Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
VIEWEG DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3900684 · 1 · PARACHUTE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:08 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 1883-05-17 — 20th 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: DAISY DITCH (1883-05-17). Immediately behind: DOW E MIDDLE FORK PL (1883-05-17).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12190.0 | 1883-05-17 | 1889-05-11 | 0.3 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 9 |
| 16777.15827 | 1893-05-01 | 1897-11-09 | 1.6 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMAUGPWROTH | 152A |
Legal record & documents
10 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
W2206, CA0745, 99CW0300, CA1413.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W2206 | 4 | 1897-11-09 | O, S |
CA0745 | 1 | 1897-11-09 | S |
99CW0300 | 4 | 1897-11-09 | O, S |
CA1413 | 1 | 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 12 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 693 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2021, came in at 693 AF — 100% of that, and 5th lowest of the 12 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1972 | 101 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 15% of median | — | 172 | 0.3 |
| 1973 | 95 | 1st lowest of 12 · 14% of median | — | 163 | 0.3 |
| 1978 | 2,237 | 11th lowest of 12 · 323% of median | — | 180 | 10.6 |
| 1979 | 2,171 | 10th lowest of 12 · 313% of median | — | 177 | 8.0 |
| 1980 | 3,118 | 12th lowest of 12 · 450% of median | — | 178 | 21.5 |
| 2012 | 467 | 4th lowest of 12 · 67% of median | 467 | 125 | 1.9 |
| 2015 | 803 | 9th lowest of 12 · 116% of median | 803 | 214 | 1.9 |
| 2016 | 127 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 18% of median | 127 | 214 | 0.3 |
| 2018 | 750 | 8th lowest of 12 · 108% of median | 750 | 200 | 1.9 |
| 2019 | 693 | 5th lowest of 12 · 100% of median | 693 | 185 | 1.9 |
| 2020 | 693 | 5th lowest of 12 · 100% of median | 693 | 185 | 1.9 |
| 2021 | 693 | 5th lowest of 12 · 100% of median | 693 | 185 | 1.9 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2178 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 21% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-2021 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.