Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GRAPE CREEK NO 1 DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5200554 · 1 · PINEY RIVER · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:08 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 1905-06-02 — 129th most senior of the 562 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: SOUTH GOODSON DITCH HDG3 (1905-06-01). Immediately behind: GRAPE CREEK NO 2 DITCH (1905-06-09).

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
29437.202411905-06-021946-08-30 1.130.0 CIRR 136

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 109 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2023, came in at 108 AF — 99% of that, and 7th 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)
1993 188 13th lowest of 15 · 172% of median 101 1.4
1994 197 14th lowest of 15 · 181% of median 89 1.1
1995 165 12th lowest of 15 · 151% of median 87 1.1
1996 100 6th lowest of 15 · 92% of median 81 0.8
1997 109 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 56 1.0
1998 74 4th lowest of 15 · 68% of median 54 1.0
1999 66 3rd lowest of 15 · 61% of median 36 1.2
2000 36 2nd lowest of 15 · 33% of median 45 0.5
2001 120 9th lowest of 15 · 110% of median 97 1.0
2002 17 1st lowest of 15 · 16% of median 36 0.2
2011 510 15th lowest of 15 · 468% of median 89 5.0
2016 147 11th lowest of 15 · 135% of median 88 1.2
2017 96 5th lowest of 15 · 88% of median 55 1.0
2019 129 10th lowest of 15 · 118% of median 46 1.5
2023 108 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median 106 0.6

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 1842 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 18% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2023 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.