Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HIGHLINE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3600658 · 1 · WILLOW CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:06 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1911-06-01 — 264th most senior of the 1247 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: VIDLER - WILLOW CREEK UNIT HDGT A (1911-05-01). Immediately behind: BUMGARNER WELL (1914-01-30).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23296.22431 | 1911-06-01 | 1914-10-12 | 3.4 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 198 |
| 36311.0 | 1949-06-01 | 1952-03-10 | 6.48 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 384 |
Legal record & documents
12 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
W1929, CA2026, CA1805, CA1599, 10/12/1914.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1929 | 3 | 1952-03-10 | S |
CA2026 | 5 | 1952-03-10 | S |
CA1805 | 1 | 1952-03-10 | S |
CA1599 | 2 | 1920-12-23 | S |
10/12/1914 | 1 | 1914-10-12 | 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 529 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 403 AF — 76% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | 56 | 1st lowest of 15 · 11% of median | 45 | 3.4 |
| 2005 | 452 | 6th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 150 | 2.0 |
| 2008 | 607 | 12th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 162 | 4.8 |
| 2012 | 572 | 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 180 | 1.8 |
| 2013 | 659 | 14th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 168 | 3.4 |
| 2015 | 529 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 147 | 2.3 |
| 2016 | 603 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 166 | 2.4 |
| 2017 | 418 | 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 137 | 3.4 |
| 2018 | 263 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 142 | 2.1 |
| 2019 | 456 | 7th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 152 | 2.9 |
| 2020 | 773 | 15th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 147 | 4.7 |
| 2021 | 580 | 10th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 141 | 4.8 |
| 2022 | 330 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 154 | 1.5 |
| 2023 | 645 | 13th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 214 | 2.7 |
| 2024 | 403 | 4th lowest of 15 · 76% of median | 214 | 3.1 |
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 B (8/10 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 | 6238 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 47% of the irrigation seasons in 1963-2024 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.