Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HOGBACK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5000585 · 1 · PASS CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 21:03 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 1885-04-30 — 21st 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: CLARK NO 1 DITCH (1885-04-30). Immediately behind: ZWAHLEN DITCH (1885-05-31).
Decreed rights (25)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12904.0 | 1885-04-30 | 1906-08-11 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 16 |
| 13260.0 | 1886-04-21 | 1906-08-11 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 25 |
| 18519.0 | 1900-09-14 | 1906-08-11 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 62 |
| 18519.0 | 1900-09-14 | 1906-08-11 | 69.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 62 |
| 18580.0 | 1900-11-14 | 1906-08-11 | 9.65 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 64 |
| 19267.0 | 1902-10-02 | 1906-08-11 | 198.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 66 |
| 19267.0 | 1902-10-02 | 1906-08-11 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 66 |
| 19597.0 | 1903-08-28 | 1906-08-11 | 21.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 72 |
| 19597.0 | 1903-08-28 | 1906-08-11 | 2.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 72 |
| 19650.0 | 1903-10-20 | 1906-08-11 | 30.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 73 |
| 19650.0 | 1903-10-20 | 1906-08-11 | 3.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 73 |
| 22494.1966 | 1903-10-30 | 1915-03-20 | 144.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 73 |
| 22494.1966 | 1903-10-30 | 1915-03-20 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 73 |
| 22494.20897 | 1907-03-20 | 1915-03-20 | 15.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 103A |
| 22494.20897 | 1907-03-20 | 1915-03-20 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 103A |
| 22494.20968 | 1907-05-30 | 1915-03-20 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 103B |
| 22494.20968 | 1907-05-30 | 1915-03-20 | 27.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 103B |
| 22494.2097 | 1907-06-01 | 1915-03-20 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 103C |
| 22494.2097 | 1907-06-01 | 1915-03-20 | 6.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 103C |
| 22494.21699 | 1909-05-30 | 1915-03-20 | 15.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 107A |
| 22494.21699 | 1909-05-30 | 1915-03-20 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 107A |
| 22494.21701 | 1909-06-01 | 1915-03-20 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 107B |
| 22494.21701 | 1909-06-01 | 1915-03-20 | 72.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 107B |
| 27960.23921 | 1915-06-30 | 1926-07-22 | 0.275 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 143 |
| 27960.23921 | 1915-06-30 | 1926-07-22 | 18.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 143 |
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 357 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 324 AF — 91% of that, and 5th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 116 | 1st lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 14 | 4.5 |
| 2011 | 1,291 | 15th lowest of 15 · 362% of median | 107 | 12.8 |
| 2012 | 549 | 12th lowest of 15 · 154% of median | 90 | 5.0 |
| 2013 | 357 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 38 | 8.0 |
| 2014 | 439 | 10th lowest of 15 · 123% of median | 33 | 8.0 |
| 2015 | 200 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 39 | 4.7 |
| 2016 | 401 | 9th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 68 | 4.0 |
| 2017 | 446 | 11th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 57 | 6.2 |
| 2018 | 211 | 4th lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 36 | 5.0 |
| 2019 | 781 | 13th lowest of 15 · 219% of median | 99 | 10.2 |
| 2020 | 782 | 14th lowest of 15 · 219% of median | 96 | 10.0 |
| 2021 | 355 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 58 | 7.0 |
| 2022 | 208 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 72 | 2.0 |
| 2023 | 341 | 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 59 | 4.0 |
| 2024 | 324 | 5th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 64 | 4.0 |
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.