Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
DUNBAUGH DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 1500545 · 1 · GREENHORN CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:14 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 1865-04-30 — 25th most senior of the 704 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: GREENHORN CANON DITCH (1865-04-30). Immediately behind: DOTSON DITCH NO 1 (1865-05-31).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5599.0 | 1865-04-30 | 1895-10-28 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 16 |
| 5642.0 | 1865-06-12 | 1895-10-28 | 0.4 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 18.5 |
| 7305.0 | 1869-12-31 | 1895-10-28 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 50.5 |
| 8324.0 | 1872-10-15 | 1893-06-26 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 77 |
| 9862.0 | 1876-12-31 | 1895-10-28 | 0.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 108 |
| 12418.0 | 1883-12-31 | 1895-10-28 | 0.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 148 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA2756, 01CW0091.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2756 | 3 | 1895-10-28 | O |
01CW0091 | 3 | 1895-10-28 | 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 75 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 113 AF — 151% of that, and 11th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 8 | 0.0 |
| 2009 | 15 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 20% of median | 58 | 0.2 |
| 2010 | 33 | 5th lowest of 15 · 44% of median | 58 | 2.1 |
| 2014 | 47 | 6th lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 50 | 0.8 |
| 2015 | 92 | 9th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 106 | 0.7 |
| 2016 | 132 | 13th lowest of 15 · 176% of median | 107 | 1.1 |
| 2017 | 176 | 15th lowest of 15 · 235% of median | 135 | 0.9 |
| 2018 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 7 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 140 | 14th lowest of 15 · 187% of median | 85 | 0.9 |
| 2020 | 18 | 4th lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 22 | 0.5 |
| 2021 | 75 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 80 | 0.7 |
| 2022 | 74 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 69 | 0.9 |
| 2023 | 94 | 10th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 93 | 0.7 |
| 2024 | 118 | 12th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 78 | 0.9 |
| 2025 | 113 | 11th lowest of 15 · 151% of median | 70 | 1.4 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (8/10 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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 10920 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 41% of the irrigation seasons in 1900-2025 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.