Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
UNION DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3801062 · 1 · ROARING FORK RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:09 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 1884-04-20 — 481st 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: HART DITCH (1931-10-10). Immediately behind: CENTER CREEK DITCH (1931-06-02).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29867.12529 | 1884-04-20 | 1932-03-21 | 9.94 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 265 |
| 30941.1472 | 1890-04-20 | 1936-08-25 | 21.56 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 301 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA3082, CA2864.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3082 | 2 | 1936-08-25 | S |
CA2864 | 2 | 1932-03-21 | 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 2,494 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 3,054 AF — 122% of that, and 11th 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 | 2,666 | 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 171 | 13.3 |
| 2011 | 1,453 | 1st lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 142 | 9.5 |
| 2012 | 3,326 | 12th lowest of 15 · 133% of median | 173 | 16.8 |
| 2013 | 2,473 | 5th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 160 | 13.2 |
| 2014 | 2,435 | 4th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 172 | 13.3 |
| 2015 | 2,227 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 182 | 11.6 |
| 2016 | 2,382 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 172 | 13.3 |
| 2017 | 2,485 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 174 | 18.1 |
| 2018 | 2,494 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 164 | 13.3 |
| 2019 | 2,636 | 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 166 | 15.1 |
| 2020 | 3,513 | 13th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 184 | 15.1 |
| 2021 | 3,920 | 14th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 153 | 28.0 |
| 2022 | 6,030 | 15th lowest of 15 · 242% of median | 190 | 26.3 |
| 2023 | 2,478 | 6th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 166 | 10.1 |
| 2024 | 3,054 | 11th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 166 | 14.2 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+84 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.048).
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7973 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 67% of the irrigation seasons in 1969-2024 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.