Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BEAVER CREEK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 0100534 · 1 · BEAVER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:21 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 1889-04-18 — 325th most senior of the 7705 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: BENTON DITCH (1888-07-01). Immediately behind: BEAVER FARMERS CANAL D (1889-09-09).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16761.14353 | 1889-04-18 | 1900-12-17 | 16.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA1186, 16CW3107.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1186 | 1 | 1900-12-17 | S |
16CW3107 | 2 | 1900-12-17 | 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 14 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 1,206 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,306 AF — 108% of that, and 10th lowest of the 14 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 765 | 1st lowest of 14 · 63% of median | 65 | 11.4 |
| 2012 | 1,196 | 6th lowest of 14 · 99% of median | 166 | 11.4 |
| 2013 | 853 | 2nd lowest of 14 · 71% of median | 154 | 6.5 |
| 2014 | 1,380 | 11th lowest of 14 · 114% of median | 164 | 6.4 |
| 2015 | 1,055 | 4th lowest of 14 · 88% of median | 93 | 13.4 |
| 2016 | 1,241 | 9th lowest of 14 · 103% of median | 132 | 13.5 |
| 2017 | 924 | 3rd lowest of 14 · 77% of median | 114 | 9.9 |
| 2018 | 1,214 | 8th lowest of 14 · 101% of median | 142 | 14.0 |
| 2019 | 1,438 | 13th lowest of 14 · 119% of median | 166 | 14.3 |
| 2020 | 1,198 | 7th lowest of 14 · 99% of median | 170 | 14.0 |
| 2021 | 1,425 | 12th lowest of 14 · 118% of median | 147 | 15.4 |
| 2022 | 1,560 | 14th lowest of 14 · 129% of median | 169 | 16.4 |
| 2023 | 1,135 | 5th lowest of 14 · 94% of median | 176 | 19.0 |
| 2024 | 1,306 | 10th lowest of 14 · 108% of median | 168 | 10.6 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 14 recorded years (+35 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.049).
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (8/10 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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2026 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 71% of the irrigation seasons in 2011-2024 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.