Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BARNARD DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4000512 · 1 · SMITH FORK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:29 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 1884-09-15 — 120th most senior of the 4661 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: PARK DITCH (1884-05-03). Immediately behind: YOUNG DITCH (1884-09-15).
Decreed rights (10)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12677.0 | 1884-09-15 | 1889-06-17 | 0.15 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 2 |
| 13904.0 | 1888-01-25 | 1889-06-17 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 7 |
| 21263.13757 | 1887-08-31 | 1914-06-23 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | A12 |
| 31924.28975 | 1929-05-01 | 1954-03-20 | 2.75 | 0.0 | C | IRR | J190 |
| 36131.0 | 1948-12-03 | 1954-03-20 | 1.75 | 0.0 | C | IRR | J327 |
| 43621.13757 | 1887-08-31 | 1969-12-31 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | DOMSTK | W1 |
| 58074.55683 | 2002-06-15 | 2009-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 58318.0 | 2009-09-01 | 2009-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | |
| 58318.0 | 2009-09-01 | 2009-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 59427.0 | 2012-09-14 | 2024-12-31 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
10 decreed actions on record across
7 court cases:
24CW3055, 09CW0178, W0001, CA3503, CA0617, 95CW0008, 18CW0046.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
24CW3055 | 1 | 2024-12-31 | O |
09CW0178 | 2 | 2009-12-31 | S |
W0001 | 1 | 1969-12-31 | S |
CA3503 | 3 | 1954-03-20 | S |
CA0617 | 1 | 1914-06-23 | S |
95CW0008 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | O |
18CW0046 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | 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 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 336 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 249 AF — 74% of that, and 3rd 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 | 270 | 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 164 | 2.7 |
| 2011 | 340 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 143 | 2.5 |
| 2012 | 403 | 12th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 178 | 4.2 |
| 2013 | 630 | 15th lowest of 15 · 188% of median | 153 | 6.0 |
| 2014 | 463 | 13th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 190 | 5.6 |
| 2015 | 540 | 14th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 202 | 2.8 |
| 2016 | 269 | 4th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 171 | 2.4 |
| 2017 | 291 | 7th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 189 | 2.0 |
| 2018 | 173 | 1st lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 75 | 2.2 |
| 2019 | 336 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 135 | 3.0 |
| 2020 | 357 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 262 | 3.8 |
| 2021 | 358 | 11th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 212 | 2.8 |
| 2022 | 279 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 194 | 3.0 |
| 2023 | 194 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 169 | 1.6 |
| 2024 | 249 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 182 | 3.1 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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 | 10 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 8244 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 71% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2024 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.