Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
A A SALAZAR D 1
Structure dossier · WDID 2400500 · 1 · RITO SECO · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:33 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 1852-04-10 — 1st most senior of the 453 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 behind: A A SALAZAR D 2 (1852-04-10).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 831.0 | 1852-04-10 | 1889-06-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 1 |
| 14410.02922 | 1857-12-31 | 1905-12-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 25 |
| 14410.04018 | 1860-12-31 | 1905-12-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 27 |
| 16932.0 | 1896-05-10 | 1905-12-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 57 |
| 19734.0 | 1904-01-12 | 1905-12-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 62 |
| 24550.0 | 1917-03-20 | 1935-02-11 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 1934-22 |
| 24562.0 | 1917-04-01 | 1935-02-11 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 1934-23 |
| 24927.0 | 1918-04-01 | 1935-02-11 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRRECFISSTKAUGOTHWLD | 1934-27 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA0885, 07CW0042.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0885 | 1 | 1935-02-11 | S |
07CW0042 | 10 | 1935-02-11 | O, S |
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 12 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 414 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1988, came in at 384 AF — 93% of that, and 6th lowest of the 12 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1972 | 242 | 4th lowest of 12 · 58% of median | 61 | 2.0 |
| 1973 | 3,392 | 12th lowest of 12 · 820% of median | 365 | 20.0 |
| 1974 | 1,144 | 11th lowest of 12 · 277% of median | 304 | 4.0 |
| 1979 | 502 | 9th lowest of 12 · 121% of median | 82 | 4.0 |
| 1981 | 131 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 32% of median | 72 | 1.5 |
| 1982 | 443 | 7th lowest of 12 · 107% of median | 96 | 4.0 |
| 1983 | 115 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 28% of median | 37 | 2.5 |
| 1984 | 42 | 1st lowest of 12 · 10% of median | 8 | 3.0 |
| 1985 | 462 | 8th lowest of 12 · 112% of median | 107 | 3.0 |
| 1986 | 553 | 10th lowest of 12 · 134% of median | 177 | 3.0 |
| 1987 | 352 | 5th lowest of 12 · 85% of median | 113 | 3.0 |
| 1988 | 384 | 6th lowest of 12 · 93% of median | 169 | 2.8 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (8/10 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 | 1591 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 46% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-1988 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.