Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

LONG GULCH DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5100784 · 1 · BATTLE CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:28 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 1911-04-25 — 276th 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: LINKE RESERVOIR (1910-10-20). Immediately behind: MORTON DITCH (1911-06-06).

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
23454.223941911-04-251915-03-18 0.8750.0 CIRR 292

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 56 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 57 AF — 102% of that, and 9th 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)
2005 61 10th lowest of 15 · 109% of median 58 0.7
2006 70 12th lowest of 15 · 125% of median 48 1.2
2007 66 11th lowest of 15 · 118% of median 51 0.9
2008 81 13th lowest of 15 · 145% of median 50 1.4
2009 56 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 37 1.0
2010 26 2nd lowest of 15 · 46% of median 27 0.5
2011 115 15th lowest of 15 · 205% of median 54 1.2
2012 51 7th lowest of 15 · 91% of median 33 0.8
2016 102 14th lowest of 15 · 182% of median 48 1.5
2018 44 3rd lowest of 15 · 79% of median 58 0.5
2019 46 4th lowest of 15 · 82% of median 47 0.5
2020 48 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median 59 0.5
2021 18 1st lowest of 15 · 32% of median 48 0.3
2022 50 6th lowest of 15 · 89% of median 48 0.8
2024 57 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median 51 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 1661 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 17% of the irrigation seasons in 1978-2024 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.