Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MILK CK DITCH 1
Structure dossier · WDID 4400707 · 1 · MILK CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:50 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 1883-03-10 — 5th 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: COLLOM DITCH NO 2 (1882-06-09). Immediately behind: ELK HORN DITCH (1883-03-20).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12122.0 | 1883-03-10 | 1894-09-22 | 2.66 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 5 |
| 19253.13665 | 1887-05-31 | 1903-09-21 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 25A |
| 19253.15563 | 1892-08-10 | 1903-09-21 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 69A |
| 36295.17532 | 1897-12-31 | 1960-09-01 | 2.7 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 6 |
| 37163.0 | 1951-10-01 | 1960-09-01 | 13.64 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 71 |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA1278, 91CW0105, 09/22/1894.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1278 | 2 | 1960-09-01 | S |
91CW0105 | 2 | 1903-09-21 | 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 628 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 213 AF — 34% of that, and 5th 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 | 628 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 58 | 9.7 |
| 2012 | 618 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 123 | 12.0 |
| 2013 | 915 | 12th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 113 | 12.0 |
| 2014 | 747 | 10th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 50 | 11.4 |
| 2015 | 1,157 | 15th lowest of 15 · 184% of median | 78 | 10.2 |
| 2016 | 1,016 | 14th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 57 | 12.5 |
| 2017 | 935 | 13th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 76 | 13.9 |
| 2018 | 234 | 6th lowest of 15 · 37% of median | 22 | 9.5 |
| 2019 | 730 | 9th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | 54 | 12.0 |
| 2020 | 88 | 1st lowest of 15 · 14% of median | 13 | 7.2 |
| 2021 | 211 | 4th lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 36 | 6.9 |
| 2022 | 877 | 11th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 74 | 10.2 |
| 2023 | 122 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 19% of median | 16 | 6.1 |
| 2024 | 143 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 23% of median | 19 | 4.1 |
| 2025 | 213 | 5th lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 17 | 7.7 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7377 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.