Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
POVERTY FLAT D NO 1
Structure dossier · WDID 4700845 · 1 · MICHIGAN RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:15 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 1888-05-20 — 156th 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: TERRELL DITCH (1888-05-16). Immediately behind: SLEW DITCH (1888-05-24).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14020.0 | 1888-05-20 | 1892-09-19 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 125(115) |
| 14185.0 | 1888-11-01 | 1892-09-19 | 7.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 164(148) |
| 14808.0 | 1890-07-17 | 1892-09-19 | 10.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 235(210) |
| 38605.0 | 1955-09-12 | 1958-01-10 | 20.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 781 |
| 50403.32353 | 1938-07-31 | 1988-12-31 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | STK |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
95CW0165, 88CW0121, 88CW0075, CA0511, CA0922.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
95CW0165 | 1 | 1988-12-31 | O |
88CW0121 | 1 | 1988-12-31 | S |
88CW0075 | 1 | 1988-12-31 | O |
CA0511 | 1 | 1958-01-10 | 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 2,062 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 2,701 AF — 131% of that, and 13th 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 | 1,602 | 1st lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 37 | 31.0 |
| 2012 | 1,829 | 5th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 138 | 20.0 |
| 2013 | 2,034 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 74 | 27.2 |
| 2014 | 1,668 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 38 | 27.2 |
| 2015 | 3,220 | 14th lowest of 15 · 156% of median | 70 | 32.0 |
| 2016 | 2,062 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 47 | 27.2 |
| 2017 | 2,479 | 12th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 62 | 29.1 |
| 2018 | 2,373 | 11th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 56 | 28.5 |
| 2019 | 1,649 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 44 | 29.7 |
| 2020 | 2,186 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 56 | 23.0 |
| 2021 | 1,822 | 4th lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 60 | 23.0 |
| 2022 | 1,885 | 6th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 53 | 30.3 |
| 2023 | 2,098 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 56 | 30.3 |
| 2024 | 4,062 | 15th lowest of 15 · 197% of median | 136 | 27.2 |
| 2025 | 2,701 | 13th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 168 | 30.7 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3664 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 24% of the irrigation seasons in 1954-2025 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.