Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WILLOW CREEK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3801101 · 1 · WILLOW CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:46 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 1885-07-01 — 181st 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: C AND M DITCH (1885-06-26). Immediately behind: ROARING FORK LAND & CATTLE AUG PLAN (1885-07-01).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12966.0 | 1885-07-01 | 1889-05-11 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 129 |
| 13635.0 | 1887-05-01 | 1889-05-11 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 174 |
| 15514.1508 | 1891-04-15 | 1892-06-23 | 30.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 209 |
| 51125.0 | 1989-12-22 | 1989-12-31 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRCOMRECFISDOMWLD | |
| 57920.0 | 2008-07-30 | 2008-12-31 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFISOTHWLD |
Legal record & documents
24 decreed actions on record across
10 court cases:
17CW3144, 08CW0181, 99CW0284, 89CW0282, W0122, CA0491, 84CW0024, 04CW0232, CA0132, 08CW0179.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
17CW3144 | 1 | 2008-12-31 | S |
08CW0181 | 1 | 2008-12-31 | S |
99CW0284 | 1 | 1989-12-31 | S |
89CW0282 | 1 | 1989-12-31 | S |
W0122 | 1 | 1892-06-23 | S |
CA0491 | 1 | 1892-06-23 | S |
84CW0024 | 6 | 1892-06-23 | O, S |
04CW0232 | 6 | 1892-06-23 | O, S |
CA0132 | 2 | 1889-05-11 | O |
08CW0179 | 4 | 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 1,258 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 2,013 AF — 160% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | 2,013 | 13th lowest of 15 · 160% of median | 124 | 9.0 |
| 2005 | 2,480 | 15th lowest of 15 · 197% of median | 155 | 17.5 |
| 2006 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2007 | 1,679 | 11th lowest of 15 · 134% of median | 140 | 14.0 |
| 2008 | 98 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 8% of median | 42 | 1.2 |
| 2009 | 1,324 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 137 | 6.7 |
| 2010 | 1,094 | 7th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 151 | 9.1 |
| 2011 | 775 | 4th lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 139 | 6.0 |
| 2012 | 542 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 43% of median | 164 | 3.8 |
| 2013 | 1,258 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 86 | 19.4 |
| 2016 | 889 | 6th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 105 | 4.3 |
| 2020 | 1,561 | 10th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 97 | 8.2 |
| 2021 | 871 | 5th lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 95 | 4.7 |
| 2022 | 1,942 | 12th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 148 | 6.7 |
| 2024 | 2,013 | 13th lowest of 15 · 160% of median | 143 | 7.3 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4384 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 41% 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.