Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KISER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4000643 · 1 · KISER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:50 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 1886-08-16 — 145th 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: ORCHARD CITY PL SUP PT 11 (1886-07-26). Immediately behind: KENNICOTT & MOWER D (1886-08-20).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13377.0 | 1886-08-16 | 1889-06-17 | 0.05 | 2.0 | C | IRR | 9 |
| 25807.21275 | 1908-04-01 | 1930-02-10 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | G54 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
8 court cases:
CA2563, 91CW0123, 75CW0156, CA2030, CA3856, CA0457, CA4239, CA0038.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2563 | 2 | 1937-05-28 | S |
91CW0123 | 1 | 1937-05-28 | S |
75CW0156 | 1 | 1937-05-28 | S |
CA2030 | 1 | 1930-02-10 | S |
CA3856 | 2 | 1907-09-28 | O, S |
CA0457 | 1 | 1907-09-28 | S |
CA4239 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | O |
CA0038 | 2 | 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 83 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 57 AF — 69% of that, and 5th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 132 | 13th lowest of 15 · 159% of median | 170 | 2.1 |
| 2010 | 129 | 12th lowest of 15 · 155% of median | 192 | 1.3 |
| 2011 | 180 | 14th lowest of 15 · 217% of median | 150 | 1.5 |
| 2012 | 62 | 6th lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 90 | 0.9 |
| 2013 | 83 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 122 | 0.6 |
| 2014 | 108 | 11th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 104 | 1.5 |
| 2015 | 97 | 10th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 121 | 0.9 |
| 2016 | 87 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 81 | 1.0 |
| 2017 | 55 | 4th lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 90 | 0.6 |
| 2018 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 236 | 15th lowest of 15 · 284% of median | 128 | 1.5 |
| 2020 | 13 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 16% of median | 22 | 0.5 |
| 2022 | 17 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 20% of median | 19 | 0.7 |
| 2023 | 72 | 7th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 96 | 0.6 |
| 2024 | 57 | 5th lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 49 | 1.2 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-6 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.038).
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 8531 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 73% 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.