Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KEYSER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3900601 · 1 · EAST CANYON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:07 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 1910-06-01 — 259th 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: HARPER WELL (1934-12-31). Immediately behind: URQHART DITCH (1911-07-15).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31780.22066 | 1910-06-01 | 1937-01-09 | 0.9 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 211 |
| 31780.2275 | 1912-04-15 | 1937-01-09 | 0.9 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 213A |
| 37503.36994 | 1951-04-15 | 1966-11-10 | 3.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 304A |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA4914, CA3104.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA4914 | 1 | 1966-11-10 | S |
CA3104 | 2 | 1937-01-09 | 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 1,054 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 737 AF — 70% of that, and 4th 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 | 1,708 | 14th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 151 | 8.0 |
| 2011 | 1,054 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 116 | 5.7 |
| 2012 | 1,989 | 15th lowest of 15 · 189% of median | 195 | 8.1 |
| 2013 | 1,452 | 13th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 156 | 6.2 |
| 2014 | 1,392 | 12th lowest of 15 · 132% of median | 135 | 6.3 |
| 2015 | 933 | 6th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 115 | 4.8 |
| 2016 | 1,115 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 130 | 8.2 |
| 2017 | 950 | 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 100 | 5.2 |
| 2018 | 603 | 1st lowest of 15 · 57% of median | 168 | 2.0 |
| 2019 | 707 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 136 | 3.3 |
| 2020 | 788 | 5th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 183 | 2.6 |
| 2021 | 1,175 | 11th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 216 | 3.4 |
| 2022 | 690 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 186 | 2.2 |
| 2023 | 1,103 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 166 | 4.4 |
| 2024 | 737 | 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 149 | 3.2 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-56 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.018).
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 12525 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 79% 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.