Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
NEW KUMNIG DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3600966 · 1 · OTTER 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 1878-07-15 — 26th 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: KUMNIG NO 1 DITCH (1878-07-15). Immediately behind: KUMNIG NO 1 DITCH AP NO 1 (1878-07-15).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10423.0 | 1878-07-15 | 1910-03-02 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 12327.0 | 1883-10-01 | 1910-03-02 | 0.35 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 13011.0 | 1885-08-15 | 1910-03-02 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 14020.0 | 1888-05-20 | 1910-03-02 | 0.87 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 14032.0 | 1888-06-01 | 1910-03-02 | 3.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 19492.0 | 1903-05-15 | 1910-03-02 | 0.333 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
W1853.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1853 | 6 | 1910-03-02 | O |
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 703 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 20 AF — 3% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 703 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 365 | 1.9 |
| 2010 | 482 | 5th lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 304 | 2.8 |
| 2011 | 401 | 4th lowest of 15 · 57% of median | 144 | 1.9 |
| 2012 | 1,072 | 11th lowest of 15 · 152% of median | 148 | 7.5 |
| 2013 | 927 | 10th lowest of 15 · 132% of median | 142 | 7.5 |
| 2014 | 1,106 | 12th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 144 | 7.5 |
| 2015 | 1,206 | 13th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 145 | 7.5 |
| 2016 | 1,351 | 14th lowest of 15 · 192% of median | 132 | 7.5 |
| 2017 | 1,449 | 15th lowest of 15 · 206% of median | 153 | 7.5 |
| 2018 | 839 | 9th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 75 | 7.5 |
| 2020 | 627 | 7th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 116 | 3.2 |
| 2021 | 21 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 3% of median | 39 | 0.5 |
| 2022 | 90 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 13% of median | 89 | 1.0 |
| 2023 | 493 | 6th lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 149 | 4.2 |
| 2024 | 20 | 1st lowest of 15 · 3% of median | 74 | 0.3 |
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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4745 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 63% of the irrigation seasons in 1989-2024 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.