Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
JERRY CREEK RES NO 2
Structure dossier · WDID 7203962 · 3 · PLATEAU CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:54 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 — 780th 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: JERRY CREEK RES NO 1 (1956-05-11). Immediately behind: ZEIGEL STOCK DITCH (1956-07-05).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40013.38847 | 1956-05-11 | 1972-04-13 | 9591.07 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFIRDOMSTK | |
| 46751.46666 | 1977-10-07 | 1978-12-31 | 0.0 | 7791.0 | A | IRRMUNFIRDOMOTH |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
W3884, CA13368, 87CW0204, 83CW0116.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W3884 | 1 | 1978-12-31 | S |
CA13368 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | S |
87CW0204 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | S |
83CW0116 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | 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 2,972 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 2,429 AF — 82% of that, and 7th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 4,955 | 12th lowest of 15 · 167% of median | — | 365 | 41.4 |
| 2006 | 5,807 | 14th lowest of 15 · 195% of median | — | 365 | 50.0 |
| 2007 | 2,388 | 6th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | — | 365 | 30.7 |
| 2008 | 4,182 | 11th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | — | 305 | 30.0 |
| 2014 | 15 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 353 | 61 | 0.4 |
| 2015 | 1,846 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 1,528 | 365 | 18.7 |
| 2016 | 2,105 | 4th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 1,709 | 366 | 39.4 |
| 2017 | 2,077 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 2,859 | 365 | 87.3 |
| 2018 | 5,142 | 13th lowest of 15 · 173% of median | 3,264 | 365 | 48.8 |
| 2019 | 2,327 | 5th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 1,532 | 365 | 43.5 |
| 2020 | 3,329 | 9th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 1,431 | 366 | 41.3 |
| 2021 | 4,006 | 10th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 3,288 | 365 | 52.0 |
| 2022 | 9,473 | 15th lowest of 15 · 319% of median | 9,180 | 365 | 2910.9 |
| 2023 | 2,972 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 1,410 | 365 | 30.6 |
| 2024 | 2,429 | 7th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 1,783 | 304 | 35.4 |
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 | 8766 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1988-2024 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.