Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WHIPPLE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 0200871 · DITCH · BIG DRY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:05 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (0576005) — 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.
Current administration
● Fully called out — call at LOWER LATHAM DITCH (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1877-11-14).
● Fully called out — call at WESTERN MUTUAL DITCH (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1871-08-09).
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 1885-12-31 — 711th most senior of the 21881 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: GERMAN DITCH (1885-11-30). Immediately behind: 2300521 (1885-12-31).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13149.0 | 1885-12-31 | 1888-02-15 | 0.99 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 15895.12663 | 1884-09-01 | 1918-08-02 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 56567.0 | 2004-11-15 | 2004-12-31 | 0.0 | 31.0 | C | MUNALL | |
| 56602.0 | 2004-12-20 | 2004-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | MUNALL |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
04CW0310, CA54658, CA8568.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
04CW0310 | 2 | 2004-12-31 | S |
CA54658 | 1 | 1918-08-02 | S |
CA8568 | 1 | 1888-02-15 | O |
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 4,880 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 4,147 AF — 85% of that, and 4th 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 | 14 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 4 | 6.0 |
| 2008 | 30 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 1% of median | 4 | 5.0 |
| 2012 | 8,638 | 15th lowest of 15 · 177% of median | 97 | 98.3 |
| 2013 | 6,251 | 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 88 | 55.7 |
| 2014 | 8,115 | 14th lowest of 15 · 166% of median | 163 | 56.5 |
| 2015 | 4,880 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 145 | 54.8 |
| 2016 | 5,625 | 9th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 98 | 47.1 |
| 2017 | 7,901 | 13th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 148 | 53.3 |
| 2018 | 4,206 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 142 | 33.2 |
| 2019 | 7,496 | 12th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 219 | 46.6 |
| 2020 | 6,956 | 11th lowest of 15 · 142% of median | 173 | 41.9 |
| 2021 | 4,327 | 7th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 161 | 35.3 |
| 2022 | 4,272 | 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 296 | 34.7 |
| 2023 | 2,933 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 365 | 25.8 |
| 2024 | 4,147 | 4th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 305 | 38.6 |
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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3537 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 39% of the irrigation seasons in 1982-2024 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.