Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
UTLEY DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4400790 · 1 · WILLIAMS FORK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:51 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 1889-07-20 — 193rd 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: GRIESER DITCH (1889-05-05). Immediately behind: UTLEY PUMP (1889-07-20).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19250.14446 | 1889-07-20 | 1902-09-18 | 0.975 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 54 |
| 40421.33753 | 1942-05-31 | 1972-05-30 | 4.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 15A |
| 43968.0 | 1970-05-19 | 1972-05-30 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 68 |
Legal record & documents
9 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
CA2259, 86CW0160, W0047-70, 98CW0002, 09/18/1902.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA2259 | 3 | 1972-05-30 | S |
86CW0160 | 1 | 1972-05-30 | S |
W0047-70 | 2 | 1902-09-18 | S |
98CW0002 | 1 | 1902-09-18 | S |
09/18/1902 | 2 | 1902-09-18 | 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 887 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 1,012 | 9th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 80 | 9.0 |
| 2010 | 2,460 | 15th lowest of 15 · 277% of median | 167 | 10.0 |
| 2011 | 887 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 103 | 5.0 |
| 2012 | 1,093 | 10th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 91 | 9.0 |
| 2013 | 2,142 | 13th lowest of 15 · 242% of median | 122 | 9.0 |
| 2014 | 1,642 | 11th lowest of 15 · 185% of median | 93 | 9.0 |
| 2015 | 286 | 5th lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 22 | 9.0 |
| 2016 | 1,698 | 12th lowest of 15 · 191% of median | 144 | 9.0 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2018 | 8 | 4th lowest of 15 · 1% of median | 53 | 0.1 |
| 2019 | 372 | 7th lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 75 | 3.2 |
| 2020 | 298 | 6th lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 66 | 2.3 |
| 2022 | 2,435 | 14th lowest of 15 · 274% of median | 205 | 6.8 |
| 2023 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2024 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
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 | 6938 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 35% of the irrigation seasons in 1932-2024 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.