Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

PITTMAN DITCH NO 4

Structure dossier · WDID 2800875 · 1 · QUARTZ CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:32 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 1953-11-28 — 781st 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: PITTMAN DITCH NO 3 (1953-11-28). Immediately behind: MCDONOUGH RES NO 2 (1954-07-22).

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
37952.01953-11-281956-04-16 1.50.0 CIRR 366

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 79 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 96 AF — 122% of that, and 11th 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 72 7th lowest of 15 · 91% of median 138 0.5
2012 3 2nd lowest of 15 · 4% of median 40 0.1
2013 58 5th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 95 0.5
2014 182 15th lowest of 15 · 230% of median 137 1.5
2015 106 12th lowest of 15 · 134% of median 126 0.6
2016 64 6th lowest of 15 · 81% of median 150 0.4
2017 48 4th lowest of 15 · 61% of median 73 0.6
2018 20 3rd lowest of 15 · 25% of median 105 0.1
2019 79 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 145 0.5
2020 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 5 0.0
2021 91 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 167 0.5
2022 119 13th lowest of 15 · 151% of median 182 0.5
2023 83 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median 106 0.8
2024 134 14th lowest of 15 · 170% of median 169 0.5
2025 96 11th lowest of 15 · 122% of median 198 0.3

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 3417 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 60% of the irrigation seasons in 1999-2025 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.