Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GUTZLER DITCH NO 3 HDG 2

Structure dossier · WDID 5200869 · 1 · SHEEPHORN CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:44 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 1910-05-01 — 146th 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: GUTZLER DITCH NO 3 (1910-05-01). Immediately behind: CASTLE PEAK DITCH (1911-05-01).

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
29437.220351910-05-011946-08-30 0.00.0 CIRR

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 159 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2020, came in at 55 AF — 35% of that, and 2nd 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)
2001 327 13th lowest of 15 · 206% of median 56 3.0
2002 62 3rd lowest of 15 · 39% of median 48 0.7
2003 159 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 33 2.5
2004 203 11th lowest of 15 · 128% of median 42 2.5
2005 153 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median 78 1.0
2006 186 10th lowest of 15 · 117% of median 95 1.0
2007 184 9th lowest of 15 · 116% of median 32 3.0
2008 298 12th lowest of 15 · 187% of median 51 3.0
2009 151 5th lowest of 15 · 95% of median 39 2.0
2010 155 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median 62 2.8
2011 345 15th lowest of 15 · 217% of median 62 2.8
2013 344 14th lowest of 15 · 216% of median 57 3.1
2018 95 4th lowest of 15 · 60% of median 47 1.3
2019 11 1st lowest of 15 · 7% of median 7 0.9
2020 55 2nd lowest of 15 · 35% of median 35 1.2

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 791 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 18% of the irrigation seasons in 2000-2020 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.