Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
SARVIS DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5004600 · 1 · RED DIRT CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 01:08 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 1911-05-24 — 181st 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: MCELROY STATE PUMP NO 1 (1900-06-01). Immediately behind: MUDDY CREEK HIGHWAY WELL (1958-08-01).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 39254.22423 | 1911-05-24 | 1964-03-30 | 1627.0 | 0.0 | A | IRR | 4A |
| 39254.22423 | 1911-05-24 | 1964-03-30 | 43.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 4A |
Legal record & documents
1 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA3538.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3538 | 1 | 1964-03-30 | 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 428 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 213 AF — 50% of that, and 4th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 485 | 9th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | — | 49 | 8.9 |
| 2008 | 1,194 | 13th lowest of 15 · 279% of median | — | 79 | 15.0 |
| 2009 | 735 | 11th lowest of 15 · 172% of median | — | 146 | 8.0 |
| 2010 | 882 | 12th lowest of 15 · 206% of median | — | 245 | 12.0 |
| 2011 | 1,911 | 15th lowest of 15 · 446% of median | — | 304 | 20.0 |
| 2012 | 428 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 428 | 92 | 5.0 |
| 2015 | 424 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 424 | 94 | 5.0 |
| 2016 | 1,194 | 13th lowest of 15 · 279% of median | 1,194 | 170 | 15.0 |
| 2017 | 156 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 36% of median | 156 | 60 | 1.5 |
| 2018 | 105 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 105 | 36 | 3.0 |
| 2019 | 305 | 6th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 305 | 106 | 3.0 |
| 2020 | 214 | 5th lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 214 | 86 | 3.0 |
| 2021 | 84 | 1st lowest of 15 · 20% of median | 84 | 53 | 2.0 |
| 2022 | 494 | 10th lowest of 15 · 115% of median | 494 | 87 | 6.0 |
| 2024 | 213 | 4th lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 213 | 145 | 5.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-43 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.020).
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (8/10 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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3511 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 42% of the irrigation seasons in 1985-2024 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.