Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MEADOW GLEN D
Structure dossier · WDID 2000742 · 1 · RIO GRANDE · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:44 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1876-03-16 — 109th most senior of the 8016 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: INDEPENDENT D 2 (1876-03-16). Immediately behind: MINOR D (1876-03-16).
Decreed rights (7)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9572.0 | 1876-03-16 | 1896-05-01 | 3.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 105 |
| 13971.0 | 1888-04-01 | 1896-05-01 | 1.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 323 |
| 14336.0 | 1889-04-01 | 1896-05-01 | 1.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 348 |
| 16923.14656 | 1890-02-15 | 1903-04-09 | 1.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1903-21A |
| 18443.0 | 1900-06-30 | 1903-04-09 | 14.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1903-57C |
| 19456.14365 | 1889-04-30 | 1916-09-13 | 5.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1916-23 |
| 19456.14975 | 1890-12-31 | 1916-09-13 | 20.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1916-30B |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA1105, 09/13/1916, 04/09/1903, 05/01/1896.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1105 | 2 | 1916-09-13 | S |
09/13/1916 | 1 | 1916-09-13 | S |
04/09/1903 | 1 | 1903-04-09 | S |
05/01/1896 | 3 | 1896-05-01 | O |
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 2,312 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 2,312 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 2,408 | 11th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | — | 212 | 9.7 |
| 2012 | 1,876 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 81% of median | — | 211 | 9.4 |
| 2013 | 1,924 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median | — | 206 | 10.8 |
| 2014 | 2,283 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | — | 215 | 20.0 |
| 2015 | 954 | 1st lowest of 15 · 41% of median | — | 276 | 18.4 |
| 2016 | 2,362 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | — | 366 | 20.0 |
| 2017 | 2,668 | 15th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | — | 365 | 17.5 |
| 2018 | 1,997 | 4th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | — | 365 | 10.3 |
| 2019 | 2,647 | 14th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | — | 365 | 46.9 |
| 2020 | 2,369 | 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | — | 366 | 10.0 |
| 2021 | 2,144 | 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | — | 365 | 10.9 |
| 2022 | 2,049 | 5th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | — | 365 | 10.3 |
| 2023 | 2,426 | 12th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | — | 312 | 9.5 |
| 2024 | 2,433 | 13th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | — | 216 | 13.8 |
| 2025 | 2,312 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 214 | 17.2 |
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 | 7 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 17019 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2025 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.