Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

GRUNER NO 2 DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5300598 · 1 · SWEETWATER CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:38 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 1890-06-28 — 99th 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: DEMPSEY NO 2 DITCH (1890-06-28). Immediately behind: RILAND DITCH (HACK CR) (1890-06-28).

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
14789.01890-06-281890-11-20 0.20.0 CIRR 120

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 64 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2020, came in at 276 AF — 431% of that, and 13th 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)
2006 30 2nd lowest of 15 · 47% of median 77 0.2
2007 41 4th lowest of 15 · 64% of median 83 0.2
2008 77 10th lowest of 15 · 120% of median 92 0.5
2009 40 3rd lowest of 15 · 62% of median 73 0.5
2010 59 6th lowest of 15 · 92% of median 78 0.5
2011 59 6th lowest of 15 · 92% of median 61 0.5
2012 54 5th lowest of 15 · 84% of median 64 0.5
2013 64 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 66 0.5
2014 11 1st lowest of 15 · 17% of median 48 0.1
2015 229 12th lowest of 15 · 358% of median 152 1.6
2016 465 15th lowest of 15 · 727% of median 173 1.7
2017 189 11th lowest of 15 · 295% of median 149 1.3
2018 303 14th lowest of 15 · 473% of median 205 1.4
2019 72 9th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 99 2.1
2020 276 13th lowest of 15 · 431% of median 138 1.8

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 3584 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 39% of the irrigation seasons in 1977-2020 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.