Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WELCH MESA DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4001218 · 1 · COAL CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:17 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 1915-09-01 — 1444th 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: FIRE MT CANAL (1914-07-02). Immediately behind: LANGFORD CADDICK LTL D (1916-01-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25807.23984 | 1915-09-01 | 1930-02-10 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | G86 |
| 29260.23984 | 1915-09-01 | 1937-05-28 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | H101 |
| 31924.23984 | 1915-09-01 | 1954-03-20 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | DOM | J160 |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA3503, CA2563, W2521, CA2030.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3503 | 1 | 1954-03-20 | S |
CA2563 | 1 | 1937-05-28 | S |
W2521 | 1 | 1930-02-10 | S |
CA2030 | 2 | 1930-02-10 | 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 479 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 413 AF — 86% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 542 | 10th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 124 | 4.7 |
| 2011 | 775 | 15th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 127 | 6.2 |
| 2012 | 231 | 1st lowest of 15 · 48% of median | 82 | 3.0 |
| 2013 | 640 | 14th lowest of 15 · 134% of median | 116 | 6.0 |
| 2014 | 560 | 11th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 138 | 6.9 |
| 2015 | 593 | 12th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 179 | 6.4 |
| 2016 | 499 | 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 109 | 6.2 |
| 2017 | 619 | 13th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 128 | 8.5 |
| 2018 | 235 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 49% of median | 102 | 3.0 |
| 2019 | 316 | 4th lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 111 | 5.8 |
| 2020 | 442 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 98 | 7.1 |
| 2021 | 245 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 51% of median | 134 | 2.8 |
| 2022 | 479 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 101 | 6.9 |
| 2023 | 380 | 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 77 | 5.6 |
| 2024 | 413 | 6th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 172 | 5.8 |
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 | 7786 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 67% 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.