Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MCCANNE 2 DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 2800632 · 1 · TOMICHI CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:55 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 1890-05-01 — 148th most senior of the 1505 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: COLE NO. 3 DITCH (1889-10-28). Immediately behind: MCCANNE 3 DITCH (1890-05-01).
Decreed rights (12)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16192.14731 | 1890-05-01 | 1904-04-29 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 106 |
| 17684.0 | 1898-06-01 | 1904-04-29 | 0.89 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 122 |
| 19601.0 | 1903-09-01 | 1904-04-29 | 1.298 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTKAUG | 136, 188 |
| 24623.0 | 1917-06-01 | 1918-09-03 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 188 |
| 28311.10957 | 1879-12-31 | 1943-04-19 | 14.18 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 215 |
| 28311.17684 | 1898-06-01 | 1943-04-19 | 3.89 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 274 |
| 28311.19523 | 1903-06-15 | 1943-04-19 | 10.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 285 |
| 28311.19842 | 1904-04-29 | 1943-04-19 | 4.15 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 287 |
| 28311.24632 | 1917-06-10 | 1943-04-19 | 3.68 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 309 |
| 59169.59104 | 2011-10-27 | 2012-12-31 | 0.403 | 0.0 | C | STO | |
| 60995.0 | 2016-12-30 | 2016-12-31 | 0.0 | 2.31 | C | INDRCH | |
| 62091.60995 | 2016-12-30 | 2020-12-31 | 0.0 | 2.31 | C | STO |
Legal record & documents
34 decreed actions on record across
15 court cases:
16CW3089, 19CW3075, 12CW0114, CA2079, 95CW0045, 94CW0192, 79CW0240, CA1602, W3411, CA1266 and 5 more below.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
16CW3089 | 2 | 2020-12-31 | S |
19CW3075 | 1 | 2012-12-31 | S |
12CW0114 | 1 | 2012-12-31 | S |
CA2079 | 4 | 1943-04-19 | S |
95CW0045 | 2 | 1943-04-19 | S |
94CW0192 | 2 | 1943-04-19 | S |
79CW0240 | 11 | 1943-04-19 | S |
CA1602 | 1 | 1918-09-03 | S |
W3411 | 1 | 1904-04-29 | S |
CA1266 | 2 | 1904-04-29 | S |
98CW0241 | 1 | 1904-04-29 | S |
81CW0285 | 1 | 1904-04-29 | S |
01CW0084 | 2 | 1904-04-29 | S |
01CW0014 | 2 | 1904-04-29 | S |
CA0946 | 1 | 1894-05-01 | 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 7,107 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 4,847 AF — 68% of that, and 5th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 3,800 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 89 | 33.0 |
| 2012 | 2,349 | 1st lowest of 15 · 33% of median | 95 | 25.2 |
| 2013 | 3,771 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 53% of median | 70 | 42.9 |
| 2014 | 6,011 | 7th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 112 | 47.8 |
| 2015 | 5,725 | 6th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 96 | 46.8 |
| 2016 | 4,239 | 4th lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 114 | 30.4 |
| 2017 | 9,292 | 12th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 145 | 60.2 |
| 2018 | 8,288 | 10th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 127 | 46.8 |
| 2019 | 9,040 | 11th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 106 | 70.2 |
| 2020 | 9,732 | 13th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 123 | 46.8 |
| 2021 | 7,107 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 115 | 56.0 |
| 2022 | 12,057 | 15th lowest of 15 · 170% of median | 158 | 66.8 |
| 2023 | 9,777 | 14th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 96 | 73.7 |
| 2024 | 7,899 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 119 | 61.3 |
| 2025 | 4,847 | 5th lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 140 | 31.2 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+481 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.018).
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 | 12 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5816 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 51% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-2025 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.