Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
0801218
Structure dossier · WDID 0801218 · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:11 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.
Current administration
● Fully called out — call at LAST CHANCE DITCH 2 (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1863-12-30).
● Fully called out — call at NEVADA DITCH (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1865-12-30).
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 1866-08-30 — 205th 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: 0802904 (1866-06-15). Immediately behind: 2300759 (1866-12-31).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6086.0 | 1866-08-30 | 1883-12-10 | 2.92 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
1 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
12/10/1883.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
12/10/1883 | 1 | 1883-12-10 | 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 405 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1998, came in at 519 AF — 128% of that, and 10th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1982 | 696 | 13th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 164 | 2.5 |
| 1984 | 333 | 5th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 70 | 3.0 |
| 1985 | 382 | 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 80 | 2.5 |
| 1986 | 651 | 12th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 138 | 3.0 |
| 1987 | 438 | 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 105 | 3.0 |
| 1988 | 218 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 64 | 2.0 |
| 1989 | 95 | 1st lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 25 | 2.0 |
| 1990 | 335 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 96 | 2.0 |
| 1991 | 299 | 4th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 82 | 2.5 |
| 1992 | 405 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 103 | 2.0 |
| 1994 | 603 | 11th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 184 | 2.5 |
| 1995 | 897 | 15th lowest of 15 · 222% of median | 194 | 2.5 |
| 1996 | 247 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 78 | 2.0 |
| 1997 | 849 | 14th lowest of 15 · 210% of median | 215 | 2.0 |
| 1998 | 519 | 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 123 | 3.5 |
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 C (6/10 points) — the components below are the finding; the letter alone is not.
The rubric, component by component
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | partial | missing name, structure type, water source |
| decreed rights | on file | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2697 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 28% of the irrigation seasons in 1953-1998 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.