Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LONE CABIN RESERVOIR
Structure dossier · WDID 4003407 · 3 · MINNESOTA CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:51 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 1905-10-10 — 1295th most senior of the 4661 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: OAK MESA DITCH (1905-06-20). Immediately behind: WEST RESERVOIR (1905-10-19).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21263.20371 | 1905-10-10 | 1914-06-23 | 90.0 | 0.0 | A | IRRAUG | A10 |
| 29260.2355 | 1914-06-24 | 1937-05-28 | 235.9 | 0.0 | A | IRRAUG | H47 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA2563, 86CW0038, CA0617.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2563 | 1 | 1937-05-28 | S |
86CW0038 | 4 | 1937-05-28 | S |
CA0617 | 1 | 1914-06-23 | 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 147 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2004, came in at 119 AF — 81% of that, and 5th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990 | 60 | 1st lowest of 15 · 41% of median | — | 16 | 2.0 |
| 1991 | 110 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 75% of median | — | 47 | 1.5 |
| 1992 | 104 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 71% of median | — | 71 | 1.5 |
| 1993 | 147 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 283 | 43 | 2.0 |
| 1994 | 167 | 14th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | — | 75 | 1.6 |
| 1995 | 176 | 15th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | — | 48 | 2.6 |
| 1996 | 159 | 13th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | — | 42 | 2.0 |
| 1997 | 129 | 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | — | 37 | 2.5 |
| 1998 | 149 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | — | 31 | 2.5 |
| 1999 | 157 | 12th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | — | 33 | 2.5 |
| 2000 | 114 | 4th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | — | 24 | 2.5 |
| 2001 | 149 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | — | 26 | 3.0 |
| 2002 | 149 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | — | 41 | 2.5 |
| 2003 | 147 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 29 | 3.0 |
| 2004 | 119 | 5th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | — | 30 | 3.0 |
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 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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1128 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 18% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2004 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.