Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HANNAH WINTERS DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 2800958 · 1 · TOMICHI CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:52 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 1968-08-18 — 954th 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: WOODS WELL (1968-07-09). Immediately behind: FREW DOM WELL (1968-08-18).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 44559.43329 | 1968-08-18 | 1972-12-31 | 1.022 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
W1651, 79CW0226.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1651 | 1 | 1972-12-31 | S |
79CW0226 | 1 | 1972-12-31 | S |
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 6 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 74 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2009, came in at 135 AF — 184% of that, and 6th lowest of the 6 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | 107 | 4th lowest of 6 · 146% of median | 40 | 2.0 |
| 2000 | 32 | 2nd lowest of 6 · 44% of median | 48 | 1.0 |
| 2001 | 27 | 1st lowest of 6 · 37% of median | 110 | 0.2 |
| 2003 | 127 | 5th lowest of 6 · 173% of median | 74 | 1.0 |
| 2004 | 40 | 3rd lowest of 6 · 54% of median | 93 | 0.2 |
| 2009 | 135 | 6th lowest of 6 · 184% of median | 122 | 1.0 |
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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 487 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 22% of the irrigation seasons in 1999-2009 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.