Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PURDY AND VICKERS DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4100517 · 1 · UNCOMPAHGRE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:33 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 1882-03-02 — 16th 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: CHIPETA BEAUDRY DITCH (1882-03-01). Immediately behind: RICE DITCH (1882-03-10).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11749.0 | 1882-03-02 | 1890-06-30 | 7.15 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 11, 12 |
| 12412.0 | 1883-12-25 | 1890-06-30 | 6.58 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 23.5, 42 |
| 13189.0 | 1886-02-09 | 1890-06-30 | 1.96 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 33.667, 70 |
| 14198.0 | 1888-11-14 | 1890-06-30 | 30.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 60, 90 |
| 29038.17623 | 1898-04-01 | 1941-12-04 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 179 |
Legal record & documents
12 decreed actions on record across
7 court cases:
CA6909, CA4573, CA1586, CA10085, CA10084, CA0149, CA0049.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA6909 | 1 | 1941-12-04 | S |
CA4573 | 4 | 1890-06-30 | O |
CA1586 | 1 | 1890-06-30 | O |
CA10085 | 1 | 1890-06-30 | O |
CA10084 | 1 | 1890-06-30 | O |
CA0149 | 2 | 1890-06-30 | O |
CA0049 | 2 | 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 3,169 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 2,694 AF — 85% 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 | 3,009 | 4th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 182 | 12.6 |
| 2012 | 2,099 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 192 | 9.5 |
| 2013 | 3,081 | 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 181 | 10.2 |
| 2014 | 3,618 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 192 | 16.0 |
| 2015 | 3,618 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 177 | 16.0 |
| 2016 | 3,980 | 14th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 191 | 16.0 |
| 2017 | 4,375 | 15th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 151 | 19.4 |
| 2018 | 3,723 | 13th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 237 | 13.6 |
| 2019 | 3,023 | 5th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 271 | 17.5 |
| 2020 | 3,169 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 156 | 15.5 |
| 2021 | 3,254 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 191 | 11.7 |
| 2022 | 3,386 | 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 191 | 14.5 |
| 2023 | 2,054 | 1st lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 175 | 10.8 |
| 2024 | 3,056 | 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 221 | 9.9 |
| 2025 | 2,694 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 150 | 12.6 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 15671 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 97% 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.