← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

CHRISTY DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 1200823 · 1 · CHANDLER CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:13 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 1883-04-20276th 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: CAMPBELL DITCH (HORTON SPRINGS) (1883-03-01). Immediately behind: GLEN VISTA AUG PLAN (1883-05-31).

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
12163.01883-04-201894-02-03 1.00.0 CIRR 286

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 43 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 43 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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)
1998 341 14th lowest of 15 · 793% of median 173 1.0
1999 361 15th lowest of 15 · 840% of median 183 1.0
2003 81 10th lowest of 15 · 188% of median 42 1.0
2004 105 11th lowest of 15 · 244% of median 54 1.0
2005 125 12th lowest of 15 · 291% of median 64 1.0
2007 151 13th lowest of 15 · 351% of median 77 1.0
2008 18 5th lowest of 15 · 42% of median 10 1.0
2009 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 4 0.0
2010 44 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median 42 1.0
2020 24 6th lowest of 15 · 56% of median 62 0.2
2021 3 4th lowest of 15 · 7% of median 10 0.2
2022 2 3rd lowest of 15 · 5% of median 23 0.1
2023 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
2024 37 7th lowest of 15 · 86% of median 44 0.4
2025 43 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 108 0.2

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 4156 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 17% of the irrigation seasons in 1913-2025 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.