Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
FOLEY DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3801215 · 1 · CRYSTAL SPRING CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:16 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 1948-06-01 — 2644th 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: ACORN GULCH WASTE DITCH (1947-12-31). Immediately behind: MAROON CR PL & DIVR DAM (1965-12-29).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47481.35946 | 1948-06-01 | 1980-12-31 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNDOMSTKHUO | |
| 51867.0 | 1992-01-03 | 1992-12-31 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFIS |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
94CW0304, 92CW0215, 80CW0281.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
94CW0304 | 1 | 1992-12-31 | S |
92CW0215 | 1 | 1992-12-31 | S |
80CW0281 | 3 | 1980-12-31 | 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 3,574 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 4,319 AF — 121% of that, and 14th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 4,951 | 15th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 366 | 15.0 |
| 1997 | 4,065 | 12th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 304 | 11.2 |
| 2004 | 1,004 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 117 | 7.2 |
| 2005 | 523 | 1st lowest of 15 · 15% of median | 230 | 5.0 |
| 2014 | 3,693 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 165 | 14.0 |
| 2015 | 4,226 | 13th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 365 | 9.8 |
| 2016 | 3,574 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 346 | 9.0 |
| 2017 | 3,560 | 6th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 346 | 7.5 |
| 2018 | 3,417 | 4th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 365 | 6.5 |
| 2019 | 3,459 | 5th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 346 | 9.5 |
| 2020 | 2,978 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 327 | 6.0 |
| 2021 | 3,565 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 347 | 7.5 |
| 2022 | 3,769 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 365 | 6.5 |
| 2023 | 3,910 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 365 | 8.0 |
| 2024 | 4,319 | 14th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 305 | 15.0 |
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 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 | 5656 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 79% of the irrigation seasons in 1991-2024 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.