Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PHILLIPS DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 2900691 · 1 · WEST FORK SAN JUAN RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:13 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 1902-09-15 — 145th 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: FLAUGH DITCH (1902-06-15). Immediately behind: WEBER PUMP SITE (1903-01-28).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19250.0 | 1902-09-15 | 1904-08-17 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | #129 |
| 59866.0 | 2013-11-27 | 2013-12-31 | 4.05 | 0.74 | C | STORECFISOTH |
Legal record & documents
8 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
22CW3044, 13CW3032, CA0165, 17CW3009.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
22CW3044 | 1 | 2013-12-31 | S |
13CW3032 | 4 | 2013-12-31 | O, S |
CA0165 | 1 | 1904-08-17 | O |
17CW3009 | 2 | 1904-08-17 | 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 894 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 848 AF — 95% of that, and 5th 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 | 857 | 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 154 | 6.0 |
| 2012 | 894 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 184 | 5.1 |
| 2013 | 592 | 4th lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 121 | 4.6 |
| 2014 | 166 | 1st lowest of 15 · 19% of median | 84 | 2.8 |
| 2015 | 260 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 29% of median | 112 | 4.2 |
| 2016 | 1,208 | 11th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 146 | 8.5 |
| 2017 | 858 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 148 | 4.3 |
| 2018 | 455 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 51% of median | 140 | 4.1 |
| 2019 | 1,531 | 13th lowest of 15 · 171% of median | 150 | 11.6 |
| 2020 | 1,377 | 12th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 232 | 8.2 |
| 2021 | 2,066 | 14th lowest of 15 · 231% of median | 365 | 6.7 |
| 2022 | 2,433 | 15th lowest of 15 · 272% of median | 305 | 5.0 |
| 2023 | 1,032 | 9th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 168 | 4.8 |
| 2024 | 1,044 | 10th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 136 | 9.4 |
| 2025 | 848 | 5th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 147 | 10.2 |
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 6428 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 49% 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.