Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
EVANSTOWN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 0400517 · 1 · BIG THOMPSON RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:23 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 1871-04-20 — 35th most senior of the 1296 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: JIM EGLIN DITCH (1869-05-31). Immediately behind: LARIMER CO IRR MFG D (1873-10-25).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7780.0 | 1871-04-20 | 1883-05-28 | 29.28 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
1 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA6613.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA6613 | 1 | 1883-05-28 | 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 6,905 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 4,720 AF — 68% of that, and 2nd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 10,252 | 15th lowest of 15 · 148% of median | 194 | 51.9 |
| 2011 | 9,496 | 13th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 180 | 39.2 |
| 2012 | 9,576 | 14th lowest of 15 · 139% of median | 187 | 44.8 |
| 2013 | 5,851 | 6th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 132 | 32.0 |
| 2014 | 6,827 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 124 | 50.8 |
| 2015 | 7,724 | 11th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 179 | 82.5 |
| 2016 | 8,913 | 12th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 198 | 39.3 |
| 2017 | 7,351 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 171 | 28.8 |
| 2018 | 6,905 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 188 | 28.5 |
| 2019 | 6,926 | 9th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 200 | 31.9 |
| 2020 | 5,141 | 4th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 179 | 25.9 |
| 2021 | 5,832 | 5th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 191 | 29.9 |
| 2022 | 4,726 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 191 | 16.8 |
| 2023 | 3,876 | 1st lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 172 | 16.8 |
| 2024 | 4,720 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 186 | 18.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-402 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.000).
How good is our record of it?
Grade A (9/10 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 | 12726 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 80% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2024 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.