← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

SHARP-FOSTER DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 1300982 · 1 · NORTH BRUSH CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 01:21 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 1872-06-0177th most senior of the 1017 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: A KATZENSTEIN NO 2 (1872-06-01). Immediately behind: LOCKHART DITCH NO 1 (1872-06-01).

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
8188.01872-06-011894-02-03 1.57890.0 CIRR 12

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 267 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 188 AF — 70% of that, and 4th 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)
2010 340 9th lowest of 15 · 127% of median 125 1.6
2011 127 2nd lowest of 15 · 48% of median 43 1.6
2012 207 6th lowest of 15 · 78% of median 78 1.5
2013 249 7th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 87 1.6
2014 267 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 126 1.6
2015 190 5th lowest of 15 · 71% of median 63 1.6
2016 462 13th lowest of 15 · 173% of median 155 1.6
2017 462 13th lowest of 15 · 173% of median 173 1.6
2018 45 1st lowest of 15 · 17% of median 31 0.8
2019 385 11th lowest of 15 · 144% of median 161 1.6
2020 170 3rd lowest of 15 · 64% of median 74 1.6
2021 375 10th lowest of 15 · 140% of median 165 1.6
2022 458 12th lowest of 15 · 172% of median 181 1.6
2023 678 15th lowest of 15 · 254% of median 238 1.6
2024 188 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 84 1.6

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 7962 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 34% of the irrigation seasons in 1916-2024 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.