Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

PANDO D

Structure dossier · WDID 2400511 · 1 · CULEBRA CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:10 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 1881-04-30 — 26th 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 ahead: J M J MAEZ D (1881-03-31). Immediately behind: GUADALUPE SANCHEZ D (1882-11-30).

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
11443.01881-04-301889-06-14 1.250.0 CIRR 22

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 99 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 85 AF — 86% of that, and 6th 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 23 1st lowest of 15 · 23% of median 25 0.6
2012 71 4th lowest of 15 · 72% of median 57 0.6
2013 115 10th lowest of 15 · 116% of median 97 0.6
2014 103 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median 86 0.6
2015 138 14th lowest of 15 · 139% of median 117 0.6
2016 134 12th lowest of 15 · 135% of median 113 0.6
2017 153 15th lowest of 15 · 154% of median 121 0.6
2018 72 5th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 71 0.6
2019 117 11th lowest of 15 · 118% of median 97 1.2
2020 99 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 89 0.6
2021 134 12th lowest of 15 · 135% of median 111 0.6
2022 40 2nd lowest of 15 · 40% of median 57 0.6
2023 91 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median 94 0.6
2024 59 3rd lowest of 15 · 60% of median 52 0.6
2025 85 6th lowest of 15 · 86% of median 87 0.6

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 8362 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 52% 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.