Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

STANDIFIRD SPRING NO 3

Structure dossier · WDID 7205136 · 4 · BUZZARD CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:45 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 1904-05-19 — 1174th 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: STANDIFIRD SPRING NO 2 (1904-05-06). Immediately behind: STANDIFIRD SPRING NO 1 (1908-08-14).

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
46386.198621904-05-191977-12-31 0.10.0 CIRRFIRDOMSTK

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 15 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2012, came in at 5 AF — 33% of that, and 2nd 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)
1995 60 15th lowest of 15 · 400% of median 304 0.1
1996 32 14th lowest of 15 · 213% of median 81 0.2
1997 18 9th lowest of 15 · 120% of median 91 0.1
1998 25 12th lowest of 15 · 167% of median 153 0.1
1999 31 13th lowest of 15 · 207% of median 159 0.1
2000 14 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 71 0.1
2001 8 4th lowest of 15 · 53% of median 41 0.1
2002 2 1st lowest of 15 · 13% of median 18 0.1
2003 5 2nd lowest of 15 · 33% of median 33 0.1
2004 15 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 52 0.2
2006 23 11th lowest of 15 · 153% of median 116 0.1
2007 13 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median 65 0.1
2008 19 10th lowest of 15 · 127% of median 96 0.1
2010 14 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 72 0.1
2012 5 2nd lowest of 15 · 33% of median 27 0.1

How good is our record of it?

Grade B (7/10 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 1440 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 38% of the irrigation seasons in 1994-2012 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.