Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
GRAND RIVER L AND C CO D
Structure dossier · WDID 5300591 · 1 · NORTH FORK DERBY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:57 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 1887-09-29 — 66th 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: BUCK POND OUTLET DITCH (1887-07-01). Immediately behind: HORN NO 1 DITCH (1887-11-01).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13786.0 | 1887-09-29 | 1890-11-20 | 18.4 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 66 |
Legal record & documents
1 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA0295.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0295 | 1 | 1890-11-20 | O |
DWR's own records for this structure: net amounts · transactions & adjudication history · scanned decrees (search a case number there for the imaged document). On this site: the district's full legal picture →
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 2,697 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,758 AF — 65% of that, and 4th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
| Year | Diverted (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 record | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 | 3,477 | 14th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 123 | 18.0 |
| 2006 | 3,586 | 15th lowest of 15 · 133% of median | 119 | 16.0 |
| 2007 | 2,753 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 106 | 16.0 |
| 2008 | 2,697 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 112 | 16.0 |
| 2009 | 2,867 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 118 | 15.3 |
| 2010 | 3,409 | 13th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 143 | 16.0 |
| 2011 | 3,088 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 126 | 14.9 |
| 2012 | 3,354 | 12th lowest of 15 · 124% of median | 169 | 13.9 |
| 2013 | 2,663 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 115 | 13.0 |
| 2015 | 1,306 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 48% of median | 173 | 6.0 |
| 2016 | 607 | 1st lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 101 | 6.1 |
| 2017 | 1,812 | 5th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 136 | 9.8 |
| 2018 | 1,817 | 6th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 138 | 13.0 |
| 2019 | 943 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 35% of median | 73 | 7.0 |
| 2024 | 1,758 | 4th lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 103 | 12.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-132 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.003).
How good is our record of it?
Grade B (8/10 points) — the components below are the finding; the letter alone is not.
The rubric, component by component
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | complete | name, type, and water source all on file |
| decreed rights | on file | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5036 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 48% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2024 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.