Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HARTZELL DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5400529 · 1 · HARTZELL CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:03 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 1902-06-10 — 140th 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: RODEWALD WELL NO 2 (1920-06-07). Immediately behind: READ WINSLOW DITCH (1909-06-21).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25743.19153 | 1902-06-10 | 1920-07-26 | 1.42 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFISWLD | A29 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
07/26/1920, 00CW0048.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
07/26/1920 | 1 | 1920-07-26 | S |
00CW0048 | 2 | 1920-07-26 | 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 175 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2017, came in at 0 AF — 0% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1950 | 393 | 13th lowest of 15 · 225% of median | 51 | 4.0 |
| 1951 | 488 | 15th lowest of 15 · 279% of median | 51 | 5.0 |
| 1952 | 393 | 13th lowest of 15 · 225% of median | 51 | 4.0 |
| 1953 | 242 | 10th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 32 | 4.0 |
| 1954 | 349 | 11th lowest of 15 · 199% of median | 37 | 5.0 |
| 1956 | 77 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 44% of median | 27 | 1.5 |
| 1957 | 51 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 29% of median | 17 | 2.0 |
| 1973 | 175 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 45 | 2.0 |
| 1976 | 123 | 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 33 | 2.0 |
| 1978 | 353 | 12th lowest of 15 · 202% of median | 90 | 2.0 |
| 1979 | 145 | 6th lowest of 15 · 83% of median | 74 | 1.0 |
| 1980 | 151 | 7th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 39 | 2.0 |
| 2006 | 195 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 93 | 1.4 |
| 2007 | 123 | 4th lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 48 | 1.3 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-5 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.017).
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
| 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 | 1238 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 7% of the irrigation seasons in 1937-2017 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.