Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GREEN COLLECTION DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 3900929 · 1 · MCLEARN DRAW · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:21 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 1964-12-31 — 862nd 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: GREEN SPRING (1964-12-31). Immediately behind: MOSS SPRING NO 2 (1965-10-31).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
46751.420031964-12-311978-12-31 1.00.0 CIRRSTK

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 169 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2004, came in at 50 AF — 30% of that, and 3rd lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
1989 266 14th lowest of 15 · 157% of median 235 0.9
1990 182 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median 352 0.8
1991 278 15th lowest of 15 · 164% of median 365 0.9
1992 210 12th lowest of 15 · 124% of median 349 0.9
1993 184 10th lowest of 15 · 109% of median 345 0.9
1994 221 13th lowest of 15 · 131% of median 304 0.6
1996 44 2nd lowest of 15 · 26% of median 119 0.5
1997 169 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 365 0.6
1998 158 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median 365 0.5
1999 188 11th lowest of 15 · 111% of median 365 1.0
2000 35 1st lowest of 15 · 21% of median 241 0.2
2001 67 4th lowest of 15 · 40% of median 259 0.4
2002 81 6th lowest of 15 · 48% of median 261 0.2
2003 75 5th lowest of 15 · 44% of median 81 1.2
2004 50 3rd lowest of 15 · 30% of median 93 0.3

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 5374 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1984-2004 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.