Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MORAINE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700785 · 1 · COLORADO CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:25 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 1956-10-01 — 609th 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: WALDEN RESERVOIR (1954-07-21). Immediately behind: HANSON WELL NO 3 (1957-06-15).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38990.0 | 1956-10-01 | 1958-01-10 | 16.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 787 |
| 58691.0 | 2010-09-09 | 2010-12-31 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | FIS |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
10CW0048, W0030-70, CA0511.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
10CW0048 | 1 | 2010-12-31 | S |
W0030-70 | 1 | 1958-01-10 | S |
CA0511 | 1 | 1958-01-10 | 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 477 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 96 AF — 20% of that, and 3rd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 196 | 5th lowest of 15 · 41% of median | 25 | 5.3 |
| 2008 | 608 | 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 109 | 10.5 |
| 2009 | 833 | 12th lowest of 15 · 175% of median | 99 | 8.0 |
| 2010 | 974 | 13th lowest of 15 · 204% of median | 103 | 9.0 |
| 2011 | 477 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 45 | 10.0 |
| 2012 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2013 | 768 | 11th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 96 | 12.0 |
| 2014 | 343 | 7th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 73 | 5.0 |
| 2015 | 280 | 6th lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 94 | 2.0 |
| 2016 | 104 | 4th lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 71 | 0.8 |
| 2017 | 1,626 | 15th lowest of 15 · 341% of median | 80 | 12.0 |
| 2018 | 6 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 1% of median | 5 | 0.8 |
| 2019 | 587 | 9th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 88 | 4.2 |
| 2020 | 1,354 | 14th lowest of 15 · 284% of median | 135 | 16.0 |
| 2024 | 96 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 20% of median | 146 | 0.3 |
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3075 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 26% of the irrigation seasons in 1969-2024 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.