← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

PINO REAL D

Structure dossier · WDID 2100579 · 1 · LA JARA CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:13 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 1880-05-0155th most senior of the 1041 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: W3115 WELL NO 01 (1880-04-01). Immediately behind: ESKRIDGE GARRETT N BR (1880-06-01).

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
11079.01880-05-011888-07-11 7.20.0 CIRRDOM 49

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 75 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 68 AF — 91% of that, and 7th 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)
2011 7 2nd lowest of 15 · 9% of median 7 3.6
2012 164 9th lowest of 15 · 219% of median 27 4.8
2013 13 3rd lowest of 15 · 17% of median 8 1.8
2014 75 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 11 4.5
2015 24 4th lowest of 15 · 32% of median 8 1.7
2016 57 5th lowest of 15 · 76% of median 12 7.2
2017 199 11th lowest of 15 · 265% of median 40 7.2
2018 58 6th lowest of 15 · 77% of median 7 7.7
2019 914 14th lowest of 15 · 1219% of median 69 7.2
2020 3 1st lowest of 15 · 4% of median 2 1.4
2021 314 12th lowest of 15 · 419% of median 23 7.2
2022 171 10th lowest of 15 · 228% of median 15 7.2
2023 936 15th lowest of 15 · 1248% of median 70 7.9
2024 392 13th lowest of 15 · 523% of median 32 7.2
2025 68 7th lowest of 15 · 91% of median 17 7.2

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 1485 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 10% of the irrigation seasons in 1953-2025 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.