Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WEST FORK DITCH 2
Structure dossier · WDID 4301002 · 1 · WEST MILLER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:57 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1888-05-01 — 974th most senior of the 3293 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: H J HAY DITCH (1883-05-01). Immediately behind: LORING DITCH (1888-10-13).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 32172.14001 | 1888-05-01 | 1942-05-26 | 0.08 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 338 |
| 32172.22737 | 1912-04-02 | 1942-05-26 | 0.19 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 441F |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA0624.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0624 | 2 | 1942-05-26 | 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 64 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 9 AF — 14% of that, and 4th 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 | 64 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 40 | 1.0 |
| 2011 | 236 | 13th lowest of 15 · 369% of median | 122 | 1.0 |
| 2012 | 65 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 109 | 0.5 |
| 2013 | 31 | 5th lowest of 15 · 48% of median | 35 | 0.5 |
| 2014 | 210 | 12th lowest of 15 · 328% of median | 110 | 1.0 |
| 2015 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2016 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 3 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 36 | 6th lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 62 | 0.3 |
| 2020 | 61 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 103 | 0.3 |
| 2021 | 421 | 15th lowest of 15 · 658% of median | 107 | 2.0 |
| 2022 | 374 | 14th lowest of 15 · 584% of median | 118 | 2.0 |
| 2023 | 86 | 10th lowest of 15 · 134% of median | 59 | 1.0 |
| 2024 | 171 | 11th lowest of 15 · 267% of median | 110 | 0.9 |
| 2025 | 9 | 4th lowest of 15 · 14% of median | 18 | 0.5 |
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5190 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 41% of the irrigation seasons in 1966-2025 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.