Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SPRING DITCH(SPRING DRW)
Structure dossier · WDID 7201522 · 1 · COON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:48 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 1909-10-20 — 339th 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: MESA L RPD RESERVOIR (1933-10-29). Immediately behind: GROVE CREEK RES NO 1 (LABBE RES) (1911-11-07).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30895.21842 | 1909-10-20 | 1941-07-25 | 0.65 | 0.0 | C | DOM | |
| 30895.23506 | 1914-05-11 | 1941-07-25 | 1.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.24236 | 1916-05-10 | 1941-07-25 | 1.82 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 51134.34894 | 1945-07-15 | 1990-12-31 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRFIRSTK |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
90CW0042, 90CW0041, CA5812.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
90CW0042 | 1 | 1990-12-31 | S |
90CW0041 | 1 | 1990-12-31 | S |
CA5812 | 3 | 1941-07-25 | 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 683 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,376 AF — 202% of that, and 15th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | 1,170 | 14th lowest of 15 · 171% of median | 366 | 4.0 |
| 2009 | 683 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 365 | 2.1 |
| 2010 | 865 | 11th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 365 | 2.8 |
| 2011 | 1,109 | 13th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 364 | 5.4 |
| 2012 | 759 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 366 | 2.4 |
| 2013 | 601 | 4th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 365 | 2.4 |
| 2014 | 678 | 6th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 358 | 2.0 |
| 2015 | 610 | 5th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 365 | 1.2 |
| 2016 | 683 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 305 | 2.0 |
| 2017 | 563 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 111 | 3.6 |
| 2018 | 154 | 1st lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 145 | 0.5 |
| 2019 | 862 | 10th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 161 | 3.6 |
| 2020 | 436 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 195 | 4.1 |
| 2023 | 998 | 12th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 208 | 3.1 |
| 2024 | 1,376 | 15th lowest of 15 · 202% of median | 305 | 4.2 |
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 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 9473 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 81% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2024 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.