Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HIGHLAND DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4400651 · 1 · MORAPOS CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:01 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 1884-07-01 — 16th 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: CRAIG WATER TREATMENT PL (1884-05-13). Immediately behind: HULETT & TORRENCE D (1885-03-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12601.0 | 1884-07-01 | 1894-09-22 | 8.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 10 |
| 26209.21981 | 1910-03-08 | 1921-10-08 | 3.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | NONE |
| 26209.23396 | 1914-01-21 | 1921-10-08 | 2.7 | 0.0 | C | IRR | NONE |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
10/08/1921, 09/22/1894.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
10/08/1921 | 2 | 1921-10-08 | S |
09/22/1894 | 1 | 1894-09-22 | 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 748 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 266 AF — 36% of that, and 2nd 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 | 1,904 | 12th lowest of 15 · 254% of median | 365 | 15.0 |
| 2012 | 2,199 | 13th lowest of 15 · 294% of median | 311 | 10.0 |
| 2013 | 1,533 | 11th lowest of 15 · 205% of median | 365 | 8.5 |
| 2014 | 2,947 | 15th lowest of 15 · 394% of median | 365 | 18.1 |
| 2015 | 2,808 | 14th lowest of 15 · 375% of median | 365 | 8.5 |
| 2016 | 961 | 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 305 | 6.1 |
| 2017 | 726 | 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 53 | 10.0 |
| 2018 | 360 | 4th lowest of 15 · 48% of median | 79 | 6.9 |
| 2019 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2020 | 748 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 74 | 8.5 |
| 2021 | 374 | 5th lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 60 | 6.1 |
| 2022 | 844 | 9th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 72 | 10.0 |
| 2023 | 314 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 48 | 4.3 |
| 2024 | 388 | 6th lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 69 | 4.7 |
| 2025 | 266 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 36% of median | 63 | 5.4 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-139 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.004).
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 12741 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 64% 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.