Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
ELLA DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3800663 · 1 · CRYSTAL RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 05:26 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 1885-06-22 — 274th most senior of the 4788 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: MCCABE DITCH (1898-09-29). Immediately behind: LOWLINE DITCH (1890-09-25).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19313.12957 | 1885-06-22 | 1902-12-12 | 8.26 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 127A |
| 30941.27931 | 1926-06-22 | 1936-08-25 | 3.45 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 423 |
| 36396.36277 | 1949-04-28 | 1952-10-24 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRROTH | 584 |
| 39193.0 | 1957-04-22 | 1958-06-20 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOMSTK | 715 |
| 44557.0 | 1971-12-29 | 1971-12-31 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 52595.52536 | 1993-11-02 | 1994-12-31 | 0.3 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK |
Legal record & documents
8 decreed actions on record across
8 court cases:
94CW0161, W2683, W0456, 94CW0376, CA4033, CA3082, CA1008, 12CW0185.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
94CW0161 | 1 | 1994-12-31 | S |
W2683 | 1 | 1971-12-31 | S |
W0456 | 1 | 1971-12-31 | S |
94CW0376 | 1 | 1958-06-20 | S |
CA4033 | 1 | 1952-10-24 | S |
CA3082 | 1 | 1936-08-25 | S |
CA1008 | 1 | 1902-12-12 | S |
12CW0185 | 1 | 1902-12-12 | 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 4,271 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 3,500 AF — 82% of that, and 3rd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 7,878 | 15th lowest of 15 · 184% of median | 173 | 42.7 |
| 2011 | 6,301 | 14th lowest of 15 · 148% of median | 146 | 24.2 |
| 2012 | 5,247 | 11th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 178 | 27.2 |
| 2013 | 4,271 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 134 | 21.9 |
| 2014 | 5,728 | 12th lowest of 15 · 134% of median | 153 | 26.7 |
| 2015 | 5,748 | 13th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 161 | 25.1 |
| 2016 | 5,174 | 10th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 159 | 21.0 |
| 2017 | 4,613 | 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 147 | 24.2 |
| 2018 | 4,082 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 182 | 19.1 |
| 2019 | 4,012 | 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 157 | 17.7 |
| 2020 | 3,258 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 76% of median | 180 | 18.3 |
| 2021 | 2,691 | 1st lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 153 | 17.3 |
| 2022 | 3,719 | 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 156 | 16.2 |
| 2023 | 3,553 | 4th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 123 | 19.6 |
| 2024 | 3,500 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 148 | 14.9 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-250 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.000).
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 | 9987 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 63% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2024 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.