Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
FISH CREEK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 2900597 · 1 · FISH CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:42 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1897-06-01 — 124th most senior of the 853 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: SNOWBALL DITCH (1896-06-27). Immediately behind: KEITH DITCH (1897-08-01).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17319.0 | 1897-06-01 | 1906-04-23 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRFISDOMSTK | #50 |
| 18049.0 | 1899-06-01 | 1906-04-23 | 4.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #112 |
| 41016.37426 | 1952-06-20 | 1968-12-19 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRFISDOMSTK | 68-127 |
| 41016.37426 | 1952-06-20 | 1968-12-19 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK | 68-128 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
W1150, CA0308-D, CA0156.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1150 | 2 | 1968-12-19 | O, S |
CA0308-D | 1 | 1968-12-19 | S |
CA0156 | 1 | 1906-04-23 | 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 437 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 524 AF — 120% of that, and 9th 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 | 121 | 1st lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 70 | 2.1 |
| 2012 | 202 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 58 | 2.7 |
| 2013 | 412 | 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 73 | 4.6 |
| 2014 | 190 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 44% of median | 75 | 3.3 |
| 2015 | 378 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 105 | 3.3 |
| 2016 | 437 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 91 | 3.3 |
| 2017 | 924 | 14th lowest of 15 · 211% of median | 128 | 7.5 |
| 2018 | 525 | 10th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 110 | 6.0 |
| 2019 | 313 | 4th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 68 | 2.7 |
| 2020 | 433 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 107 | 5.2 |
| 2021 | 665 | 13th lowest of 15 · 152% of median | 61 | 8.0 |
| 2022 | 1,252 | 15th lowest of 15 · 286% of median | 101 | 7.5 |
| 2023 | 661 | 12th lowest of 15 · 151% of median | 155 | 4.6 |
| 2024 | 616 | 11th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 117 | 6.8 |
| 2025 | 524 | 9th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 131 | 5.1 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+35 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.010).
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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7596 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 58% of the irrigation seasons in 1964-2025 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.