Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KERR DITCH NO 1
Structure dossier · WDID 0600612 · DITCH · COAL CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:56 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (96d5528) — 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: no administrative call record for this basin.
Where it sits in line
Priority 1861-04-15 — 100th most senior of the 1867 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: ERIE LAKE RES (1881-10-15). Immediately behind: KERR DITCH NO 2 (1868-04-15).
On COAL CREEK at river mile 8.6, it is 21st of 29 down the reach. Immediately upstream: LOUISVILLE CCGC PL 3. Immediately downstream: KERR DITCH NO 2.
Position on the modelled network, not a claim about whose water this is — a stream carries water from many rights at once, and diverted water returns to it.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11841.04123 | 1861-04-15 | 1894-05-05 | 7.68 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
1 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA3107.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3107 | 1 | 1894-05-05 | 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 595 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2003, came in at 135 AF — 23% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1989 | 498 | 6th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 168 | 5.0 |
| 1990 | 427 | 5th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 181 | 2.5 |
| 1991 | 655 | 10th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 177 | 6.0 |
| 1992 | 873 | 15th lowest of 15 · 147% of median | 164 | 6.0 |
| 1993 | 709 | 13th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 129 | 7.0 |
| 1994 | 633 | 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 176 | 4.0 |
| 1995 | 595 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 171 | 3.0 |
| 1996 | 666 | 12th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 166 | 6.0 |
| 1997 | 736 | 14th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 165 | 6.0 |
| 1998 | 663 | 11th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 148 | 4.5 |
| 1999 | 529 | 7th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 167 | 3.0 |
| 2000 | 350 | 4th lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 158 | 3.2 |
| 2001 | 182 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 31% of median | 101 | 2.5 |
| 2002 | 53 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 75 | 0.8 |
| 2003 | 135 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 23% of median | 49 | 2.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-35 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.048).
Its reference gage, EGGLESTON 1 DITCH: no clear flow trend.
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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | stale | 4068 measured days, but newest is 8426 day(s) before the data's end (target 450) |
| record continuity | sparse | 36% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2003 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.