Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
TRIAL DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4001287 · 1 · GUNNISON RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:40 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 1882-01-31 — 606th 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: HARTLAND DITCH (1881-12-31). Immediately behind: JOHNSON'S DITCH (1882-01-31).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18729.11719 | 1882-01-31 | 1903-02-25 | 3.545 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 3 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
W3397, CA0374, 80CW0079, 03CW0076.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W3397 | 1 | 1903-02-25 | S |
CA0374 | 1 | 1903-02-25 | S |
80CW0079 | 1 | 1903-02-25 | S |
03CW0076 | 1 | 1903-02-25 | 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 365 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2000, came in at 424 AF — 116% of that, and 5th lowest of the 8 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1986 | 1,192 | 7th lowest of 8 · 327% of median | — | 66 | 13.0 |
| 1987 | 876 | 6th lowest of 8 · 240% of median | — | 91 | 10.0 |
| 1988 | — | no recorded volume | 188 | 0 | — |
| 1989 | — | no recorded volume | 1,156 | 0 | — |
| 1990 | — | no recorded volume | 667 | 0 | — |
| 1991 | — | no recorded volume | 538 | 0 | — |
| 1992 | — | no recorded volume | 1,789 | 0 | — |
| 1993 | — | no recorded volume | 1,559 | 0 | — |
| 1994 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | 0 | 2 | 0.0 |
| 1995 | 2,817 | 8th lowest of 8 · 772% of median | 1,722 | 216 | 7.0 |
| 1996 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | 0 | 8 | 0.0 |
| 1997 | 0 | 1st lowest of 8 · 0% of median | 106 | 4 | 0.0 |
| 1998 | — | no recorded volume | 589 | 0 | — |
| 1999 | 306 | 4th lowest of 8 · 84% of median | — | 173 | 2.0 |
| 2000 | 424 | 5th lowest of 8 · 116% of median | — | 214 | 1.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 8 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 | 975 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 22% of the irrigation seasons in 1980-2000 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.