Colorado Revised Statutes

Colo. Rev. Stat. § 37-84-112 (2026)

Headgates - specifications - failure to maintain - penalty

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CO-LEGleg.colorado.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The owners of any irrigation ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir in this state, taking water from any stream, shall erect where necessary and maintain in good repair, at the point of intake of such ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir, a suitable and proper headgate of height and strength and with embankments sufficient to control the water at all ordinary stages and suitable and proper measuring flumes, weirs, and devices and shall also erect and maintain in good repair suitable wastegates where necessary in connection with such ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir intake. The framework of such headgate shall be constructed of timber not less than four inches square, and the bottom, sides, and gate shall be of plank not less than two inches in thickness, or said gate may be made of other material of equal strength and durability or may be made and constructed upon plans and specifications approved by the state engineer. No such headgate shall be deemed complete until provided with suitable locks and fastenings (except when the division engineer deems such locks and fastenings unnecessary therefor) and keys therefor are delivered to the division engineer of the division who has control thereof during the seasons of the distribution of water.

(2) If the owners of any such irrigation ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir fail or neglect to erect or maintain in good repair said headgate, measuring flume, weir, or devices, in the manner and form provided in this section, then the state engineer or division engineer, upon ten days' previous notice in writing, duly served upon such owners, or upon any agent or employee representing them or controlling such ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir, shall refuse to deliver any water from such stream to such owners, or to such ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir, until such owners erect or repair the headgate, measuring flume, weirs, or devices of such ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir. The owners of all such ditches, canals, flumes, or reservoirs shall be liable for all damages resulting from their neglect or refusal to comply with the provisions of sections 37-84-112 to 37-84-117. Such owners who divert water from any such stream and into any such ditch, canal, flume, or reservoir contrary to the orders of the state engineer or division engineer are guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, and each day of violation shall be deemed a separate offense.

Source: L. 01: p. 193, § 1. R.S. 08: § 3248. L. 11: p. 463, § 1. C.L. § 1727. CSA: C. 90, § 125. CRS 53: § 147-7-13. C.R.S. 1963: § 148-7-12. L. 69: p. 1220, § 9.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2005–2020 · leading case: Tatum v. People ex rel. Simpson, 122 P.3d 997 (Colo. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tatum v. People ex rel. Simpson, 122 P.3d 997 (Colo. 2005). · cites it 30× “This is an appeal from an order of the District Court, Water Division 2 (water court) enjoining Appellant, Jim Tatum, from continuing to violate section 37-84-112(1), C.R.S. (2005), by failing to maintain a suitable and proper headgate at the point of diversion from the…”

Paquet v. Smith, 854 F. Supp. 2d 1003 (D. Colo. 2012). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs also include statutory claims pursuant to C.R.S. § 37-84-112 to 120 (2009) and C.R.”

a Valley Irrigation Co. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners of the Cnty. of Montezuma, 2020 COA 161 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 3× “” For instance, in two cases applying slightly different versions of section 37-84-112(1), C.R.S. 2019 — which at all relevant times has required irrigation ditch owners to “erect” and “maintain” proper headgates to control the flow of water — the court indicated that a ditch…”

Tatum v. Simpson, 399 F. Supp. 2d 1159 (D. Colo. 2005). · cites it 2× “In his Objection plaintiff argues that false claims were presented in the state court case, that due process was denied by the presentation of false evidence of water usage, and by the court’s ruling that plaintiff violated C.R.S. § 37-84-112 (Plaintiffs Objection at 4).”

— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 37-84-112(1) — 2 cases

Tatum v. People ex rel. Simpson, 122 P.3d 997 (Colo. 2005). “This is an appeal from an order of the District Court, Water Division 2 (water court) enjoining Appellant, Jim Tatum, from continuing to violate section 37-84-112(1), C.R.S. (2005), by failing to maintain a suitable and proper headgate at the point of diversion from the…”

a Valley Irrigation Co. v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners of the Cnty. of Montezuma, 2020 COA 161 (Colo. Ct. App. 2020). “” For instance, in two cases applying slightly different versions of section 37-84-112(1), C.R.S. 2019 — which at all relevant times has required irrigation ditch owners to “erect” and “maintain” proper headgates to control the flow of water — the court indicated that a ditch…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.