Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
JOSEPH FREED DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3300547 · 1 · LA PLATA RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:45 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 1904-01-02 — 197th 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: MORGAN AND STAMBAUGH D (1903-08-01). Immediately behind: TREANOR DITCH (1904-05-01).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19724.0 | 1904-01-02 | 1915-06-23 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #56 |
| 19733.0 | 1904-01-11 | 1915-06-23 | 5.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #57 |
| 20898.0 | 1907-03-21 | 1915-06-23 | 0.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #64 |
| 20913.0 | 1907-04-05 | 1915-06-23 | 6.75 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #65 |
| 27863.0 | 1926-04-15 | 1966-03-21 | 12.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 65-32 |
| 54968.0 | 2000-06-30 | 2000-12-31 | 0.0 | 25.0 | C | STO |
Legal record & documents
9 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
00CW0049, 96CW0008, CA0807-C, CA6708, CA0807-B.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
00CW0049 | 1 | 2000-12-31 | S |
96CW0008 | 1 | 1996-12-31 | S |
CA0807-C | 1 | 1966-03-21 | S |
CA6708 | 2 | 1915-06-23 | S |
CA0807-B | 4 | 1915-06-23 | S |
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 1,035 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 580 AF — 56% of that, and 4th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
| 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 | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 1,545 | 11th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 348 | 18.5 |
| 2012 | 769 | 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 237 | 14.9 |
| 2013 | 303 | 1st lowest of 15 · 29% of median | 204 | 7.1 |
| 2014 | 858 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 248 | 9.7 |
| 2015 | 1,350 | 9th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 323 | 14.0 |
| 2016 | 1,826 | 12th lowest of 15 · 176% of median | 265 | 24.9 |
| 2017 | 3,450 | 13th lowest of 15 · 333% of median | 347 | 17.4 |
| 2018 | 925 | 7th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 236 | 8.1 |
| 2019 | 4,434 | 15th lowest of 15 · 428% of median | 280 | 26.4 |
| 2020 | 1,443 | 10th lowest of 15 · 139% of median | 306 | 17.9 |
| 2021 | 322 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 31% of median | 365 | 10.2 |
| 2022 | 322 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 31% of median | 365 | 8.8 |
| 2023 | 3,760 | 14th lowest of 15 · 363% of median | 365 | 25.0 |
| 2024 | 1,035 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 366 | 9.0 |
| 2025 | 580 | 4th lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 303 | 14.0 |
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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 18676 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1948-2025 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.