Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
JULESBURG RES
Structure dossier · WDID 6403906 · 3 · SOUTH PLATTE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:01 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 1904-02-12 — 136th 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: HARMONY DITCH 3 (1903-05-13). Immediately behind: HENRY L GREVE DITCH (1907-04-09).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19765.0 | 1904-02-12 | 1908-12-08 | 28178.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 53325.49581 | 1985-09-30 | 1996-12-31 | 8079.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
96CW1033, CA0944.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
96CW1033 | 1 | 1996-12-31 | S |
CA0944 | 1 | 1908-12-08 | 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 19,531 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 18,114 AF — 93% of that, and 5th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 27,536 | 15th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | — | 261 | 257.6 |
| 2011 | 24,256 | 12th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 24 | 199 | 288.7 |
| 2012 | 20,564 | 10th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 19,055 | 208 | 179.6 |
| 2013 | 22,744 | 11th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 20,434 | 175 | 228.3 |
| 2014 | 19,531 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 39,034 | 238 | 236.3 |
| 2015 | 18,064 | 4th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 15,792 | 215 | 160.9 |
| 2016 | 15,482 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 15,225 | 254 | 201.0 |
| 2017 | 19,444 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 13,373 | 266 | 164.1 |
| 2018 | 13,387 | 1st lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 2,532 | 218 | 179.6 |
| 2019 | 18,858 | 6th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | — | 229 | 207.8 |
| 2020 | 16,975 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 5,500 | 182 | 192.0 |
| 2021 | 27,505 | 14th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 17,256 | 236 | 211.1 |
| 2022 | 25,020 | 13th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 16,926 | 181 | 188.3 |
| 2023 | 19,759 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 14,195 | 182 | 219.1 |
| 2024 | 18,114 | 5th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 14,771 | 305 | 192.7 |
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 (8/10 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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 6455 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 40% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2024 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.