Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LEWIS NO 2 DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3900609 · 1 · EAST CANYON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:11 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 1895-06-01 — 157th 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: LEWIS NO 1 DITCH (1895-06-01). Immediately behind: COULTER SUPPLY DITCH (1903-05-18).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20407.16588 | 1895-06-01 | 1905-11-22 | 0.04 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 154BB2 |
| 21000.20909 | 1907-04-01 | 1908-09-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 175 |
| 33978.33883 | 1942-10-08 | 1952-09-05 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 242 |
| 37503.25719 | 1920-06-01 | 1966-11-10 | 1.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 290 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA4914, 02CW0400, CA1148.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA4914 | 1 | 1966-11-10 | S |
02CW0400 | 2 | 1952-09-05 | S |
CA1148 | 1 | 1905-11-22 | 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 244 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2003, came in at 14 AF — 6% of that, and 2nd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970 | 233 | 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 144 | 1.0 |
| 1971 | 365 | 12th lowest of 15 · 150% of median | 185 | 1.0 |
| 1972 | 250 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 148 | 1.0 |
| 1973 | 401 | 13th lowest of 15 · 164% of median | 153 | 2.0 |
| 1974 | 468 | 15th lowest of 15 · 192% of median | 187 | 2.0 |
| 1975 | 428 | 14th lowest of 15 · 175% of median | 203 | 1.5 |
| 1976 | 236 | 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 96 | 1.2 |
| 1984 | 37 | 4th lowest of 15 · 15% of median | 48 | 0.4 |
| 1985 | 332 | 11th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 129 | 1.6 |
| 1986 | 244 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 104 | 1.5 |
| 1987 | 312 | 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 92 | 2.6 |
| 2000 | 45 | 5th lowest of 15 · 18% of median | 184 | 0.1 |
| 2001 | 16 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 7% of median | 65 | 0.1 |
| 2002 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2003 | 14 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 6% of median | 174 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-10 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.018).
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (7/10 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4505 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 39% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2003 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.