03-15 | 1974-12-31 | 3000.0 | 0.0 | A | RCH |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
W7839, 96CW0097, 81CW0353, 02CW0283.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W7839 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | S |
96CW0097 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | S |
81CW0353 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | S |
02CW0283 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 782 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 625 AF — 80% of that, and 5th 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 | 782 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 124 | 13.0 |
| 2011 | 803 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 134 | 11.3 |
| 2012 | 477 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 67 | 10.8 |
| 2013 | 1,137 | 14th lowest of 15 · 145% of median | 102 | 23.2 |
| 2014 | 871 | 11th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 91 | 10.8 |
| 2015 | 1,226 | 15th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 161 | 10.5 |
| 2016 | 842 | 10th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 122 | 8.7 |
| 2017 | 1,114 | 13th lowest of 15 · 142% of median | 145 | 8.2 |
| 2018 | 1,054 | 12th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 121 | 11.5 |
| 2019 | 731 | 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 89 | 21.4 |
| 2020 | 373 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 48% of median | 63 | 7.0 |
| 2021 | 493 | 4th lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 68 | 8.9 |
| 2022 | 269 | 1st lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 38 | 7.3 |
| 2023 | 771 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 143 | 8.5 |
| 2024 | 625 | 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 303 | 9.2 |
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 | 3248 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 34% of the irrigation seasons in 1979-2024 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.