Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CHIPETA BEAUDRY DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4100515 · 1 · UNCOMPAHGRE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:18 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 1882-03-01 — 15th most senior of the 1104 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: UNCOMPAHGRE (LOUTSENHIZE (1882-02-23). Immediately behind: PURDY AND VICKERS DITCH (1882-03-02).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11748.0 | 1882-03-01 | 1890-06-30 | 9.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 10, 11 |
| 12851.0 | 1885-03-08 | 1890-06-30 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 40, 60 |
| 14198.0 | 1888-11-14 | 1890-06-30 | 5.82 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 116, 59, 8 |
Legal record & documents
8 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA4573, CA0149.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA4573 | 4 | 1890-06-30 | O |
CA0149 | 4 | 1890-06-30 | O |
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 4,655 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 4,301 AF — 92% of that, and 3rd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 4,803 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 195 | 20.8 |
| 2012 | 6,947 | 15th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 206 | 23.6 |
| 2013 | 4,653 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 148 | 19.2 |
| 2014 | 4,835 | 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 188 | 19.2 |
| 2015 | 5,964 | 12th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 193 | 23.8 |
| 2016 | 6,366 | 14th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 179 | 25.0 |
| 2017 | 4,539 | 5th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 183 | 18.1 |
| 2018 | 4,623 | 6th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 211 | 16.4 |
| 2019 | 4,151 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 182 | 20.3 |
| 2020 | 5,683 | 11th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 206 | 18.5 |
| 2021 | 4,350 | 4th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 209 | 15.1 |
| 2022 | 6,265 | 13th lowest of 15 · 135% of median | 206 | 25.0 |
| 2023 | 3,525 | 1st lowest of 15 · 76% of median | 163 | 17.7 |
| 2024 | 4,655 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 199 | 15.6 |
| 2025 | 4,301 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 185 | 16.8 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 14046 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 87% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2025 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.