Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CARTER CREEK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5000531 · 1 · CARTER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:57 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1896-05-23 — 80th most senior of the 360 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: SMITH DITCH HGT 4 (1894-12-31). Immediately behind: HARRISON DITCH (1897-05-15).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20676.16945 | 1896-05-23 | 1911-08-03 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 88 |
| 33797.16945 | 1896-05-23 | 1945-03-05 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 88 |
| 52360.0 | 1993-05-10 | 1993-12-31 | 1.3 | 0.7 | C | IRRSTK |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
93CW0275, 06CW0233, CA0816, CA0492, CA0210.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
93CW0275 | 1 | 1993-12-31 | S |
06CW0233 | 1 | 1993-12-31 | S |
CA0816 | 2 | 1945-03-05 | S |
CA0492 | 1 | 1911-08-03 | S |
CA0210 | 2 | 1911-08-03 | 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 328 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 117 AF — 36% of that, and 2nd 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 | 523 | 13th lowest of 15 · 160% of median | 112 | 3.5 |
| 2008 | 698 | 15th lowest of 15 · 213% of median | 74 | 7.2 |
| 2009 | 187 | 4th lowest of 15 · 57% of median | 43 | 4.6 |
| 2010 | 523 | 13th lowest of 15 · 160% of median | 79 | 5.2 |
| 2011 | 297 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 55 | 3.0 |
| 2012 | 252 | 5th lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 64 | 2.3 |
| 2013 | 171 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 50 | 2.5 |
| 2014 | 429 | 12th lowest of 15 · 131% of median | 64 | 4.7 |
| 2015 | 297 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 50 | 4.1 |
| 2016 | 328 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 50 | 5.1 |
| 2017 | 338 | 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 56 | 5.3 |
| 2018 | 104 | 1st lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 46 | 2.0 |
| 2019 | 357 | 10th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 62 | 5.2 |
| 2023 | 393 | 11th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 85 | 4.0 |
| 2024 | 117 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 36% of median | 69 | 2.0 |
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3322 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 30% of the irrigation seasons in 1973-2024 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.