Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CLEAR CREEK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4500550 · 1 · CLEAR CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:34 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1883-11-08 — 16th most senior of the 1378 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: HARRINGTON DITCH (1883-06-01). Immediately behind: RISING SUN DITCH (1883-12-05).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12365.0 | 1883-11-08 | 1888-05-05 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 15 |
| 12902.0 | 1885-04-28 | 1888-05-05 | 2.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 29 |
| 13801.0 | 1887-10-14 | 1888-05-05 | 0.17 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 97 |
| 21653.21305 | 1908-05-01 | 1909-07-22 | 1.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 143 |
| 23224.23131 | 1913-05-01 | 1913-10-17 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 146 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
CA1665, CA1356, 07/22/1909, CA0089, 05/05/1888.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1665 | 2 | 1913-10-17 | S |
CA1356 | 2 | 1909-07-22 | S |
07/22/1909 | 1 | 1909-07-22 | S |
CA0089 | 4 | 1888-05-05 | O |
05/05/1888 | 2 | 1888-05-05 | 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 467 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,046 AF — 224% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 467 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 84 | 6.9 |
| 2005 | 1,060 | 14th lowest of 15 · 227% of median | 139 | 8.0 |
| 2006 | 454 | 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median | 60 | 8.5 |
| 2007 | 597 | 9th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 108 | 6.0 |
| 2008 | 804 | 12th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 88 | 8.0 |
| 2009 | 763 | 11th lowest of 15 · 163% of median | 99 | 7.0 |
| 2013 | 248 | 1st lowest of 15 · 53% of median | 64 | 3.5 |
| 2017 | 426 | 6th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 39 | 7.8 |
| 2018 | 259 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 88 | 3.5 |
| 2019 | 1,201 | 15th lowest of 15 · 257% of median | 104 | 8.0 |
| 2020 | 344 | 4th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 38 | 7.0 |
| 2021 | 376 | 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 80 | 3.5 |
| 2022 | 733 | 10th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 93 | 7.7 |
| 2023 | 302 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 64 | 9.2 |
| 2024 | 1,046 | 13th lowest of 15 · 224% of median | 134 | 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 (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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4940 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 47% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2024 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.