Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
NEW PIONEER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700790 · 1 · CANADIAN RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:21 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 1890-05-20 — 227th 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: TROUBLESOME DITCH (1890-05-15). Immediately behind: TELLER DITCH (1890-05-20).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14750.0 | 1890-05-20 | 1892-09-19 | 2.67 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 224(200) |
| 15143.0 | 1891-06-17 | 1892-09-19 | 1.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 242(214) |
| 15603.0 | 1892-09-19 | 1908-07-01 | 6.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 255 |
| 19448.0 | 1903-04-01 | 1908-07-01 | 15.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 323 |
| 30280.19478 | 1903-05-01 | 1939-06-20 | 15.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 704 |
| 51864.51013 | 1989-09-01 | 1992-12-31 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | STK |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
92CW0085, CA0286, CA1783, 91CW0024.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
92CW0085 | 1 | 1992-12-31 | S |
CA0286 | 1 | 1939-06-20 | S |
CA1783 | 2 | 1908-07-01 | O |
91CW0024 | 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 1,418 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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 | 2,838 | 13th lowest of 15 · 200% of median | 70 | 29.8 |
| 2008 | 854 | 5th lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 53 | 15.6 |
| 2009 | 1,997 | 10th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 48 | 35.0 |
| 2010 | 1,418 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 48 | 25.0 |
| 2012 | 1,776 | 9th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 99 | 10.0 |
| 2013 | 472 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 33% of median | 23 | 18.0 |
| 2014 | 1,173 | 7th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 65 | 10.0 |
| 2015 | 2,190 | 11th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 70 | 16.0 |
| 2016 | 1,029 | 6th lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 43 | 13.5 |
| 2017 | 829 | 4th lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 60 | 8.2 |
| 2018 | 2,491 | 12th lowest of 15 · 176% of median | 74 | 26.0 |
| 2019 | 3,134 | 14th lowest of 15 · 221% of median | 58 | 35.0 |
| 2020 | 3,511 | 15th lowest of 15 · 248% of median | 82 | 26.0 |
| 2022 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2024 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2842 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 25% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-2024 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.