Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HUDSON & SULLIVAN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4500635 · 1 · GARFIELD CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:38 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 1885-11-15 — 41st 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: WEST DIVIDE CREEK DITCH (1885-11-02). Immediately behind: R F DITCH (1885-11-25).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13103.0 | 1885-11-15 | 1888-05-05 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 43 |
| 13605.0 | 1887-04-01 | 1888-05-05 | 1.67 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 74 |
| 33099.32262 | 1938-05-01 | 1941-07-23 | 11.47 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 172C |
Legal record & documents
13 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
W3262, CA3395, 00CW0298, CA0089.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W3262 | 6 | 1941-07-23 | O, S |
CA3395 | 3 | 1941-07-23 | O, S |
00CW0298 | 1 | 1941-07-23 | S |
CA0089 | 3 | 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 783 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,005 AF — 128% of that, and 12th 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 | 1,030 | 14th lowest of 15 · 132% of median | 122 | 9.0 |
| 2011 | 650 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 91 | 5.7 |
| 2012 | 392 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 117 | 5.7 |
| 2013 | 1,020 | 13th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 129 | 4.7 |
| 2014 | 1,166 | 15th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | 134 | 5.7 |
| 2015 | 871 | 11th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 89 | 6.8 |
| 2016 | 837 | 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 121 | 7.0 |
| 2017 | 823 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 124 | 4.6 |
| 2018 | 227 | 1st lowest of 15 · 29% of median | 47 | 4.7 |
| 2019 | 783 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 130 | 3.6 |
| 2020 | 681 | 7th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 120 | 3.6 |
| 2021 | 475 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 80 | 4.4 |
| 2022 | 605 | 4th lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 92 | 4.7 |
| 2023 | 614 | 5th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 87 | 6.2 |
| 2024 | 1,005 | 12th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 114 | 6.2 |
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5115 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 48% 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.