Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WEST GILMER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4000824 · 1 · CURRANT CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:02 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 1885-12-01 — 1206th 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: MINERAL SPRINGS DITCH (1885-12-01). Immediately behind: JOHN W SKINNER NO 1 D (1889-06-17).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21089.13119 | 1885-12-01 | 1908-03-20 | 0.025 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 2 |
| 21089.14914 | 1890-10-31 | 1908-03-20 | 0.175 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 3 |
| 25807.21971 | 1910-02-26 | 1930-02-10 | 1.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | G61 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA2030, CA0894.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2030 | 1 | 1930-02-10 | S |
CA0894 | 2 | 1908-03-20 | 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 138 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 41 AF — 30% of that, and 6th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 12 | 0.0 |
| 2005 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2006 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2007 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2014 | 9 | 5th lowest of 15 · 6% of median | 82 | 0.2 |
| 2015 | 248 | 12th lowest of 15 · 180% of median | 207 | 1.9 |
| 2016 | 174 | 9th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 134 | 1.8 |
| 2017 | 222 | 11th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 183 | 4.3 |
| 2018 | 192 | 10th lowest of 15 · 139% of median | 192 | 2.6 |
| 2019 | 308 | 13th lowest of 15 · 223% of median | 149 | 3.8 |
| 2020 | 88 | 7th lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 138 | 0.8 |
| 2021 | 138 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 160 | 1.0 |
| 2022 | 325 | 14th lowest of 15 · 236% of median | 184 | 1.7 |
| 2023 | 367 | 15th lowest of 15 · 266% of median | 182 | 2.0 |
| 2024 | 41 | 6th lowest of 15 · 30% of median | 100 | 0.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+15 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.009).
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 | 7178 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 65% 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.