Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MCBROOM DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 0900816 · 1 · BEAR CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:57 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 1859-11-01 — 1st most senior of the 2058 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 behind: BEAR CREEK LAKE (1859-11-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3592.0 | 1859-11-01 | 1884-02-04 | 3.415 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNALL | |
| 50848.0 | 1989-03-20 | 1989-12-31 | 14.69 | 1.31 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMSTKAUG |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
89CW0063, 19CW3171, 00CW0045, CA6832, 88CW0203.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
89CW0063 | 1 | 1989-12-31 | S |
19CW3171 | 1 | 1989-12-31 | S |
00CW0045 | 1 | 1989-12-31 | S |
CA6832 | 1 | 1884-02-04 | O |
88CW0203 | 3 | 1884-02-04 | 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 658 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 546 AF — 83% of that, and 3rd 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 | 1,314 | 14th lowest of 15 · 200% of median | — | 332 | 6.9 |
| 2011 | 843 | 9th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | — | 274 | 9.4 |
| 2012 | 658 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 214 | 3.2 |
| 2013 | 653 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | — | 214 | 3.2 |
| 2014 | 910 | 10th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | — | 274 | 4.1 |
| 2015 | 1,296 | 13th lowest of 15 · 197% of median | — | 364 | 5.3 |
| 2016 | 1,629 | 15th lowest of 15 · 248% of median | — | 366 | 6.0 |
| 2017 | 1,234 | 12th lowest of 15 · 188% of median | — | 296 | 5.7 |
| 2018 | 1,125 | 11th lowest of 15 · 171% of median | — | 304 | 9.1 |
| 2019 | 226 | 1st lowest of 15 · 34% of median | — | 202 | 1.4 |
| 2020 | 517 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 79% of median | — | 223 | 5.4 |
| 2021 | 578 | 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | — | 197 | 2.2 |
| 2022 | 563 | 4th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | — | 209 | 2.9 |
| 2023 | 574 | 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | — | 215 | 3.2 |
| 2024 | 546 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median | — | 211 | 8.7 |
Call-derived yield: senior right divertible 100.0% of a median season / 100.0% dry-year.
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-26 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.038).
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 15599 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 98% 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.