← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

WASTE WATER DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 2800936 · 1 · TOMICHI CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:35 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 1895-05-01175th 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: PARLIN QUARTZ CREEK D (1895-05-01). Immediately behind: AGATE NO 2 DITCH (1895-05-31).

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
16557.01895-05-011904-04-29 1.00.0 CIRR 117

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 429 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 109 AF — 25% of that, and 1st 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 883 13th lowest of 15 · 206% of median 154 7.5
2011 690 10th lowest of 15 · 161% of median 78 5.3
2012 180 2nd lowest of 15 · 42% of median 98 1.4
2013 221 3rd lowest of 15 · 52% of median 82 2.9
2014 351 7th lowest of 15 · 82% of median 54 3.8
2015 623 9th lowest of 15 · 145% of median 79 5.1
2016 319 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 46 3.6
2017 429 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 77 3.6
2018 278 4th lowest of 15 · 65% of median 156 1.0
2019 1,056 14th lowest of 15 · 246% of median 133 6.8
2021 331 6th lowest of 15 · 77% of median 112 2.0
2022 728 11th lowest of 15 · 170% of median 140 3.0
2023 1,240 15th lowest of 15 · 289% of median 126 5.0
2024 766 12th lowest of 15 · 179% of median 81 6.0
2025 109 1st lowest of 15 · 25% of median 68 1.0

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 2807 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 54% of the irrigation seasons in 2001-2025 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.