Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
GARCIA D-R
Structure dossier · WDID 2200692 · 1 · CONEJOS RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:07 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 1855-10-01 — 11th most senior of the 1764 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: LLANO D (1855-08-20). Immediately behind: SERVIETTA D (1856-03-05).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2100.0 | 1855-10-01 | 1883-10-22 | 6.23 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 41/2 |
| 2648.0 | 1857-04-01 | 1883-10-22 | 6.09 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 17 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
W3396.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W3396 | 4 | 1883-10-22 | 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 1,011 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 1,328 AF — 131% of that, and 14th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 805 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 79 | 6.1 |
| 2010 | 823 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 87 | 6.3 |
| 2011 | 1,011 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 104 | 6.3 |
| 2012 | 861 | 5th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 78 | 6.3 |
| 2013 | 1,005 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 126 | 6.3 |
| 2014 | 855 | 4th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 88 | 8.0 |
| 2016 | 1,151 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 112 | 6.3 |
| 2017 | 1,502 | 15th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 132 | 6.5 |
| 2018 | 887 | 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 84 | 6.0 |
| 2019 | 1,054 | 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 99 | 7.0 |
| 2020 | 589 | 1st lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 56 | 6.0 |
| 2021 | 1,057 | 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 91 | 6.3 |
| 2023 | 1,189 | 12th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 103 | 6.3 |
| 2024 | 1,212 | 13th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 107 | 6.3 |
| 2025 | 1,328 | 14th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 128 | 6.3 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+25 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.010).
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
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | complete | name, type, and water source all on file |
| decreed rights | on file | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3379 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 35% of the irrigation seasons in 1980-2025 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.