Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MCCARTNEY SEEP DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 2300889 · DITCH · TARRYALL CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:17 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (0576005) — 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.
Current administration
● Fully called out — call at LAST CHANCE DITCH 2 (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1863-12-30).
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 1885-05-20 — 702nd most senior of the 21881 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: 8000835 (1885-05-01). Immediately behind: 2300904 (1885-05-20).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12924.0 | 1885-05-20 | 1889-10-18 | 7.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFISFIRSTKWLD | |
| 23152.12924 | 1885-05-20 | 1918-05-18 | 45.6 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 53325.26053 | 1921-05-01 | 1996-12-31 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | STO | |
| 61726.60138 | 2014-08-26 | 2019-12-31 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
10 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
19CW3052, 96CW0235, CA1777, CA0341, 88CW0263, 02CW0240A.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
19CW3052 | 1 | 2019-12-31 | S |
96CW0235 | 1 | 1996-12-31 | S |
CA1777 | 1 | 1918-05-18 | S |
CA0341 | 1 | 1889-10-18 | O |
88CW0263 | 2 | 1889-10-18 | O |
02CW0240A | 4 | 1889-10-18 | 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 651 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2006, came in at 63 AF — 10% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990 | 514 | 6th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 75 | 9.0 |
| 1991 | 489 | 5th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 64 | 6.0 |
| 1992 | 100 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 15% of median | 29 | 4.0 |
| 1993 | 1,178 | 14th lowest of 15 · 181% of median | 63 | 13.0 |
| 1994 | 865 | 11th lowest of 15 · 133% of median | 87 | 11.0 |
| 1995 | 1,023 | 12th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 162 | 8.0 |
| 1996 | 702 | 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 92 | 9.0 |
| 1997 | 651 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 152 | 7.5 |
| 1998 | 544 | 7th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 122 | 9.0 |
| 1999 | 1,133 | 13th lowest of 15 · 174% of median | 175 | 6.0 |
| 2000 | 845 | 10th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 156 | 10.0 |
| 2001 | 1,629 | 15th lowest of 15 · 250% of median | 200 | 12.0 |
| 2004 | 79 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 12% of median | 18 | 3.6 |
| 2005 | 182 | 4th lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 27 | 5.0 |
| 2006 | 63 | 1st lowest of 15 · 10% of median | 9 | 4.0 |
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 (7/10 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3136 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 26% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2006 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.