← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

MINNIE V DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3700714 · 1 · SQUAW CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 03:46 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 1902-04-15284th 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: OLE CREEK DITCH (1895-06-01). Immediately behind: MINNIE V DITCH ALT PT (1902-04-15).

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
22120.190971902-04-151911-02-27 1.50.0 CIRRMUNCOMRECFISFIRAUG 285

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 44 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2009, came in at 669 AF — 1520% of that, and 14th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
1992 15 6th lowest of 15 · 34% of median 41 0.2
1993 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
1994 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
1995 52 9th lowest of 15 · 118% of median 108 0.5
1996 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 2 0.0
1997 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
1998 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
2001 44 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 46 0.5
2003 104 11th lowest of 15 · 236% of median 133 0.5
2004 41 7th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 125 0.2
2005 328 13th lowest of 15 · 746% of median 126 1.5
2006 76 10th lowest of 15 · 173% of median 97 0.4
2007 189 12th lowest of 15 · 430% of median 135 0.9
2008 778 15th lowest of 15 · 1768% of median 143 2.9
2009 669 14th lowest of 15 · 1520% of median 155 2.6

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 3945 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 32% of the irrigation seasons in 1951-2009 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.