← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GARNER D 1

Structure dossier · WDID 2500571 · 1 · GARNER CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:06 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 1870-04-0112th most senior of the 847 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: MAJOR CR D (1870-03-01). Immediately behind: BACA GRANT 4 IRR D 9 (1870-05-01).

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
7396.01870-04-011890-03-28 6.40.0 CIRRAUGRCH 8

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 697 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 804 AF — 115% of that, and 11th 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 921 12th lowest of 15 · 132% of median 304 2.5
2012 386 2nd lowest of 15 · 55% of median 176 1.5
2013 502 6th lowest of 15 · 72% of median 204 1.8
2014 578 7th lowest of 15 · 83% of median 158 2.0
2015 1,546 15th lowest of 15 · 222% of median 182 5.7
2016 697 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 153 2.5
2017 990 14th lowest of 15 · 142% of median 170 4.9
2018 495 5th lowest of 15 · 71% of median 221 1.8
2019 777 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 207 4.2
2020 480 3rd lowest of 15 · 69% of median 216 1.7
2021 737 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 210 2.8
2022 485 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 214 1.7
2023 257 1st lowest of 15 · 37% of median 121 2.0
2024 968 13th lowest of 15 · 139% of median 366 3.4
2025 804 11th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 304 2.6

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 17957 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 100% 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.