Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KIWA DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700711 · 1 · MICHIGAN RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 20:34 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.
Which of its rights get called out?
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 1886-04-01 — 70th 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: BUTLER DITCH 3 (1885-07-05). Immediately behind: SHEARER DITCH NO 2 (1886-04-14).
Decreed rights (9)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13240.0 | 1886-04-01 | 1892-09-19 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 48(46) |
| 13985.0 | 1888-04-15 | 1892-09-19 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 112(103) |
| 14031.0 | 1888-05-31 | 1892-09-19 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 131(121) |
| 14052.0 | 1888-06-21 | 1892-09-19 | 6.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 146(133) |
| 14170.0 | 1888-10-17 | 1892-09-19 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 163(147) |
| 14390.0 | 1889-05-25 | 1892-09-19 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 185(166) |
| 14720.0 | 1890-04-20 | 1892-09-19 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 213(192) |
| 18752.0 | 1901-05-05 | 1902-04-23 | 4.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 308(289) |
| 50403.35589 | 1947-06-10 | 1988-12-31 | 30.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK |
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 3,128 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 4,820 AF — 154% of that, and 15th 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 | 3,020 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 71 | 30.7 |
| 2010 | 3,607 | 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 62 | 45.0 |
| 2012 | 2,693 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 87 | 32.1 |
| 2013 | 3,915 | 11th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 75 | 55.9 |
| 2014 | 4,364 | 12th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 53 | 50.0 |
| 2015 | 1,468 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 47% of median | 76 | 10.0 |
| 2016 | 2,699 | 6th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 49 | 29.6 |
| 2017 | 3,128 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 52 | 32.2 |
| 2018 | 3,159 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 65 | 41.1 |
| 2019 | 1,082 | 1st lowest of 15 · 35% of median | 55 | 10.1 |
| 2020 | 2,259 | 4th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 76 | 20.0 |
| 2021 | 1,919 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 48 | 39.7 |
| 2022 | 4,635 | 13th lowest of 15 · 148% of median | 52 | 45.8 |
| 2023 | 4,750 | 14th lowest of 15 · 152% of median | 62 | 45.8 |
| 2025 | 4,820 | 15th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 140 | 51.8 |
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.