← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

BRIGHTON DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5400510 · 1 · SMITH CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 01:48 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 1901-06-01154th most senior of the 724 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: SLATER PARK DITCH NO 1 (1899-07-01). Immediately behind: LUCHSINGER DITCH (1901-06-01).

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
37433.187791901-06-011964-06-23 5.50.0 CIRR 4

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 211 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 315 AF — 149% of that, and 12th 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)
2009 381 15th lowest of 15 · 181% of median 103 2.5
2010 365 14th lowest of 15 · 173% of median 145 3.0
2011 362 13th lowest of 15 · 172% of median 123 3.0
2012 204 7th lowest of 15 · 97% of median 146 2.7
2013 225 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median 122 2.2
2014 132 4th lowest of 15 · 63% of median 110 1.0
2015 4 1st lowest of 15 · 2% of median 11 0.3
2016 155 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 89 1.5
2018 99 3rd lowest of 15 · 47% of median 77 1.1
2019 196 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 72 3.3
2020 211 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 102 3.9
2021 218 9th lowest of 15 · 103% of median 102 2.7
2022 257 11th lowest of 15 · 122% of median 60 3.6
2023 64 2nd lowest of 15 · 30% of median 75 0.6
2024 315 12th lowest of 15 · 149% of median 113 3.4

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 3203 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 28% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2024 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.