Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
TITSWORTH DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 1200531 · 1 · FOURMILE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:29 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 1861-05-31 — 14th most senior of the 1967 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: PEGGY DITCH (1861-05-20). Immediately behind: BATES DITCH (1861-05-31).
Decreed rights (7)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4169.0 | 1861-05-31 | 1894-02-03 | 0.187 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 9 |
| 4899.0 | 1863-05-31 | 1894-02-03 | 0.415 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 15 |
| 5520.0 | 1865-02-10 | 1894-02-03 | 1.56 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 5 |
| 5569.0 | 1865-03-31 | 1894-02-03 | 0.32 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 23 |
| 6360.0 | 1867-05-31 | 1894-02-03 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 11 |
| 8036.0 | 1872-01-01 | 1894-02-03 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 27 |
| 8094.0 | 1872-02-28 | 1894-02-03 | 0.3 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 83 |
Legal record & documents
21 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA3204, 11CW0088, 02/03/1894, 01/07/1907.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3204 | 4 | 1894-02-03 | O |
11CW0088 | 11 | 1894-02-03 | O |
02/03/1894 | 5 | 1894-02-03 | O |
01/07/1907 | 1 | 1894-02-03 | 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 1,223 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 1,335 AF — 109% of that, and 10th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 415 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 161 | 4.6 |
| 2012 | 271 | 1st lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 278 | 1.6 |
| 2013 | 1,282 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 280 | 9.4 |
| 2014 | 1,449 | 11th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 211 | 6.6 |
| 2015 | 1,031 | 6th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 156 | 5.0 |
| 2016 | 1,998 | 15th lowest of 15 · 163% of median | 276 | 5.1 |
| 2017 | 1,741 | 14th lowest of 15 · 142% of median | 249 | 4.8 |
| 2018 | 494 | 4th lowest of 15 · 40% of median | 141 | 5.0 |
| 2019 | 1,223 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 213 | 5.0 |
| 2020 | 471 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 38% of median | 97 | 4.2 |
| 2021 | 1,127 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 281 | 5.1 |
| 2022 | 818 | 5th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 234 | 4.8 |
| 2023 | 1,619 | 13th lowest of 15 · 132% of median | 271 | 5.7 |
| 2024 | 1,535 | 12th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 298 | 5.7 |
| 2025 | 1,335 | 10th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 225 | 4.8 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 7 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 20714 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 84% of the irrigation seasons in 1911-2025 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.