Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
GRANBY DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4000946 · 1 · DIRTY GEORGE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:24 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 1894-05-01 — 1140th 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: LAMAR DITCH (1894-05-01). Immediately behind: LEON PARK RES (1894-08-27).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20501.16192 | 1894-05-01 | 1907-09-28 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 35 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA0457, 82CW0270.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0457 | 1 | 1907-09-28 | S |
82CW0270 | 2 | 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 953 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,152 AF — 121% of that, and 9th lowest of the 12 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 | — | no recorded volume | 1,084 | 0 | — |
| 2009 | — | no recorded volume | 1,804 | 0 | — |
| 2010 | — | no recorded volume | 945 | 0 | — |
| 2011 | 2,101 | 11th lowest of 12 · 220% of median | — | 140 | 11.4 |
| 2012 | 1,028 | 8th lowest of 12 · 108% of median | — | 214 | 5.5 |
| 2013 | 941 | 6th lowest of 12 · 99% of median | — | 183 | 7.2 |
| 2014 | 1,840 | 10th lowest of 12 · 193% of median | — | 179 | 11.3 |
| 2016 | 833 | 5th lowest of 12 · 87% of median | — | 132 | 8.0 |
| 2017 | 965 | 7th lowest of 12 · 101% of median | — | 150 | 6.1 |
| 2018 | 408 | 2nd lowest of 12 · 43% of median | — | 175 | 1.5 |
| 2019 | 2,284 | 12th lowest of 12 · 240% of median | — | 171 | 9.5 |
| 2020 | 808 | 4th lowest of 12 · 85% of median | — | 158 | 5.7 |
| 2021 | 251 | 1st lowest of 12 · 26% of median | — | 123 | 3.7 |
| 2022 | 544 | 3rd lowest of 12 · 57% of median | — | 114 | 7.3 |
| 2024 | 1,152 | 9th lowest of 12 · 121% of median | — | 171 | 7.6 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 12 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (7/10 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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3810 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 33% 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.