Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
COTTONWOOD IRRIGATING 1
Structure dossier · WDID 1100648 · 1 · COTTONWOOD CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:23 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 1866-07-31 — 42nd 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: GORREL DITCH (1866-05-31). Immediately behind: COTTONWOOD IRRIGATING 2 (1866-07-31).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6056.0 | 1866-07-31 | 1890-06-19 | 3.78 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 15 |
| 8401.0 | 1872-12-31 | 1890-06-19 | 10.28 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 43 |
| 22888.13881 | 1888-01-02 | 1913-07-14 | 1.9 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 194 |
Legal record & documents
13 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
W0344, CA4738, CA4396, CA1127, 79CW0172, 19CW3089.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W0344 | 1 | 1913-07-14 | S |
CA4738 | 2 | 1890-06-19 | O |
CA4396 | 2 | 1890-06-19 | O |
CA1127 | 2 | 1890-06-19 | O |
79CW0172 | 2 | 1890-06-19 | O |
19CW3089 | 4 | 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 4,429 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 4,369 AF — 99% of that, and 7th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 4,525 | 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 327 | 16.4 |
| 2010 | 4,607 | 11th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 223 | 14.1 |
| 2011 | 5,130 | 15th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 241 | 20.3 |
| 2012 | 4,616 | 12th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 214 | 14.1 |
| 2013 | 4,656 | 13th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 184 | 14.1 |
| 2014 | 4,429 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 199 | 18.1 |
| 2015 | 3,127 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 175 | 15.6 |
| 2016 | 2,779 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 174 | 15.0 |
| 2017 | 4,938 | 14th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 195 | 16.3 |
| 2018 | 3,232 | 4th lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 196 | 17.0 |
| 2019 | 4,079 | 6th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 195 | 14.0 |
| 2020 | 3,826 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 180 | 16.1 |
| 2021 | 4,512 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 203 | 19.0 |
| 2022 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2023 | 4,369 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 178 | 14.9 |
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 (8/10 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 11587 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 48% of the irrigation seasons in 1910-2023 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.