Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RINKER PUMP D
Structure dossier · WDID 5500519 · 8 · LITTLE SNAKE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:08 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1916-06-26 — 95th most senior of the 477 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: TISDEL SPG NO 2 (1971-06-01). Immediately behind: DAISY SPG (1935-06-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 45290.24283 | 1916-06-26 | 1974-12-31 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 48577.48364 | 1982-06-01 | 1983-12-31 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 48734.0 | 1983-06-06 | 1983-12-31 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
87CW0102, 83CW0056, W0591-74.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
87CW0102 | 1 | 1983-12-31 | S |
83CW0056 | 2 | 1983-12-31 | S |
W0591-74 | 1 | 1974-12-31 | 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 183 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 849 | 12th lowest of 15 · 464% of median | 48 | 9.3 |
| 2008 | 5 | 4th lowest of 15 · 3% of median | 78 | 0.1 |
| 2009 | 139 | 7th lowest of 15 · 76% of median | 8 | 10.0 |
| 2010 | 1,190 | 14th lowest of 15 · 650% of median | 54 | 12.0 |
| 2012 | 2,043 | 15th lowest of 15 · 1116% of median | 107 | 10.0 |
| 2013 | 1,023 | 13th lowest of 15 · 559% of median | 44 | 12.0 |
| 2014 | 183 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 37 | 2.9 |
| 2015 | 228 | 10th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 45 | 2.9 |
| 2016 | 560 | 11th lowest of 15 · 306% of median | 99 | 2.9 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2018 | 189 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 47 | 2.9 |
| 2019 | 11 | 5th lowest of 15 · 6% of median | 6 | 2.9 |
| 2020 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2022 | 24 | 6th lowest of 15 · 13% of median | 20 | 0.8 |
| 2023 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-38 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.042).
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 | 1965 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 19% of the irrigation seasons in 1974-2023 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.