← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

DELL DITCH NO 1

Structure dossier · WDID 1200563 · 1 · CURRANT CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:35 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 1879-06-01335th 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: CHESS WELL NO 2 (1904-01-01). Immediately behind: FLOOD DITCH (1900-04-01).

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
19852.107441879-06-011904-05-12 1.50.0 CIRR

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 133 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 215 AF — 162% of that, and 10th 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)
1980 1,190 13th lowest of 15 · 895% of median 200 3.0
1983 1,309 14th lowest of 15 · 984% of median 200 3.3
1984 1,309 14th lowest of 15 · 984% of median 200 3.3
2014 32 2nd lowest of 15 · 24% of median 46 1.6
2015 327 12th lowest of 15 · 246% of median 137 4.7
2016 133 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 169 1.5
2017 159 9th lowest of 15 · 120% of median 160 1.2
2018 73 6th lowest of 15 · 55% of median 86 0.8
2019 97 7th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 84 0.8
2020 20 1st lowest of 15 · 15% of median 36 0.6
2021 41 3rd lowest of 15 · 31% of median 44 1.0
2022 53 4th lowest of 15 · 40% of median 99 1.0
2023 57 5th lowest of 15 · 43% of median 63 0.5
2024 246 11th lowest of 15 · 185% of median 155 1.5
2025 215 10th lowest of 15 · 162% of median 77 1.7

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 2165 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 18% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2025 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.