Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

ENTERPRISE DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 4500593 · 1 · WEST MAMM CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:07 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 1891-07-01 — 81st 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: SWAN SPRING WW DITCH (1889-05-01). Immediately behind: RAINBOW DITCH (1891-07-01).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
15307.151571891-07-011893-04-08 3.527.57 CIRRAUG 111

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 100 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2022, came in at 100 AF — 100% of that, and 7th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
2004 41 2nd lowest of 15 · 41% of median 105 0.3
2005 65 3rd lowest of 15 · 65% of median 67 0.5
2008 188 12th lowest of 15 · 188% of median 185 0.6
2009 256 14th lowest of 15 · 256% of median 214 1.0
2010 115 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 138 1.1
2011 505 15th lowest of 15 · 505% of median 205 1.5
2012 194 13th lowest of 15 · 194% of median 198 1.0
2013 37 1st lowest of 15 · 37% of median 87 0.4
2014 133 11th lowest of 15 · 133% of median 201 0.6
2015 74 4th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 205 0.4
2016 100 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 204 0.4
2017 83 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median 86 0.9
2018 79 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median 206 0.8
2020 106 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median 167 0.6
2022 100 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 126 0.4

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 7360 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 72% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2022 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.