Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
FORREST DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4000758 · 1 · SURFACE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:52 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 1881-12-17 — 6th 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: COOK DITCH (1881-12-17). Immediately behind: SETTLE DITCH (1881-12-17).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11674.0 | 1881-12-17 | 1889-06-17 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 1 |
| 12881.0 | 1885-04-07 | 1889-06-17 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 11 |
| 13514.0 | 1886-12-31 | 1889-06-17 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 18 |
| 13704.0 | 1887-07-09 | 1889-06-17 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 20 |
| 25807.12881 | 1885-04-07 | 1930-02-10 | 7.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 4 |
| 25807.14427 | 1889-07-01 | 1930-02-10 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | G12 |
Legal record & documents
13 decreed actions on record across
9 court cases:
CA2030, W3487, CA5644, CA3836, CA1639, CA1211, CA0038, 75CW0081, 03CW0061.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2030 | 2 | 1930-02-10 | S |
W3487 | 1 | 1907-09-28 | S |
CA5644 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | O |
CA3836 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | O |
CA1639 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | O |
CA1211 | 1 | 1889-06-17 | O |
CA0038 | 3 | 1889-06-17 | O |
75CW0081 | 2 | 1889-06-17 | O |
03CW0061 | 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 2,466 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 2,466 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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 | 2,595 | 10th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 365 | 10.6 |
| 2011 | 2,737 | 11th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 358 | 11.2 |
| 2012 | 2,025 | 4th lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 305 | 10.1 |
| 2013 | 1,675 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 210 | 9.0 |
| 2014 | 2,486 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 266 | 9.7 |
| 2015 | 2,422 | 6th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 314 | 9.6 |
| 2016 | 2,940 | 13th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 356 | 11.8 |
| 2017 | 2,865 | 12th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 360 | 24.8 |
| 2018 | 1,055 | 1st lowest of 15 · 43% of median | 360 | 6.7 |
| 2019 | 3,587 | 14th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 365 | 13.5 |
| 2020 | 2,246 | 5th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 364 | 9.5 |
| 2021 | 1,203 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 49% of median | 365 | 5.7 |
| 2022 | 2,430 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 365 | 9.8 |
| 2023 | 3,770 | 15th lowest of 15 · 153% of median | 364 | 14.3 |
| 2024 | 2,466 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 305 | 8.7 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 17101 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1969-2024 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.