Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CARBONDALE MUN WELL RF01
Structure dossier · WDID 3806265 · 2 · ROARING FORK RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:01 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 1883-01-11 — 76th most senior of the 4788 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: CARBONDALE MUN WELL CR01 (1883-01-11). Immediately behind: CARBONDALE MUN WELL RF02 (1883-01-11).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12064.0 | 1883-01-11 | 1889-05-11 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 51 |
| 12518.0 | 1884-04-09 | 1889-05-11 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 81 |
| 13605.0 | 1887-04-01 | 1889-05-01 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 169 |
| 25494.1368 | 1887-06-15 | 1920-02-21 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 180B |
| 30941.14776 | 1890-06-15 | 1936-08-25 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 311 |
| 30941.23895 | 1915-06-04 | 1936-08-25 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 399 |
| 30941.25658 | 1920-04-01 | 1936-08-25 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUN | 408 |
| 46020.45773 | 1975-04-28 | 1976-12-31 | 0.78 | 0.1 | C | IRRMUNINDFIRDOMOTH |
Legal record & documents
9 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
W3288, 86CW0191, 88CW0421.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W3288 | 1 | 1976-12-31 | S |
86CW0191 | 1 | 1976-12-31 | S |
88CW0421 | 7 | 1936-08-25 | 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 155 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 123 AF — 79% of that, and 5th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 180 | 10th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 365 | 1.9 |
| 2011 | 39 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 25% of median | 365 | 0.8 |
| 2012 | 59 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 38% of median | 366 | 0.9 |
| 2013 | 17 | 1st lowest of 15 · 11% of median | 365 | 0.6 |
| 2014 | 282 | 13th lowest of 15 · 182% of median | 365 | 4.0 |
| 2015 | 156 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 365 | 1.1 |
| 2016 | 142 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 366 | 1.2 |
| 2017 | 315 | 14th lowest of 15 · 203% of median | 365 | 2.5 |
| 2018 | 378 | 15th lowest of 15 · 244% of median | 365 | 1.6 |
| 2019 | 121 | 4th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 365 | 0.9 |
| 2020 | 218 | 12th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 366 | 1.4 |
| 2021 | 184 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 365 | 1.0 |
| 2022 | 131 | 6th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 365 | 0.8 |
| 2023 | 155 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 365 | 0.9 |
| 2024 | 123 | 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 305 | 0.7 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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
| 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 | 6175 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 2005-2024 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.