Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

BEASTON WW DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3001480 · 1 · SPRING GULCH · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:14 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 1900-05-01 — 469th 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: BROWN DITCH (1900-01-01). Immediately behind: BOYD DITCH (1900-06-01).

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
26974.183831900-05-011966-03-21 2.00.0 CIRRDOMSTK

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 10 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 10 AF — 100% of that, and 7th 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 14th lowest of 15 · 310% of median 124 0.2
2012 17 11th lowest of 15 · 170% of median 95 0.2
2013 2 1st lowest of 15 · 20% of median 36 0.1
2014 21 13th lowest of 15 · 210% of median 114 0.1
2015 7 5th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 94 0.1
2016 8 6th lowest of 15 · 80% of median 67 0.1
2017 41 15th lowest of 15 · 410% of median 107 0.5
2018 16 10th lowest of 15 · 160% of median 58 0.4
2019 18 12th lowest of 15 · 180% of median 95 0.4
2020 10 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 49 0.5
2021 3 3rd lowest of 15 · 30% of median 44 0.1
2022 2 1st lowest of 15 · 20% of median 9 0.2
2023 5 4th lowest of 15 · 50% of median 43 0.2
2024 15 9th lowest of 15 · 150% of median 60 0.3
2025 10 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 48 0.5

How good is our record of it?

Grade B (7/10 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 2878 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 38% of the irrigation seasons in 1990-2025 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.