Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
UTE PIPELINE HGT NO 1
Structure dossier · WDID 7201487 · 7 · COTTONWOOD CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:21 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 1956-05-11 — 726th 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: UTE PIPELINE HGT NO 4 (1956-05-11). Immediately behind: UTE PIPELINE HGT NO 3 (1956-05-11).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38847.0 | 1956-05-11 | 1959-07-21 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOM | 947 |
| 40013.39608 | 1958-06-11 | 1972-04-13 | 30.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMSTK | 1019 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA13368, 83CW0116, W3406.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA13368 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | S |
83CW0116 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | S |
W3406 | 1 | 1959-07-21 | 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 8,388 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 8,946 AF — 107% of that, and 9th 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 | 1,389 | 1st lowest of 15 · 17% of median | 61 | 15.7 |
| 2011 | 11,857 | 13th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 359 | 42.4 |
| 2012 | 6,385 | 4th lowest of 15 · 76% of median | 275 | 24.5 |
| 2013 | 4,619 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 55% of median | 164 | 50.7 |
| 2014 | 7,555 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 365 | 19.5 |
| 2015 | 9,195 | 10th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 365 | 38.5 |
| 2016 | 10,038 | 11th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 366 | 52.7 |
| 2017 | 7,593 | 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 365 | 101.0 |
| 2018 | 6,612 | 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 365 | 55.0 |
| 2019 | 14,432 | 14th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 365 | 57.5 |
| 2020 | 8,388 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 366 | 57.0 |
| 2021 | 3,533 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 365 | 55.5 |
| 2022 | 15,363 | 15th lowest of 15 · 183% of median | 365 | 3473.1 |
| 2023 | 11,733 | 12th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 365 | 49.8 |
| 2024 | 8,946 | 9th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 305 | 50.8 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 9930 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1994-2024 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.