Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GRAHAM CREEK NO 2 DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3100534 · 1 · EAST CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:39 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 1884-12-31 — 307th 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: GRAHAM CREEK NO 1 DITCH (1884-12-31). Immediately behind: KIRKPATRICK DITCH (1884-12-31).

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
12784.01884-12-311934-06-12 0.380.0 CIRR E-1

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 124 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2017, came in at 129 AF — 104% of that, and 10th 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)
2003 9 1st lowest of 15 · 7% of median 30 0.2
2004 87 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 99 1.0
2005 109 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median 86 1.5
2006 67 3rd lowest of 15 · 54% of median 78 0.8
2007 24 2nd lowest of 15 · 19% of median 44 0.4
2008 203 13th lowest of 15 · 164% of median 150 1.6
2009 124 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 145 0.8
2010 237 14th lowest of 15 · 191% of median 153 2.8
2011 278 15th lowest of 15 · 224% of median 149 2.8
2012 98 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median 142 0.7
2013 112 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median 154 1.6
2014 162 12th lowest of 15 · 131% of median 160 1.2
2015 148 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median 162 0.8
2016 125 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median 133 1.5
2017 129 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median 121 1.2

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 6816 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 48% of the irrigation seasons in 1951-2017 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.