Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LOWLINE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3800840 · 1 · CRYSTAL RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:05 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 1890-09-25 — 275th 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: ELLA DITCH (1885-06-22). Immediately behind: EAST MESA DITCH (1894-08-10).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19313.14878 | 1890-09-25 | 1902-12-12 | 19.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 208C |
| 30941.26945 | 1923-10-10 | 1936-08-25 | 21.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 417 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA3082, 19CW3022, CA1007.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3082 | 1 | 1936-08-25 | S |
19CW3022 | 4 | 1936-08-25 | S |
CA1007 | 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 9,064 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 10,256 AF — 113% of that, and 13th 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 | 11,316 | 14th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 152 | 47.3 |
| 2011 | 5,377 | 1st lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 139 | 25.9 |
| 2012 | 8,310 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 204 | 34.0 |
| 2013 | 7,949 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 153 | 34.0 |
| 2014 | 8,367 | 4th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 168 | 37.0 |
| 2015 | 8,556 | 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 179 | 36.4 |
| 2016 | 8,859 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 172 | 45.3 |
| 2017 | 9,878 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 195 | 38.0 |
| 2018 | 8,401 | 5th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 182 | 45.8 |
| 2019 | 9,064 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 180 | 40.1 |
| 2020 | 11,655 | 15th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 176 | 41.1 |
| 2021 | 10,228 | 12th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 174 | 40.6 |
| 2022 | 9,600 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 175 | 40.6 |
| 2023 | 9,258 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 171 | 40.6 |
| 2024 | 10,256 | 13th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 170 | 44.8 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+171 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.013).
How good is our record of it?
Grade A (9/10 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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 11172 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 75% of the irrigation seasons in 1955-2024 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.