Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
VULCAN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3904725 · 1 · CANYON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:23 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 1907-04-01 — 175th 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: MCKEAL NO 4 DITCH (1905-01-05). Immediately behind: CLINETOP DITCH NO 1 (1885-05-10).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21000.20909 | 1907-04-01 | 1908-09-14 | 5.757 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMAUGWLD | 175 |
| 33978.33883 | 1942-10-08 | 1952-09-05 | 3.838 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRMUNCOMINDRECFISDOMAUGWLD | 242 |
| 52230.47729 | 1980-09-04 | 1993-12-31 | 0.13 | 0.0 | C | IRRFIR |
Legal record & documents
17 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
93CW0091, W2127, CA4004, 79CW0257, 02CW0400, CA1319.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
93CW0091 | 1 | 1993-12-31 | S |
W2127 | 4 | 1952-09-05 | S |
CA4004 | 1 | 1952-09-05 | S |
79CW0257 | 4 | 1952-09-05 | S |
02CW0400 | 6 | 1952-09-05 | S |
CA1319 | 1 | 1908-09-14 | 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 118 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 11 AF — 9% of that, and 1st lowest of the 15 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 85 | 7th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | — | 94 | 0.5 |
| 2011 | 138 | 10th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | — | 116 | 0.8 |
| 2012 | 208 | 13th lowest of 15 · 176% of median | 18 | 171 | 0.8 |
| 2013 | 161 | 11th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 8 | 169 | 0.7 |
| 2014 | 118 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 162 | 0.6 |
| 2015 | 204 | 12th lowest of 15 · 173% of median | 16 | 199 | 1.5 |
| 2016 | 327 | 14th lowest of 15 · 277% of median | — | 140 | 1.5 |
| 2017 | 31 | 6th lowest of 15 · 26% of median | 31 | 214 | 0.1 |
| 2018 | 472 | 15th lowest of 15 · 400% of median | 11 | 185 | 2.2 |
| 2019 | 119 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 11 | 199 | 0.4 |
| 2020 | 11 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 11 | 185 | 0.0 |
| 2021 | 11 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 11 | 185 | 0.0 |
| 2022 | 11 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 11 | 185 | 0.0 |
| 2023 | 11 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 11 | 185 | 0.0 |
| 2024 | 11 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 11 | 185 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-10 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.043).
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 11336 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 71% of the irrigation seasons in 1949-2024 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.