Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

BYERS NO 5 DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5100566 · 1 · UTE BILL CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:32 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 1887-12-31 — 61st 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: WOOD NO 2 DITCH (1887-10-31). Immediately behind: HURD CREEK DITCH (1888-05-01).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
13879.01887-12-311906-08-11 0.250.0 CIRR 54

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 23 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2022, came in at 28 AF — 122% of that, and 11th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
1994 25 10th lowest of 15 · 109% of median 67 0.2
1995 30 12th lowest of 15 · 130% of median 62 0.2
1996 23 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 56 0.2
1997 19 4th lowest of 15 · 83% of median 39 0.2
1998 34 13th lowest of 15 · 148% of median 72 0.2
1999 22 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median 50 0.2
2000 17 3rd lowest of 15 · 74% of median 35 0.2
2001 22 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median 57 0.2
2002 15 2nd lowest of 15 · 65% of median 32 0.2
2004 20 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median 42 0.2
2005 23 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 47 0.2
2006 71 15th lowest of 15 · 309% of median 73 0.5
2007 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
2011 41 14th lowest of 15 · 178% of median 83 0.2
2022 28 11th lowest of 15 · 122% of median 15 1.0

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 2025 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 20% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2022 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.