Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MIDDLE BARTON NO 1 DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3600741 · 1 · MIDDLE BARTON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:07 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 1941-07-21 — 394th 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: COPPER MOUNTAIN METRO DISTRICT WELL NO 3 (1941-03-10). Immediately behind: MIDDLE BARTON NO 2 DITCH (1941-07-21).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33439.0 | 1941-07-21 | 1952-03-10 | 5.6 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 355 |
Legal record & documents
1 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA1805.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1805 | 1 | 1952-03-10 | 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 316 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 129 AF — 41% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 316 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 133 | 1.5 |
| 2006 | 326 | 10th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 134 | 1.5 |
| 2007 | 371 | 14th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 141 | 1.5 |
| 2008 | 279 | 7th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 108 | 1.6 |
| 2009 | 349 | 13th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 129 | 1.5 |
| 2010 | 389 | 15th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 138 | 1.6 |
| 2012 | 329 | 11th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 134 | 1.6 |
| 2017 | 274 | 6th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 93 | 2.2 |
| 2018 | 319 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 127 | 2.7 |
| 2019 | 133 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 57 | 1.5 |
| 2020 | 331 | 12th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 112 | 2.0 |
| 2021 | 143 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 45% of median | 107 | 1.6 |
| 2022 | 219 | 5th lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 96 | 1.9 |
| 2023 | 197 | 4th lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 123 | 1.4 |
| 2024 | 129 | 1st lowest of 15 · 41% of median | 111 | 0.9 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-10 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.023).
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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5199 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 42% of the irrigation seasons in 1966-2024 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.