Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WALLACE NO 1 DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4001062 · 1 · JAY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:02 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 1962-06-18 — 2064th 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: WILBUR E MARTIN NO1 WELL (1962-05-01). Immediately behind: WALLACE NO 2 DITCH (1962-06-18).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 41076.0 | 1962-06-18 | 1964-01-31 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | K201 |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
83CW0001, CA4808, 91CW0083.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
83CW0001 | 2 | 1983-12-31 | S |
CA4808 | 1 | 1964-01-31 | S |
91CW0083 | 2 | 1964-01-31 | 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 35 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2017, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st lowest of the 15 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 17 | 6th lowest of 15 · 49% of median | — | 87 | 0.1 |
| 2004 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | — | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2005 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | — | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2006 | 35 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 89 | 0.2 |
| 2007 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | — | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2008 | 10 | 5th lowest of 15 · 29% of median | — | 51 | 0.1 |
| 2009 | 84 | 13th lowest of 15 · 240% of median | — | 170 | 0.2 |
| 2010 | 81 | 11th lowest of 15 · 231% of median | — | 105 | 0.5 |
| 2011 | 81 | 11th lowest of 15 · 231% of median | — | 141 | 0.5 |
| 2012 | 34 | 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 0 | 171 | 0.1 |
| 2013 | 36 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | — | 105 | 0.5 |
| 2014 | 98 | 15th lowest of 15 · 280% of median | 0 | 105 | 0.5 |
| 2015 | 93 | 14th lowest of 15 · 266% of median | — | 117 | 0.5 |
| 2016 | 47 | 10th lowest of 15 · 134% of median | — | 87 | 0.3 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | — | 3 | 0.0 |
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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5424 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 54% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2017 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.