Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HELMKE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4200522 · 1 · NORTH EAST CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:03 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 1929-04-01 — 271st most senior of the 726 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: ANDERSON RES NO 2 (1928-10-05). Immediately behind: RABER COAL CREEK DITCH (1930-04-01).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30895.28945 | 1929-04-01 | 1941-07-25 | 0.68 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 60355.0 | 2015-03-31 | 2015-12-31 | 0.0 | 1.0 | C | IRRSTKWLD |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
15CW3051, CA5812, 75CW0307.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
15CW3051 | 3 | 2015-12-31 | S |
CA5812 | 2 | 1941-07-25 | S |
75CW0307 | 1 | 1941-07-25 | 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 87 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2001, came in at 123 AF — 141% of that, and 13th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1981 | 54 | 4th lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 185 | 0.3 |
| 1982 | 66 | 5th lowest of 15 · 76% of median | 67 | 1.0 |
| 1983 | 72 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 103 | 0.6 |
| 1984 | 107 | 11th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 122 | 1.4 |
| 1985 | 34 | 1st lowest of 15 · 39% of median | 78 | 0.3 |
| 1986 | 44 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 51% of median | 98 | 0.4 |
| 1987 | 34 | 1st lowest of 15 · 39% of median | 82 | 0.3 |
| 1989 | 73 | 7th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 74 | 0.9 |
| 1991 | 114 | 12th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 88 | 0.9 |
| 1995 | 133 | 14th lowest of 15 · 153% of median | 103 | 0.9 |
| 1996 | 99 | 10th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 75 | 0.9 |
| 1997 | 185 | 15th lowest of 15 · 213% of median | 124 | 0.9 |
| 1999 | 95 | 9th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 86 | 0.7 |
| 2000 | 87 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 79 | 0.7 |
| 2001 | 123 | 13th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 104 | 0.9 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+4 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.033).
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1723 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 35% of the irrigation seasons in 1978-2001 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.