Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BELMAR RESERVOIR
Structure dossier · WDID 6903529 · 3 · RINCONE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:08 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (f6d7fdc) — 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 1912-08-26 — 18th most senior of the 55 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: SHOOTING STAR PUMP (1935-11-12). Immediately behind: MELVIN A IRR DITCH (1938-04-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31843.22883 | 1912-08-26 | 1968-06-11 | 80.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 33085.0 | 1940-08-01 | 1968-06-11 | 365.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 42550.0 | 1966-07-01 | 1968-06-11 | 0.0 | 467.0 | A | IRR |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA2220.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2220 | 3 | 1968-06-11 | 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 4 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1984, came in at 565 AF — 16143% of that, and 8th lowest of the 8 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1975 | 389 | 7th lowest of 8 · 11114% of median | — | 108 | 2.0 |
| 1976 | — | no recorded volume | 98 | 0 | — |
| 1977 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | — | 4 | 0.0 |
| 1978 | 7 | 5th lowest of 8 · 200% of median | 257 | 12 | 0.5 |
| 1979 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | 248 | 7 | 0.0 |
| 1980 | — | no recorded volume | 321 | 0 | — |
| 1981 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | 0 | 18 | 0.0 |
| 1982 | 242 | 6th lowest of 8 · 6914% of median | — | 59 | 2.5 |
| 1983 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | — | 7 | 0.0 |
| 1984 | 565 | 8th lowest of 8 · 16143% of median | — | 97 | 3.0 |
| 2002 | — | no recorded volume | 65 | 0 | — |
| 2003 | — | no recorded volume | 153 | 0 | — |
| 2007 | — | no recorded volume | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2008 | — | no recorded volume | 137 | 0 | — |
| 2009 | — | no recorded volume | 228 | 0 | — |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 8 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 394 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 3% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2009 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.