Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BIG LAKE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5100529 · 1 · WILLIAMS FORK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:55 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 1903-02-06 — 151st most senior of the 2208 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: ST LOUIS NO 2 DITCH (1902-07-15). Immediately behind: WALDEN HOLLOW DITCH (1903-02-22).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19394.0 | 1903-02-06 | 1906-08-11 | 120.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 133 |
| 19967.0 | 1904-09-01 | 1906-08-11 | 111.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 143 |
| 56124.55506 | 2001-12-20 | 2004-08-30 | 0.0 | 85.0 | C | STOIRRSTK |
Legal record & documents
8 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
01CW0343, CA0112, 90CW0114, 82CW0126.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
01CW0343 | 1 | 2004-08-30 | S |
CA0112 | 5 | 1906-08-11 | O |
90CW0114 | 1 | 1906-08-11 | O |
82CW0126 | 1 | 1906-08-11 | 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 20,175 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 19,855 AF — 98% of that, and 7th 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 | 20,775 | 10th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 135 | 182.0 |
| 2011 | 32,686 | 15th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 154 | 177.0 |
| 2012 | 15,657 | 1st lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 175 | 120.0 |
| 2013 | 16,652 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 82% of median | 132 | 177.2 |
| 2014 | 17,739 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 88% of median | 138 | 169.0 |
| 2015 | 18,649 | 4th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 193 | 150.0 |
| 2016 | 18,824 | 5th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 189 | 170.0 |
| 2017 | 21,125 | 12th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 180 | 156.0 |
| 2018 | 21,406 | 13th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 184 | 167.0 |
| 2019 | 20,795 | 11th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 167 | 166.0 |
| 2020 | 21,927 | 14th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 190 | 169.0 |
| 2021 | 20,440 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 185 | 134.0 |
| 2022 | 19,273 | 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 187 | 143.0 |
| 2023 | 20,175 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 170 | 148.0 |
| 2024 | 19,855 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 184 | 173.0 |
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 (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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7162 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 68% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2024 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.