Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
POQUETTE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4700842 · 1 · MICHIGAN RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:17 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 1888-11-15 — 186th 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: MATHEWS, EASTERN DITCH (1888-09-30). Immediately behind: NEW ROSS DITCH (1889-03-23).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14199.0 | 1888-11-15 | 1892-09-19 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 165(149) |
| 14417.0 | 1889-06-21 | 1892-09-19 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 194(174) |
| 14757.0 | 1890-05-27 | 1892-09-19 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 227(203) |
| 50403.28641 | 1928-06-01 | 1988-12-31 | 22.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
88CW0108, CA0922.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
88CW0108 | 1 | 1988-12-31 | S |
CA0922 | 3 | 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 1,704 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3,027 | 12th lowest of 15 · 178% of median | 69 | 35.0 |
| 2006 | 1,611 | 7th lowest of 15 · 94% of median | 72 | 23.0 |
| 2007 | 3,715 | 13th lowest of 15 · 218% of median | 74 | 44.0 |
| 2008 | 2,432 | 10th lowest of 15 · 143% of median | 56 | 32.0 |
| 2009 | 2,562 | 11th lowest of 15 · 150% of median | 70 | 25.0 |
| 2010 | 1,704 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 62 | 30.0 |
| 2011 | 5,093 | 15th lowest of 15 · 299% of median | 76 | 40.0 |
| 2012 | 980 | 4th lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 83 | 11.0 |
| 2013 | 1,418 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 72 | 15.0 |
| 2014 | 1,785 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 51 | 20.0 |
| 2015 | 1,329 | 5th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 69 | 10.0 |
| 2016 | 761 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 45% of median | 39 | 16.0 |
| 2017 | 161 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 6 | 20.3 |
| 2018 | 3,816 | 14th lowest of 15 · 224% of median | 63 | 40.5 |
| 2025 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-157 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.029).
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 | 2662 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 23% of the irrigation seasons in 1972-2025 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.