Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BENNETT-MYERS IRR DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3100528 · 1 · LOS PINOS RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:46 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 1882-08-01 — 299th most senior of the 1037 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: ISLAND DITCH (1882-05-05). Immediately behind: FOREST LAKES INFILT GALL (1882-08-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11901.0 | 1882-08-01 | 1934-06-12 | 2.4 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | P-15 |
| 11902.0 | 1882-08-02 | 1934-06-12 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | P-16 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
W1085, CA1248.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1085 | 2 | 1934-06-12 | O |
CA1248 | 2 | 1934-06-12 | 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 808 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 884 AF — 109% of that, and 11th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 829 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | — | 158 | 5.1 |
| 2012 | 951 | 13th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | — | 149 | 4.6 |
| 2013 | 680 | 5th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | — | 141 | 4.6 |
| 2014 | 744 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | — | 160 | 4.6 |
| 2015 | 628 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 78% of median | — | 148 | 4.6 |
| 2016 | 673 | 4th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | — | 153 | 3.8 |
| 2017 | 659 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 82% of median | — | 143 | 5.0 |
| 2018 | 519 | 1st lowest of 15 · 64% of median | — | 101 | 3.3 |
| 2019 | 1,119 | 14th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | — | 174 | 6.1 |
| 2020 | 877 | 10th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | — | 306 | 7.6 |
| 2021 | 725 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | — | 365 | 3.0 |
| 2022 | 808 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 365 | 3.3 |
| 2023 | 1,205 | 15th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | — | 365 | 5.8 |
| 2024 | 946 | 12th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | — | 366 | 5.0 |
| 2025 | 884 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | — | 304 | 4.5 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 14500 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 90% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2025 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.