← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

MICHIGAN DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 1100661 · 1 · COTTONWOOD CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 03:02 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 1887-03-17226th 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: BOOTS & HINTON DITCH (1887-03-15). Immediately behind: OURAY DITCH (1887-03-31).

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
13590.01887-03-171905-01-17 4.00.0 CIRR

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 269 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 29 AF — 11% of that, and 4th 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)
2008 440 13th lowest of 15 · 164% of median 366 4.0
2009 372 11th lowest of 15 · 138% of median 306 4.0
2010 196 6th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 38 4.0
2011 270 9th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 47 4.0
2012 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 12 0.0
2013 56 5th lowest of 15 · 21% of median 23 4.0
2014 269 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 52 4.0
2015 395 12th lowest of 15 · 147% of median 76 4.0
2016 225 7th lowest of 15 · 84% of median 40 4.0
2017 628 14th lowest of 15 · 234% of median 103 4.7
2018 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 8 0.0
2019 1,584 15th lowest of 15 · 589% of median 123 13.0
2020 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 7 0.0
2021 300 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 35 13.0
2023 29 4th lowest of 15 · 11% of median 12 1.8

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 4270 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 18% 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.