Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
GRANLEE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3900562 · 1 · PARACHUTE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:06 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 1889-04-01 — 129th most senior of the 1758 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: DAVENPORT DITCH (1889-05-01). Immediately behind: JENNINGS NO 1 DITCH (1889-02-10).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17699.14336 | 1889-04-01 | 1900-02-20 | 0.4 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 143AA |
| 17699.16541 | 1895-04-15 | 1900-02-20 | 3.6 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 154 |
| 21523.18388 | 1900-05-06 | 1909-02-04 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 158AA |
| 21523.18936 | 1901-11-05 | 1909-02-04 | 1.6 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 161AA |
| 31031.27818 | 1926-03-01 | 1937-01-04 | 6.09 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 207I |
Legal record & documents
31 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
W2206, W0281, CA3124, 99CW0300, CA1345, CA0781.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W2206 | 10 | 1937-01-04 | S |
W0281 | 1 | 1937-01-04 | S |
CA3124 | 4 | 1937-01-04 | S |
99CW0300 | 10 | 1937-01-04 | S |
CA1345 | 4 | 1909-02-04 | S |
CA0781 | 2 | 1900-02-20 | 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 1,084 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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 | 1,719 | 13th lowest of 15 · 159% of median | 135 | 10.5 |
| 2011 | 1,185 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 90 | 9.5 |
| 2012 | 1,115 | 10th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 160 | 8.5 |
| 2013 | 945 | 6th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 104 | 8.5 |
| 2014 | 1,106 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 128 | 9.3 |
| 2015 | 1,342 | 12th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 161 | 13.2 |
| 2016 | 1,766 | 14th lowest of 15 · 163% of median | 149 | 13.2 |
| 2017 | 1,084 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 172 | 7.3 |
| 2018 | 972 | 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 196 | 4.5 |
| 2019 | 561 | 5th lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 115 | 3.1 |
| 2020 | 8 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 1% of median | 22 | 1.0 |
| 2021 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 13 | 0.0 |
| 2022 | 155 | 4th lowest of 15 · 14% of median | 70 | 1.2 |
| 2023 | 2,864 | 15th lowest of 15 · 264% of median | 187 | 9.3 |
| 2024 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-96 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.020).
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 | 9257 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 58% 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.