Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MESA DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 2900669 · 1 · FOURMILE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:41 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 1891-01-12 — 101st 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: CHAPSON AND HOWE DITCH (1890-10-31). Immediately behind: SHEEP CABIN DITCH (1892-05-01).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14987.0 | 1891-01-12 | 1902-01-20 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #58 |
| 16801.0 | 1895-12-31 | 1902-01-20 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #93 |
| 17897.0 | 1898-12-31 | 1902-01-20 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #107 |
| 18627.0 | 1900-12-31 | 1902-01-20 | 4.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #122 |
| 19085.0 | 1902-04-03 | 1912-11-13 | 8.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #148 |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA0308, CA0073.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0308 | 1 | 1912-11-13 | S |
CA0073 | 4 | 1902-01-20 | 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 1,080 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 1,351 AF — 125% of that, and 11th 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 | 1,080 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 157 | 11.3 |
| 2012 | 883 | 4th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 66 | 15.5 |
| 2013 | 769 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 56 | 14.8 |
| 2014 | 991 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 109 | 16.2 |
| 2015 | 1,722 | 13th lowest of 15 · 159% of median | 184 | 13.8 |
| 2016 | 791 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 60 | 13.6 |
| 2017 | 1,902 | 15th lowest of 15 · 176% of median | 115 | 11.2 |
| 2018 | 630 | 1st lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 73 | 11.0 |
| 2019 | 1,781 | 14th lowest of 15 · 165% of median | 147 | 22.5 |
| 2020 | 1,333 | 10th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 89 | 18.9 |
| 2021 | 886 | 5th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 71 | 11.5 |
| 2022 | 904 | 6th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 69 | 21.0 |
| 2023 | 1,327 | 9th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 119 | 11.9 |
| 2024 | 1,587 | 12th lowest of 15 · 147% of median | 105 | 19.7 |
| 2025 | 1,351 | 11th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 131 | 11.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7290 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 55% 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.