Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HARRIMAN DITCH LEFT IN STREAM AT HEADGAT
Structure dossier · WDID 0902950 · 0 · BEAR CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:47 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 1861-12-01 — 21st 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 ahead: MOUNT CARBON METRO DIST DITCH (1861-12-01). Immediately behind: HOMESTEAD GOLF COURSE PONDS (1861-12-01).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4353.0 | 1861-12-01 | 1884-02-04 | 0.0308 | 0.0 | C | MUNDOMAUG | |
| 5418.0 | 1864-10-31 | 1884-02-04 | 0.0637 | 0.0 | C | MUNDOMAUG | |
| 5570.0 | 1865-04-01 | 1884-02-04 | 0.0287 | 0.0 | C | MUNDOMAUG | |
| 5753.0 | 1865-10-01 | 1884-02-04 | 326.02 | 0.0 | A | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMAUG | |
| 5753.0 | 1865-10-01 | 1884-02-04 | 1.97 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMAUG |
Legal record & documents
9 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
84CW0221, 80CW0289, 18CW3195, 17CW3217, 04CW0197.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
84CW0221 | 1 | 1884-02-04 | O |
80CW0289 | 3 | 1884-02-04 | O |
18CW3195 | 2 | 1884-02-04 | O |
17CW3217 | 2 | 1884-02-04 | O |
04CW0197 | 1 | 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 12 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 646 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 640 AF — 99% of that, and 6th lowest of the 12 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 | 383 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 59% of median | 383 | 245 | 3.2 |
| 2013 | 772 | 9th lowest of 12 · 120% of median | 772 | 244 | 6.4 |
| 2014 | 1 | 1st lowest of 12 · 0% of median | 1 | 32 | 0.0 |
| 2016 | 776 | 10th lowest of 12 · 120% of median | 776 | 214 | 3.9 |
| 2017 | 851 | 12th lowest of 12 · 132% of median | 851 | 245 | 3.2 |
| 2018 | 456 | 4th lowest of 12 · 71% of median | 456 | 241 | 3.2 |
| 2019 | 736 | 8th lowest of 12 · 114% of median | 736 | 245 | 3.2 |
| 2020 | 327 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 51% of median | 327 | 216 | 3.2 |
| 2021 | 651 | 7th lowest of 12 · 101% of median | 651 | 210 | 3.2 |
| 2022 | 818 | 11th lowest of 12 · 127% of median | 818 | 244 | 3.2 |
| 2023 | 515 | 5th lowest of 12 · 80% of median | 515 | 200 | 3.2 |
| 2024 | 640 | 6th lowest of 12 · 99% of median | 640 | 225 | 3.2 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2561 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 94% of the irrigation seasons in 2012-2024 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.