Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

FRIELER DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3800697 · 1 · LUCHSINGER CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:19 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 1895-08-16 — 246th 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: PAT MCNULTY NO 2 DITCH (1888-05-28). Immediately behind: KESTER DITCH (1885-04-01).

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
16664.01895-08-161895-11-25 1.50.0 CIRR 211

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 277 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 288 AF — 104% of that, and 10th 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)
1985 171 3rd lowest of 15 · 62% of median 145 0.6
1986 726 15th lowest of 15 · 262% of median 184 2.0
1988 408 12th lowest of 15 · 147% of median 184 1.5
2013 138 2nd lowest of 15 · 50% of median 147 0.5
2014 195 5th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 162 0.6
2015 387 11th lowest of 15 · 140% of median 195 1.4
2016 423 13th lowest of 15 · 153% of median 192 1.1
2017 235 6th lowest of 15 · 85% of median 130 0.9
2018 277 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 191 0.7
2019 194 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 118 1.5
2020 480 14th lowest of 15 · 173% of median 169 1.7
2021 267 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median 115 1.2
2022 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 2 0.0
2023 280 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median 133 1.1
2024 288 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median 126 1.7

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 3373 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 32% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2024 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.