Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MCPHERSON DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3800895 · 1 · OWL CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:40 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 1881-05-15 — 13th 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: LIGHT AND LIGHT DITCH (1881-05-15). Immediately behind: LITTLE WOODY DITCH PT B (1881-05-17).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11458.0 | 1881-05-15 | 1889-05-11 | 2.8 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 10 |
| 12205.0 | 1883-06-01 | 1889-05-11 | 0.1 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNRECFISDOMSTKAUGWLD | 66 |
| 12564.0 | 1884-05-25 | 1889-05-11 | 0.1 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNRECFISDOMSTKAUGWLD | 94 |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA0132, 88CW0344, 83CW0284.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0132 | 1 | 1889-05-11 | O |
88CW0344 | 2 | 1889-05-11 | O |
83CW0284 | 2 | 1889-05-11 | O |
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 286 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 609 AF — 213% of that, and 12th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1994 | 253 | 7th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 66 | 4.4 |
| 1995 | 580 | 11th lowest of 15 · 203% of median | 147 | 3.1 |
| 1996 | 286 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 85 | 4.0 |
| 1997 | 677 | 13th lowest of 15 · 237% of median | 118 | 3.3 |
| 1998 | 708 | 14th lowest of 15 · 248% of median | 129 | 3.3 |
| 1999 | 554 | 10th lowest of 15 · 194% of median | 116 | 3.0 |
| 2004 | 110 | 5th lowest of 15 · 38% of median | 30 | 2.3 |
| 2005 | 104 | 4th lowest of 15 · 36% of median | 176 | 1.1 |
| 2006 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2015 | 97 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 131 | 0.4 |
| 2016 | 141 | 6th lowest of 15 · 49% of median | 144 | 0.8 |
| 2017 | 529 | 9th lowest of 15 · 185% of median | 99 | 3.2 |
| 2019 | 853 | 15th lowest of 15 · 298% of median | 141 | 3.1 |
| 2022 | 4 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 1% of median | 76 | 0.0 |
| 2023 | 609 | 12th lowest of 15 · 213% of median | 155 | 2.0 |
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3162 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 30% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2023 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.