Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

LITTLE MESA DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5300680 · 1 · RED DIRT CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 23:26 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 1913-06-10 — 290th 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: CHOCKY JACKSON DITCH (1913-06-01). Immediately behind: TWIN SPRINGS DITCH (1913-06-18).

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
33023.231711913-06-101956-02-07 1.840.0 CIRR 301

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 53 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2019, came in at 68 AF — 128% of that, and 10th 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)
1996 144 13th lowest of 15 · 272% of median 92 1.0
1997 152 14th lowest of 15 · 287% of median 67 1.4
1998 272 15th lowest of 15 · 513% of median 154 1.4
1999 109 12th lowest of 15 · 206% of median 56 1.0
2000 92 11th lowest of 15 · 174% of median 65 1.0
2001 39 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 40 0.5
2002 46 7th lowest of 15 · 87% of median 47 0.5
2003 34 4th lowest of 15 · 64% of median 51 0.5
2004 53 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 68 0.5
2005 59 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median 81 0.4
2007 13 2nd lowest of 15 · 24% of median 68 0.1
2008 12 1st lowest of 15 · 23% of median 61 0.1
2009 26 3rd lowest of 15 · 49% of median 74 0.2
2015 45 6th lowest of 15 · 85% of median 76 0.4
2019 68 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median 62 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 2852 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 30% 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.