← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

JAPECK DITCH NO 5

Structure dossier · WDID 2800805 · 1 · COCHETOPA CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:15 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 1890-05-01983rd 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: MARTHAS SPRING DITCH (1886-06-15). Immediately behind: JAPECK DITCH NO 3 (1890-05-01).

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
45290.147311890-05-011974-12-31 1.50.0 CIRRSTK

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 368 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 368 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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)
2011 196 4th lowest of 15 · 53% of median 107 1.5
2012 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 10 0.0
2013 150 3rd lowest of 15 · 41% of median 123 1.0
2014 511 10th lowest of 15 · 139% of median 101 5.1
2015 540 12th lowest of 15 · 147% of median 71 6.6
2016 523 11th lowest of 15 · 142% of median 48 6.9
2017 656 14th lowest of 15 · 178% of median 102 4.4
2018 898 15th lowest of 15 · 244% of median 131 11.9
2019 391 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 54 4.2
2020 211 5th lowest of 15 · 57% of median 66 1.9
2021 604 13th lowest of 15 · 164% of median 76 4.8
2022 346 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median 51 4.3
2023 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 4 0.0
2024 213 6th lowest of 15 · 58% of median 81 1.5
2025 368 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 66 3.2

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 2511 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 35% of the irrigation seasons in 1992-2025 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.