← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

MCQUEARY SHOEMAKER D HG1

Structure dossier · WDID 7200782 · 1 · TATE CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:42 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 1914-08-15379th most senior of the 2166 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: JULIA KRUH DITCH (1914-08-05). Immediately behind: PARROT DITCH (1914-08-15).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
30895.236021914-08-151941-07-25 3.90.0 CIRR

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 329 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2022, came in at 145 AF — 44% of that, and 2nd lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
1992 186 6th lowest of 15 · 56% of median 65 3.1
1993 1,465 15th lowest of 15 · 445% of median 162 10.8
1994 509 12th lowest of 15 · 155% of median 161 2.5
1995 329 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 68 4.3
1996 159 3rd lowest of 15 · 48% of median 46 2.8
1997 918 14th lowest of 15 · 279% of median 156 4.3
1998 383 10th lowest of 15 · 116% of median 98 3.5
2000 184 5th lowest of 15 · 56% of median 124 0.9
2001 175 4th lowest of 15 · 53% of median 151 0.7
2004 230 7th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 71 2.1
2007 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
2011 766 13th lowest of 15 · 233% of median 145 3.6
2014 404 11th lowest of 15 · 123% of median 166 3.3
2019 373 9th lowest of 15 · 113% of median 100 3.9
2022 145 2nd lowest of 15 · 44% of median 74 1.3

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 1960 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 18% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2022 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.