Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SOUTH FLAT DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 0500558 · 1 · SAINT VRAIN CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:57 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 1863-05-15 — 64th most senior of the 1289 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: HOLLAND DITCH (1863-05-01). Immediately behind: BADER DITCH 1 & 2 (1863-05-31).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4883.0 | 1863-05-15 | 1882-06-02 | 14.75 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNAUGPWRRCHWLDALL | |
| 4883.0 | 1863-05-15 | 1882-06-02 | 215.4 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNAUGPWRRCHWLDALL |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
SC8074, CA6387, CA1311, 87CW0220, 08CW0275.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
SC8074 | 1 | 1882-06-02 | O |
CA6387 | 1 | 1882-06-02 | O |
CA1311 | 1 | 1882-06-02 | O |
87CW0220 | 2 | 1882-06-02 | O |
08CW0275 | 2 | 1882-06-02 | 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 811 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 829 AF — 102% of that, and 10th lowest of the 15 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 906 | 13th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 432 | 135 | 10.2 |
| 2011 | 1,488 | 15th lowest of 15 · 184% of median | — | 195 | 9.4 |
| 2012 | 1,000 | 14th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | — | 186 | 5.3 |
| 2013 | 766 | 5th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | — | 111 | 7.3 |
| 2014 | 847 | 11th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | — | 153 | 7.1 |
| 2015 | 876 | 12th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | — | 112 | 8.5 |
| 2016 | 795 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | — | 143 | 8.1 |
| 2017 | 766 | 5th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | — | 123 | 7.8 |
| 2018 | 816 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | — | 152 | 7.0 |
| 2019 | 705 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 87% of median | — | 181 | 9.2 |
| 2020 | 603 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 74% of median | — | 131 | 6.7 |
| 2021 | 503 | 1st lowest of 15 · 62% of median | — | 141 | 6.1 |
| 2022 | 746 | 4th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | — | 170 | 8.2 |
| 2023 | 811 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 199 | 7.1 |
| 2024 | 829 | 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | — | 182 | 8.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-20 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.020).
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 10985 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 69% 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.