Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HADLEY CONSOLIDATED D
Structure dossier · WDID 3900934 · 1 · MAIN ELK CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:45 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 1887-06-01 — 180th most senior of the 1758 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: SHUPE/WESCOTT DITCH (1885-10-01). Immediately behind: RILEY DITCH (1888-07-01).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21521.13666 | 1887-06-01 | 1908-12-05 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 115B |
| 21521.16253 | 1894-07-01 | 1908-12-05 | 0.2 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 153A |
| 21521.21244 | 1908-03-01 | 1908-12-05 | 0.7 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 176 |
| 32959.24601 | 1917-05-10 | 1943-01-11 | 0.3 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 216 |
| 32959.25995 | 1921-03-04 | 1943-01-11 | 1.6 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 220A |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
W2082, 92CW0038.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W2082 | 5 | 1943-01-11 | S |
92CW0038 | 2 | 1943-01-11 | 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 250 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 214 AF — 86% 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 | 165 | 4th lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 131 | 0.9 |
| 2011 | 150 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 155 | 1.1 |
| 2012 | 502 | 13th lowest of 15 · 201% of median | 157 | 2.2 |
| 2013 | 224 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 152 | 2.0 |
| 2014 | 617 | 15th lowest of 15 · 247% of median | 181 | 2.9 |
| 2015 | 598 | 14th lowest of 15 · 239% of median | 150 | 2.3 |
| 2016 | 415 | 12th lowest of 15 · 166% of median | 105 | 2.2 |
| 2017 | 293 | 9th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 165 | 1.3 |
| 2018 | 408 | 11th lowest of 15 · 163% of median | 171 | 1.4 |
| 2019 | 250 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 99 | 2.0 |
| 2020 | 234 | 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 97 | 1.4 |
| 2021 | 156 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 100 | 0.8 |
| 2022 | 113 | 1st lowest of 15 · 45% of median | 73 | 0.8 |
| 2023 | 406 | 10th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 186 | 1.4 |
| 2024 | 214 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 127 | 1.4 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 8802 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1984-2024 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.