Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
TERRACE MAIN CNL
Structure dossier · WDID 2100601 · 1 · ALAMOSA RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:31 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 1867-08-01 — 4th 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: EL VIEGO D (1867-08-01). Immediately behind: CODDINGTON D (1870-03-01).
Decreed rights (8)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6422.0 | 1867-08-01 | 1888-07-11 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 2 |
| 7403.0 | 1870-04-08 | 1888-07-11 | 5.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 8 |
| 7821.0 | 1871-05-31 | 1888-07-11 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 14 |
| 9618.0 | 1876-05-01 | 1888-07-11 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 37 |
| 9649.0 | 1876-06-01 | 1888-07-11 | 10.83 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 39 |
| 11048.0 | 1880-03-31 | 1888-07-11 | 7.12 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 45 |
| 13585.0 | 1887-03-12 | 1888-07-11 | 18.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRRCH | 76 |
| 20487.0 | 1906-02-03 | 1918-02-07 | 91.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 112 |
Legal record & documents
14 decreed actions on record across
8 court cases:
02/07/1918, 01CW0037, CA2667, CA0972, CA0970, CA0969, CA0968, 94CW0004.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
02/07/1918 | 1 | 1918-02-07 | S |
01CW0037 | 1 | 1918-02-07 | S |
CA2667 | 5 | 1888-07-11 | O |
CA0972 | 1 | 1888-07-11 | O |
CA0970 | 1 | 1888-07-11 | O |
CA0969 | 1 | 1888-07-11 | O |
CA0968 | 1 | 1888-07-11 | O |
94CW0004 | 3 | 1888-07-11 | 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 6,106 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 5,795 AF — 95% of that, and 6th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
| 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 | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 5,421 | 4th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 210 | 35.2 |
| 2012 | 4,730 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 184 | 26.8 |
| 2013 | 3,683 | 1st lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 212 | 22.9 |
| 2014 | 6,320 | 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 207 | 88.0 |
| 2015 | 5,965 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 203 | 41.8 |
| 2016 | 7,274 | 12th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 272 | 49.2 |
| 2017 | 9,554 | 13th lowest of 15 · 156% of median | 365 | 49.4 |
| 2018 | 6,106 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 365 | 33.3 |
| 2019 | 9,931 | 14th lowest of 15 · 163% of median | 365 | 52.7 |
| 2020 | 5,238 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 306 | 40.3 |
| 2021 | 5,780 | 5th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 215 | 32.0 |
| 2022 | 6,613 | 11th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 227 | 31.8 |
| 2023 | 11,575 | 15th lowest of 15 · 190% of median | 218 | 62.4 |
| 2024 | 6,201 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 217 | 35.5 |
| 2025 | 5,795 | 6th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 222 | 31.7 |
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 | 8 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 13830 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 85% 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.