Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PERCIVAL DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 1200620 · 1 · HARDSCRABBLE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:01 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 1871-06-01 — 111th 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: HILTON LOWER DIVERSION (1871-05-31). Immediately behind: D&RGW COTOPAXI (1871-06-30).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7822.0 | 1871-06-01 | 1894-02-03 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 74 |
| 14280.0 | 1889-02-04 | 1894-02-03 | 1.2625 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 367 |
| 25688.0 | 1920-05-01 | 1922-02-25 | 18.42 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
02/25/1922, 02/03/1894.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
02/25/1922 | 1 | 1922-02-25 | S |
02/03/1894 | 3 | 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 168 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 289 AF — 172% of that, and 14th 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 | 35 | 6th lowest of 15 · 21% of median | 40 | 1.0 |
| 2012 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2013 | 9 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 5% of median | 14 | 1.1 |
| 2014 | 17 | 4th lowest of 15 · 10% of median | 17 | 1.3 |
| 2015 | 266 | 12th lowest of 15 · 158% of median | 146 | 1.0 |
| 2016 | 199 | 11th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 112 | 1.4 |
| 2017 | 593 | 15th lowest of 15 · 353% of median | 224 | 3.3 |
| 2018 | 28 | 5th lowest of 15 · 17% of median | 35 | 0.5 |
| 2019 | 168 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 91 | 2.4 |
| 2020 | 2 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 1% of median | 26 | 0.6 |
| 2021 | 103 | 7th lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 84 | 1.0 |
| 2022 | 180 | 9th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 129 | 1.1 |
| 2023 | 186 | 10th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 142 | 1.0 |
| 2024 | 276 | 13th lowest of 15 · 164% of median | 129 | 2.2 |
| 2025 | 289 | 14th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 174 | 1.1 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+17 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.038).
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
| 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 | 9343 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 38% of the irrigation seasons in 1912-2025 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.