Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SHADY RETREAT D
Structure dossier · WDID 3500573 · 1 · SOUTH ZAPATA CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:34 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 1879-04-01 — 49th most senior of the 709 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: SMITH OVERFLOW DITCH (1878-06-01). Immediately behind: SOUTH D 1 (1880-06-01).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10683.0 | 1879-04-01 | 1895-03-26 | 3.33 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMRECDOMAUG | 5A |
| 11779.0 | 1882-04-01 | 1895-03-26 | 3.33 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMRECDOMAUGRCH | 9A |
| 14246.0 | 1889-01-01 | 1895-03-26 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMRECDOMAUGRCH | 18A, 19, 1 |
Legal record & documents
29 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
W3345, 89CW0030, 80CW0132, 10CW0002, 05CW0010, 03/26/1895.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W3345 | 6 | 1895-03-26 | O |
89CW0030 | 6 | 1895-03-26 | O |
80CW0132 | 6 | 1895-03-26 | O |
10CW0002 | 4 | 1895-03-26 | O |
05CW0010 | 4 | 1895-03-26 | O |
03/26/1895 | 3 | 1895-03-26 | 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 1,095 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1988, came in at 895 AF — 82% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1969 | 125 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 11% of median | 22 | 3.0 |
| 1970 | 430 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 39% of median | 99 | 6.0 |
| 1973 | 1,368 | 10th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 75 | 25.0 |
| 1977 | 432 | 4th lowest of 15 · 40% of median | 97 | 4.0 |
| 1978 | 111 | 1st lowest of 15 · 10% of median | 29 | 2.0 |
| 1979 | 1,265 | 9th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 113 | 10.0 |
| 1980 | 982 | 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 106 | 10.0 |
| 1981 | 815 | 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 141 | 8.0 |
| 1982 | 2,146 | 14th lowest of 15 · 196% of median | 124 | 12.0 |
| 1983 | 1,676 | 12th lowest of 15 · 153% of median | 120 | 15.0 |
| 1984 | 1,095 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 97 | 10.0 |
| 1985 | 1,634 | 11th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 94 | 20.0 |
| 1986 | 2,510 | 15th lowest of 15 · 229% of median | 101 | 45.0 |
| 1987 | 1,678 | 13th lowest of 15 · 153% of median | 111 | 20.0 |
| 1988 | 895 | 6th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 101 | 6.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+86 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.023).
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2144 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 19% of the irrigation seasons in 1952-2005 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.