Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SLOSS DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3800994 · 1 · WEST SOPRIS CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:14 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 1883-06-30 — 100th 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: WENGER NO 2 DITCH (1883-06-01). Immediately behind: STRANG NO 1 DITCH (1883-07-02).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12234.0 | 1883-06-30 | 1889-05-11 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFISFIRSTKAUGOTH | 71 |
| 13376.0 | 1886-08-15 | 1889-05-11 | 2.3 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFISFIRSTKAUGOTH | 162 |
| 36396.29371 | 1930-06-01 | 1952-10-24 | 7.86 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFISFIRSTKAUGOTH | 541 |
Legal record & documents
9 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA4033, 07CW0196, CA0132.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA4033 | 1 | 1952-10-24 | S |
07CW0196 | 6 | 1952-10-24 | O, S |
CA0132 | 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 636 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,602 AF — 252% of that, and 15th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | 857 | 10th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 169 | 4.0 |
| 2009 | 1,025 | 11th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 214 | 3.6 |
| 2010 | 706 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 203 | 4.6 |
| 2011 | 1,194 | 12th lowest of 15 · 188% of median | 190 | 4.8 |
| 2012 | 392 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 153 | 2.5 |
| 2013 | 628 | 6th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 151 | 2.5 |
| 2014 | 636 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 165 | 4.0 |
| 2015 | 440 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 106 | 3.5 |
| 2017 | 631 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 154 | 3.4 |
| 2019 | 625 | 5th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 157 | 3.4 |
| 2020 | 524 | 4th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 155 | 2.5 |
| 2021 | 194 | 1st lowest of 15 · 30% of median | 94 | 1.0 |
| 2022 | 1,577 | 14th lowest of 15 · 248% of median | 167 | 5.0 |
| 2023 | 1,438 | 13th lowest of 15 · 226% of median | 161 | 5.0 |
| 2024 | 1,602 | 15th lowest of 15 · 252% of median | 180 | 5.0 |
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 (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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 9733 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 61% 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.