Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

LYTLE SPRING & DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 1000895 · 1 · TURKEY CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 01:25 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 1872-12-31 — 934th most senior of the 2864 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: DUCK POND (1965-08-13). Immediately behind: ODNEAL WELL NO 2 (1965-08-23).

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
42228.084011872-12-311979-12-31 4.00.0 CIRRRECDOMFEDOTH

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 217 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 431 AF — 199% of that, and 12th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
2011 82 4th lowest of 15 · 38% of median 365 0.3
2012 63 2nd lowest of 15 · 29% of median 236 0.2
2013 274 9th lowest of 15 · 126% of median 153 1.4
2014 426 11th lowest of 15 · 196% of median 365 0.9
2015 760 15th lowest of 15 · 350% of median 365 1.6
2016 660 13th lowest of 15 · 304% of median 366 1.4
2017 726 14th lowest of 15 · 335% of median 365 1.7
2018 212 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median 365 0.6
2019 152 6th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 365 0.4
2020 63 2nd lowest of 15 · 29% of median 366 0.2
2021 129 5th lowest of 15 · 59% of median 365 0.8
2022 45 1st lowest of 15 · 21% of median 365 0.2
2023 279 10th lowest of 15 · 129% of median 365 1.9
2024 217 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 366 1.5
2025 431 12th lowest of 15 · 199% of median 304 1.8

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 11027 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1994-2025 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.