Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

CEDAR CREEK NO 2 DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5300528 · 1 · NORTH FORK CEDAR CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:21 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1885-03-26 — 20th most senior of the 1231 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: MERRIMAN DITCH (1885-03-20). Immediately behind: BUFFALO HEAD DITCH (1885-04-15).

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
12869.01885-03-261890-11-20 2.70.0 CIRR 17

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 161 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2019, came in at 49 AF — 30% of that, and 1st 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)
2000 214 12th lowest of 15 · 133% of median 55 2.0
2001 214 12th lowest of 15 · 133% of median 55 2.0
2002 137 7th lowest of 15 · 85% of median 70 1.0
2003 417 15th lowest of 15 · 259% of median 113 2.5
2004 184 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median 94 1.0
2005 161 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 82 1.0
2006 113 3rd lowest of 15 · 70% of median 58 1.0
2007 135 6th lowest of 15 · 84% of median 69 1.0
2008 107 2nd lowest of 15 · 66% of median 55 1.0
2009 125 4th lowest of 15 · 78% of median 43 1.5
2010 176 9th lowest of 15 · 109% of median 60 1.5
2011 275 14th lowest of 15 · 171% of median 102 1.5
2012 180 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 86 1.5
2013 129 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median 57 1.5
2019 49 1st lowest of 15 · 30% of median 32 0.8

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 2556 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 27% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2019 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.