Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WISCONSIN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4400511 · 1 · FORTIFICATION CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:04 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 1888-05-19 — 51st most senior of the 3562 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: SOUTH SIDE DITCH (1888-04-30). Immediately behind: DEER CK DITCH (1888-05-20).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14019.0 | 1888-05-19 | 1892-09-22 | 17.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 30 |
| 40421.20948 | 1907-05-10 | 1972-05-30 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOMSTK | 4 |
| 51864.51651 | 1991-06-01 | 1992-12-31 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
92CW0007, CA2259, 09/22/1892.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
92CW0007 | 1 | 1992-12-31 | S |
CA2259 | 1 | 1972-05-30 | S |
09/22/1892 | 1 | 1892-09-22 | 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 2,544 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 2,969 AF — 117% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 2,392 | 6th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 69 | 32.0 |
| 2012 | 2,655 | 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 89 | 32.8 |
| 2013 | 1,794 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 51 | 32.8 |
| 2014 | 2,886 | 12th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 78 | 28.1 |
| 2015 | 2,607 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 119 | 22.6 |
| 2016 | 2,141 | 4th lowest of 15 · 84% of median | 66 | 25.8 |
| 2017 | 2,440 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 75 | 30.6 |
| 2018 | 1,177 | 1st lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 38 | 24.2 |
| 2019 | 4,133 | 15th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 135 | 31.6 |
| 2020 | 2,202 | 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 97 | 24.2 |
| 2021 | 2,108 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 82 | 28.8 |
| 2022 | 2,829 | 11th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 79 | 31.8 |
| 2023 | 2,544 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 84 | 30.3 |
| 2024 | 3,114 | 14th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 89 | 33.6 |
| 2025 | 2,969 | 13th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 83 | 33.6 |
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 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7360 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 37% of the irrigation seasons in 1932-2025 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.