← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

TIJERAS DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 1900568 · 1 · PURGATOIRE RIVER · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:23 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 1864-05-1031st most senior of the 735 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: JUAN VIGIL DITCH (1864-05-01). Immediately behind: DAVIS & MARTINEZ DITCH (1865-01-15).

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
5244.01864-05-101903-08-10 6.40.0 CIRR 17

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 500 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 725 AF — 145% of that, and 12th 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 985 14th lowest of 15 · 197% of median 126 6.2
2011 221 4th lowest of 15 · 44% of median 68 4.6
2012 649 11th lowest of 15 · 130% of median 83 7.1
2013 78 2nd lowest of 15 · 16% of median 30 3.4
2014 603 9th lowest of 15 · 121% of median 78 7.1
2015 771 13th lowest of 15 · 154% of median 100 6.1
2016 500 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 74 5.7
2017 399 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median 74 4.7
2018 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 23 0.0
2019 1,493 15th lowest of 15 · 299% of median 172 5.6
2020 188 3rd lowest of 15 · 38% of median 49 5.6
2021 490 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median 78 5.4
2022 486 6th lowest of 15 · 97% of median 99 4.7
2023 644 10th lowest of 15 · 129% of median 92 4.8
2024 725 12th lowest of 15 · 145% of median 91 7.6

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 8898 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 46% of the irrigation seasons in 1934-2024 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.