← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

JOHN DAVIS DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 4000562 · 1 · ALUM GULCH · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:39 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 1894-04-011247th 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: OBERT DITCH (1894-01-31). Immediately behind: KREUMLING DITCH (1894-04-19).

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
21263.161621894-04-011914-06-23 0.80.0 CIRR A29

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 524 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 578 AF — 110% of that, and 12th 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)
2010 642 14th lowest of 15 · 122% of median 189 3.2
2011 603 13th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 197 4.3
2012 271 2nd lowest of 15 · 52% of median 193 2.0
2013 537 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median 206 2.8
2014 524 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 193 2.2
2015 533 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median 194 2.2
2016 645 15th lowest of 15 · 123% of median 190 2.6
2017 575 11th lowest of 15 · 110% of median 196 2.2
2018 130 1st lowest of 15 · 25% of median 118 1.4
2019 441 6th lowest of 15 · 84% of median 173 2.4
2020 366 5th lowest of 15 · 70% of median 175 1.5
2021 327 4th lowest of 15 · 62% of median 182 1.5
2022 301 3rd lowest of 15 · 57% of median 175 1.8
2023 508 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median 180 2.2
2024 578 12th lowest of 15 · 110% of median 190 2.5

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 8219 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 75% of the irrigation seasons in 1973-2024 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.