Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

COTTONWOOD DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3300525 · 1 · CHERRY CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:59 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (f6d7fdc) — 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 1888-01-01 — 178th most senior of the 364 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: MCGUIRE DITCH (1887-07-01). Immediately behind: JOHN SPONSEL DITCH (1888-05-10).

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
17544.13881888-01-011915-06-23 0.750.0 CIRR #30

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 21 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2010, came in at 13 AF — 62% of that, and 5th 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)
1996 21 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 24 0.8
1997 9 4th lowest of 15 · 43% of median 29 0.2
1998 32 10th lowest of 15 · 152% of median 33 0.7
1999 13 5th lowest of 15 · 62% of median 10 0.8
2000 65 14th lowest of 15 · 310% of median 14 3.0
2001 47 11th lowest of 15 · 224% of median 30 1.0
2002 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
2003 8 3rd lowest of 15 · 38% of median 12 0.7
2004 28 9th lowest of 15 · 133% of median 24 0.7
2005 48 12th lowest of 15 · 229% of median 32 1.0
2006 4 2nd lowest of 15 · 19% of median 11 0.2
2007 52 13th lowest of 15 · 248% of median 42 0.8
2008 68 15th lowest of 15 · 324% of median 61 0.8
2009 15 7th lowest of 15 · 71% of median 18 0.5
2010 13 5th lowest of 15 · 62% of median 9 0.8

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 960 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 12% of the irrigation seasons in 1974-2010 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.