Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BRISCOE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 1100565 · 1 · SOUTH ARKANSAS RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:48 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 1876-11-18 — 122nd most senior of the 1489 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: FRANTZ DITCH (1875-12-31). Immediately behind: BRISCOE DITCH WELL 84102 (1876-11-18).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9819.0 | 1876-11-18 | 1890-06-19 | 1.8 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 60 |
| 11078.0 | 1880-04-30 | 1890-06-19 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 75 |
| 11474.0 | 1881-05-31 | 1890-06-19 | 2.2 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 91 |
| 11839.0 | 1882-05-31 | 1890-06-19 | 5.4 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 113 |
Legal record & documents
13 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA1127, 84CW0102, 18CW3008.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1127 | 4 | 1890-06-19 | O |
84CW0102 | 1 | 1890-06-19 | O |
18CW3008 | 8 | 1890-06-19 | 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 1,741 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 984 AF — 56% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | 1,877 | 10th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 164 | 8.0 |
| 2009 | 1,622 | 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 185 | 6.0 |
| 2010 | 1,452 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 162 | 6.0 |
| 2011 | 2,068 | 14th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 194 | 8.0 |
| 2012 | 910 | 1st lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 149 | 6.5 |
| 2013 | 1,893 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 197 | 9.3 |
| 2014 | 1,736 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 187 | 8.0 |
| 2015 | 1,558 | 5th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 191 | 6.7 |
| 2016 | 1,972 | 12th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 204 | 9.3 |
| 2017 | 1,741 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 178 | 8.5 |
| 2018 | 1,555 | 4th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 188 | 8.7 |
| 2019 | 2,199 | 15th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 214 | 8.6 |
| 2020 | 1,843 | 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 187 | 12.3 |
| 2021 | 1,975 | 13th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 195 | 9.9 |
| 2023 | 984 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 100 | 5.9 |
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 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 9350 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 39% of the irrigation seasons in 1912-2023 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.