Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HIGHEST DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4500628 · 1 · BROOK CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:49 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 1909-06-15 — 199th 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: POLE CREEK DITCH (1907-05-15). Immediately behind: JOE TAYLOR DITCH (1887-05-07).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23747.21715 | 1909-06-15 | 1915-07-31 | 0.7 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 143AAC |
| 23747.21807 | 1909-09-15 | 1915-07-31 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 143AAD |
| 33441.32264 | 1938-05-03 | 1945-05-07 | 3.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 174 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
CA3628, CA1791.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3628 | 1 | 1945-05-07 | S |
CA1791 | 2 | 1915-07-31 | 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 149 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2009, came in at 1,045 AF — 701% of that, and 14th lowest of the 14 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1993 | 8 | 2nd lowest of 14 · 5% of median | — | 6 | 1.0 |
| 1994 | 159 | 8th lowest of 14 · 107% of median | — | 33 | 2.5 |
| 1995 | 271 | 9th lowest of 14 · 182% of median | — | 37 | 3.8 |
| 1996 | 121 | 5th lowest of 14 · 81% of median | — | 17 | 3.8 |
| 1997 | 109 | 4th lowest of 14 · 73% of median | — | 47 | 1.2 |
| 1998 | 0 | 1st lowest of 14 · 0% of median | — | 1 | 0.0 |
| 1999 | 127 | 6th lowest of 14 · 85% of median | — | 33 | 2.0 |
| 2000 | 139 | 7th lowest of 14 · 93% of median | — | 22 | 5.0 |
| 2001 | 60 | 3rd lowest of 14 · 40% of median | — | 21 | 1.5 |
| 2003 | — | no recorded volume | 92 | 0 | — |
| 2005 | 655 | 13th lowest of 14 · 440% of median | — | 59 | 8.0 |
| 2006 | 303 | 10th lowest of 14 · 203% of median | — | 22 | 8.0 |
| 2007 | 528 | 11th lowest of 14 · 354% of median | — | 54 | 6.0 |
| 2008 | 607 | 12th lowest of 14 · 407% of median | — | 40 | 12.0 |
| 2009 | 1,045 | 14th lowest of 14 · 701% of median | — | 74 | 10.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 14 recorded years (+37 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.016).
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 | 1103 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 15% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2009 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.