Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CUMBERLAND DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700577 · 1 · MICHIGAN RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 21:05 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 1887-04-01 — 93rd 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: RHEA DITCH (1886-12-31). Immediately behind: MIDLAND DITCH (1887-04-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13605.0 | 1887-04-01 | 1892-09-19 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 69(67) |
| 14323.0 | 1889-03-19 | 1892-09-19 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 166(150) |
| 17420.0 | 1897-09-10 | 1902-04-23 | 24.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 285(272) |
| 23016.21807 | 1909-09-15 | 1923-03-06 | 20.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 378 |
| 48212.32293 | 1938-06-01 | 1982-12-31 | 18.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK |
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 4,197 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 2,317 AF — 55% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 7,312 | 15th lowest of 15 · 174% of median | 84 | 88.3 |
| 2012 | 3,993 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 189 | 44.8 |
| 2013 | 5,958 | 11th lowest of 15 · 142% of median | 104 | 72.8 |
| 2014 | 4,224 | 10th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 54 | 52.4 |
| 2015 | 7,287 | 14th lowest of 15 · 174% of median | 108 | 69.9 |
| 2016 | 4,197 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 106 | 43.7 |
| 2017 | 1,724 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 41% of median | 51 | 48.8 |
| 2018 | 2,925 | 5th lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 62 | 48.0 |
| 2019 | 1,935 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 49 | 24.4 |
| 2020 | 4,211 | 9th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 101 | 49.0 |
| 2021 | 3,338 | 6th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 50 | 54.9 |
| 2022 | 6,415 | 12th lowest of 15 · 153% of median | 58 | 61.2 |
| 2023 | 6,942 | 13th lowest of 15 · 165% of median | 82 | 70.0 |
| 2024 | 468 | 1st lowest of 15 · 11% of median | 68 | 3.5 |
| 2025 | 2,317 | 4th lowest of 15 · 55% of median | 56 | 52.8 |
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.