← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

CONLEY DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3000525 · 1 · ELBERT CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:36 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 1876-10-10121st most senior of the 2277 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: SULLIVAN-WALLACE DITCH (1876-08-28). Immediately behind: ANIMAS CITY DITCH (1876-11-01).

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
9780.01876-10-101923-11-08 1.250.0 CIRR E-1

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 500 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 523 AF — 105% of that, and 9th 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)
2011 705 13th lowest of 15 · 141% of median 209 3.1
2012 553 10th lowest of 15 · 111% of median 270 3.0
2013 788 14th lowest of 15 · 158% of median 349 3.0
2014 574 11th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 203 2.5
2015 791 15th lowest of 15 · 158% of median 205 3.1
2016 465 7th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 211 2.3
2017 372 6th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 187 1.6
2018 146 1st lowest of 15 · 29% of median 158 1.4
2019 612 12th lowest of 15 · 122% of median 203 3.1
2020 326 5th lowest of 15 · 65% of median 209 1.8
2021 286 4th lowest of 15 · 57% of median 259 2.1
2022 221 3rd lowest of 15 · 44% of median 312 0.8
2023 188 2nd lowest of 15 · 38% of median 170 1.6
2024 500 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 237 2.3
2025 523 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median 304 1.5

How good is our record of it?

Grade A (9/10 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 17773 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 83% of the irrigation seasons in 1925-2025 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.