Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PIPELINE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5300754 · 1 · DERBY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:10 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 1951-11-09 — 349th 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: VISINTAINER NO 02 DITCH (1951-08-06). Immediately behind: LUARK DITCH (1951-11-30).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 37202.0 | 1951-11-09 | 1956-02-07 | 15.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 374 |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
CA1123.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1123 | 2 | 1956-02-07 | S |
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 1,448 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 1,995 AF — 138% of that, and 11th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 1,131 | 6th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 58 | 10.0 |
| 2007 | 1,448 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 74 | 10.0 |
| 2008 | 966 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 70 | 7.1 |
| 2009 | 1,850 | 10th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | 82 | 14.5 |
| 2010 | 2,238 | 12th lowest of 15 · 155% of median | 108 | 14.2 |
| 2011 | 3,086 | 15th lowest of 15 · 213% of median | 126 | 15.1 |
| 2012 | 2,636 | 14th lowest of 15 · 182% of median | 122 | 14.0 |
| 2013 | 646 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 45% of median | 82 | 7.1 |
| 2014 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2015 | 2,529 | 13th lowest of 15 · 175% of median | 171 | 12.0 |
| 2016 | 1,333 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 95 | 9.7 |
| 2017 | 1,616 | 9th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 119 | 9.3 |
| 2018 | 990 | 4th lowest of 15 · 68% of median | 60 | 8.8 |
| 2019 | 1,071 | 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 118 | 5.3 |
| 2024 | 1,995 | 11th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 173 | 7.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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 | 4428 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 42% 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.