← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

WM KNUTH DITCH NO 3

Structure dossier · WDID 1301065 · 1 · PIROTH CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:13 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 1877-06-02251st 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: HOULE DITCH NO 5 (1877-06-01). Immediately behind: JACOB BECK DITCH NO 6 (1877-06-24).

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
10015.01877-06-021896-03-12 0.410.0 CIRR 186

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 31 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 41 AF — 132% of that, and 14th 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)
2007 30 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median 39 0.4
2008 33 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 42 0.4
2009 33 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 43 0.4
2010 22 4th lowest of 15 · 71% of median 29 0.4
2011 15 1st lowest of 15 · 48% of median 22 0.4
2013 15 1st lowest of 15 · 48% of median 21 0.4
2014 22 4th lowest of 15 · 71% of median 29 0.4
2015 36 12th lowest of 15 · 116% of median 47 0.4
2016 29 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median 38 0.4
2017 16 3rd lowest of 15 · 52% of median 22 0.4
2019 35 11th lowest of 15 · 113% of median 44 0.4
2021 41 14th lowest of 15 · 132% of median 53 0.4
2022 31 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 46 0.4
2023 40 13th lowest of 15 · 129% of median 51 0.4
2024 41 14th lowest of 15 · 132% of median 52 0.4

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 1802 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 8% 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.