Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LONE PINE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4000686 · 1 · SURFACE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:44 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 1898-09-15 — 1185th 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: WOMACK RESERVOIR NO. 3 (1898-08-26). Immediately behind: KLONDYKE DITCH (1899-06-10).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20501.1779 | 1898-09-15 | 1907-09-28 | 12.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 40 |
| 21263.1779 | 1898-09-15 | 1914-06-23 | 38.75 | 0.0 | C | IRR | A51 |
| 31924.1779 | 1898-09-15 | 1954-03-20 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | DOMSTK | J66 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA3503, CA0617, CA0457.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3503 | 1 | 1954-03-20 | S |
CA0617 | 1 | 1914-06-23 | S |
CA0457 | 1 | 1907-09-28 | 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 1,536 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 891 AF — 58% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2,101 | 10th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 97 | 26.1 |
| 2011 | 3,212 | 13th lowest of 15 · 209% of median | 92 | 34.0 |
| 2012 | 1,116 | 6th lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 53 | 24.8 |
| 2013 | 757 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 49% of median | 28 | 29.5 |
| 2014 | 1,536 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 63 | 29.0 |
| 2015 | 2,099 | 9th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 78 | 27.3 |
| 2016 | 3,066 | 11th lowest of 15 · 200% of median | 110 | 35.6 |
| 2017 | 3,845 | 15th lowest of 15 · 250% of median | 131 | 30.0 |
| 2018 | 337 | 1st lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 24 | 18.4 |
| 2019 | 3,198 | 12th lowest of 15 · 208% of median | 96 | 33.3 |
| 2020 | 831 | 4th lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 47 | 20.2 |
| 2021 | 503 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 33% of median | 22 | 18.7 |
| 2022 | 1,208 | 7th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 73 | 20.5 |
| 2023 | 3,403 | 14th lowest of 15 · 222% of median | 106 | 25.0 |
| 2024 | 891 | 5th lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 43 | 20.1 |
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4697 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 40% 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.