Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

WEBBER DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3001264 · 1 · LONE PINE GULCH · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:10 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 1887-08-01 — 463rd 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: WATER TANK NO 2 HERMOSA (1885-12-31). Immediately behind: TWIN ROCK DITCH (1887-11-01).

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
26974.137271887-08-011966-03-21 1.50.0 CIRR 65-1A

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 33 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 29 AF — 88% of that, and 6th 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 31 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median 112 0.2
2012 33 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 103 0.2
2013 6 1st lowest of 15 · 18% of median 33 0.2
2014 74 12th lowest of 15 · 224% of median 125 0.5
2015 146 14th lowest of 15 · 442% of median 141 1.0
2016 88 13th lowest of 15 · 267% of median 94 1.0
2017 232 15th lowest of 15 · 703% of median 138 1.5
2018 7 2nd lowest of 15 · 21% of median 45 0.2
2019 59 11th lowest of 15 · 179% of median 77 0.8
2020 13 3rd lowest of 15 · 39% of median 53 0.3
2021 19 4th lowest of 15 · 58% of median 53 0.5
2022 24 5th lowest of 15 · 73% of median 78 0.2
2023 44 9th lowest of 15 · 133% of median 110 0.8
2024 53 10th lowest of 15 · 161% of median 97 0.4
2025 29 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median 85 0.4

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 4857 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 41% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2025 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.