Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
COE DITCH NO 1
Structure dossier · WDID 4700563 · 1 · GOVERNMENT CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:12 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 1882-06-21 — 9th most senior of the 1262 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: PETERSON DITCH 1 (1882-06-01). Immediately behind: COE DITCH NO 2 (1882-06-21).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11860.0 | 1882-06-21 | 1892-09-19 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 8 |
| 12591.0 | 1884-06-21 | 1892-09-19 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 18(17) |
| 52109.0 | 1992-09-01 | 1992-12-31 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | STK | |
| 54421.52031 | 1992-06-15 | 1999-12-31 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRSTKWLD |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
99CW0021, 06CW0006, 92CW0088, CA0922.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
99CW0021 | 2 | 1999-12-31 | S |
06CW0006 | 2 | 1999-12-31 | S |
92CW0088 | 1 | 1992-12-31 | S |
CA0922 | 2 | 1892-09-19 | 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 228 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 107 AF — 47% of that, and 4th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 349 | 10th lowest of 15 · 153% of median | 50 | 6.2 |
| 2012 | 376 | 12th lowest of 15 · 165% of median | 107 | 3.2 |
| 2013 | 212 | 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 83 | 3.0 |
| 2014 | 227 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 84 | 2.0 |
| 2015 | 262 | 9th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 93 | 2.5 |
| 2016 | 714 | 15th lowest of 15 · 313% of median | 93 | 5.7 |
| 2017 | 400 | 13th lowest of 15 · 175% of median | 81 | 4.8 |
| 2018 | 65 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 64 | 0.8 |
| 2019 | 41 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 18% of median | 56 | 0.4 |
| 2020 | 184 | 5th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 52 | 2.0 |
| 2021 | 350 | 11th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 73 | 3.0 |
| 2022 | 431 | 14th lowest of 15 · 189% of median | 62 | 5.0 |
| 2023 | 228 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 49 | 2.7 |
| 2024 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2025 | 107 | 4th lowest of 15 · 47% of median | 90 | 0.7 |
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 (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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3690 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 32% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-2025 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.