Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GOLD SPRING NO 1

Structure dossier · WDID 7201095 · 4 · BUZZARD CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:14 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1947-06-01 — 948th most senior of the 2166 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: WORTHINGTON SPG & SEEP D (1945-12-31). Immediately behind: GOLD SPRING NO 2 (1947-06-01).

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
44559.35581947-06-011972-12-31 0.0040.0 CIRRFISDOMSTK

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 22 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2015, came in at 1 AF — 4% 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)
1991 3 5th lowest of 15 · 14% of median 365 0.0
1992 2 2nd lowest of 15 · 9% of median 305 0.0
1995 121 10th lowest of 15 · 550% of median 61 1.0
1996 629 15th lowest of 15 · 2859% of median 366 1.0
1997 209 11th lowest of 15 · 950% of median 365 0.7
1998 441 12th lowest of 15 · 2004% of median 365 0.7
1999 2 2nd lowest of 15 · 9% of median 304 0.0
2008 85 9th lowest of 15 · 386% of median 61 0.7
2009 510 14th lowest of 15 · 2318% of median 365 0.7
2010 441 12th lowest of 15 · 2004% of median 365 0.7
2011 2 2nd lowest of 15 · 9% of median 304 0.0
2012 5 6th lowest of 15 · 23% of median 61 0.0
2013 22 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 365 0.0
2014 9 7th lowest of 15 · 41% of median 365 0.0
2015 1 1st lowest of 15 · 4% of median 228 0.0

How good is our record of it?

Grade A (9/10 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 5890 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 89% of the irrigation seasons in 1985-2015 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.