← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

LILY POND DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 1100733 · 1 · CORSKE CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 01:20 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 1881-05-01321st 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: COLORADO GULCH DITCH (1879-07-01). Immediately behind: METTE DITCH (1887-03-30).

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
22888.114441881-05-011913-07-14 6.00.0 CIRR 192

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 1,144 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2020, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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)
2003 336 3rd lowest of 15 · 29% of median 192 5.0
2004 324 2nd lowest of 15 · 28% of median 183 1.8
2005 416 4th lowest of 15 · 36% of median 177 2.9
2006 1,144 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 167 6.9
2007 1,449 12th lowest of 15 · 127% of median 138 6.0
2008 1,371 11th lowest of 15 · 120% of median 150 11.4
2009 1,194 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median 177 6.0
2010 958 7th lowest of 15 · 84% of median 181 7.6
2011 1,713 14th lowest of 15 · 150% of median 204 14.7
2012 451 5th lowest of 15 · 39% of median 203 1.9
2013 831 6th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 170 6.0
2014 1,481 13th lowest of 15 · 130% of median 179 6.0
2015 1,787 15th lowest of 15 · 156% of median 171 13.5
2016 1,231 10th lowest of 15 · 108% of median 160 6.0
2020 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 4420 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 44% of the irrigation seasons in 1973-2020 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.