← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

ADAMS DITCH NO 2

Structure dossier · WDID 1300989 · 1 · NORTH BRUSH CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:18 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 1880-05-31317th 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: KITZMAN & TOD DITCH NO 2 (1880-05-31). Immediately behind: THOMAS BALMAN DITCH NO 4 (1880-05-31).

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
11109.01880-05-311894-02-03 1.00.0 CIRR 61

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 60 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 67 AF — 112% 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)
2005 85 12th lowest of 15 · 142% of median 44 1.0
2006 24 1st lowest of 15 · 40% of median 13 1.0
2007 60 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 31 1.0
2008 157 15th lowest of 15 · 262% of median 80 1.0
2009 52 7th lowest of 15 · 87% of median 28 1.0
2010 50 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median 26 1.0
2014 115 13th lowest of 15 · 192% of median 59 1.0
2015 69 11th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 36 1.0
2016 65 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median 34 1.0
2017 46 5th lowest of 15 · 77% of median 24 1.0
2019 117 14th lowest of 15 · 195% of median 61 1.0
2021 40 3rd lowest of 15 · 67% of median 21 1.0
2022 44 4th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 24 1.0
2023 24 1st lowest of 15 · 40% of median 13 1.0
2024 67 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 36 1.0

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 1779 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 10% of the irrigation seasons in 1942-2024 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.