Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BRAGG NO 1 DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3700519 · 1 · EAST LAKE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:47 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 1905-12-31 — 324th most senior of the 2162 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: KEYES DITCH (NEW NO 1) (1888-11-01). Immediately behind: SANDSTONE DITCH (1913-06-02).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25277.20453 | 1905-12-31 | 1919-06-23 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 341 |
| 30894.20939 | 1907-05-01 | 1936-10-03 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 402 |
| 30894.27514 | 1925-05-01 | 1936-10-03 | 4.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 465 |
| 30894.30102 | 1932-06-01 | 1936-10-03 | 4.08 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 479 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA0963, W2822.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0963 | 3 | 1936-10-03 | S |
W2822 | 1 | 1919-06-23 | 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 1,728 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 371 AF — 22% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 1,726 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 146 | 6.0 |
| 2002 | 1,139 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 150 | 5.0 |
| 2003 | 1,445 | 5th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 151 | 7.0 |
| 2004 | 1,725 | 6th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 153 | 7.8 |
| 2005 | 1,363 | 4th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 143 | 8.0 |
| 2006 | 1,872 | 11th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 158 | 8.0 |
| 2007 | 2,079 | 14th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 147 | 7.8 |
| 2008 | 1,740 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 120 | 7.6 |
| 2009 | 1,728 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 119 | 7.5 |
| 2010 | 2,430 | 15th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 159 | 8.5 |
| 2011 | 1,966 | 12th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 137 | 8.0 |
| 2012 | 1,762 | 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 146 | 6.8 |
| 2013 | 2,022 | 13th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 144 | 8.0 |
| 2014 | 599 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 35% of median | 152 | 2.0 |
| 2023 | 371 | 1st lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 102 | 1.9 |
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 (7/10 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 6184 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 40% of the irrigation seasons in 1951-2023 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.