Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MUTUAL DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700786 · 1 · GRIZZLY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:56 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 1888-08-29 — 179th 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: NORTH PARK DITCH NO 7 (1888-08-03). Immediately behind: INDEPENDENT DITCH (1888-09-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14121.0 | 1888-08-29 | 1902-04-23 | 100.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 77 |
| 43829.41499 | 1963-08-15 | 1970-12-31 | 40.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOMSTK | |
| 50403.3564 | 1947-07-31 | 1988-12-31 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | STK | |
| 56761.0 | 2005-05-28 | 2005-12-31 | 8.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
05CW0042, 88CW0116, W0048-70, CA1523.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
05CW0042 | 1 | 2005-12-31 | S |
88CW0116 | 1 | 1988-12-31 | S |
W0048-70 | 1 | 1970-12-31 | S |
CA1523 | 1 | 1902-04-23 | 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 12,782 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 9,467 AF — 74% 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 | 15,091 | 12th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 191 | 129.1 |
| 2012 | 10,136 | 5th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 78 | 100.9 |
| 2013 | 12,173 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 71 | 118.2 |
| 2014 | 20,022 | 14th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 113 | 158.0 |
| 2015 | 12,988 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 58 | 157.8 |
| 2016 | 13,299 | 10th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 130 | 111.9 |
| 2017 | 5,865 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 86 | 77.6 |
| 2018 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 21,953 | 15th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | 70 | 177.1 |
| 2020 | 15,373 | 13th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 64 | 148.5 |
| 2021 | 8,553 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 44 | 139.5 |
| 2022 | 11,848 | 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 39 | 167.3 |
| 2023 | 13,681 | 11th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 57 | 157.8 |
| 2024 | 12,782 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 58 | 130.6 |
| 2025 | 9,467 | 4th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 92 | 52.5 |
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 | 4655 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 39% of the irrigation seasons in 1969-2025 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.