Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PERKINS FOX DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5400554 · 1 · WILLOW CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:09 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 1889-05-12 — 18th 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: MARY E HOFFMAN DITCH 3 (1892-10-22). Immediately behind: PERKINS IRR DITCH (1897-06-16).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17431.14377 | 1889-05-12 | 1897-09-23 | 1.3 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 14 |
| 17431.15139 | 1891-06-13 | 1897-09-23 | 1.04 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 17 |
| 17431.16976 | 1896-06-23 | 1897-09-23 | 7.66 | 0.0 | C | IRRIND | 24 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
7 court cases:
CA1598, 11CW0037, W1171-77, 07/31/1926, CA0410, CA0394, 84CW0083.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1598 | 1 | 1964-06-23 | S |
11CW0037 | 1 | 1964-06-23 | S |
W1171-77 | 2 | 1926-07-31 | S |
07/31/1926 | 2 | 1926-07-31 | S |
CA0410 | 2 | 1897-09-23 | S |
CA0394 | 1 | 1897-09-23 | S |
84CW0083 | 2 | 1897-09-23 | 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 75 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 2 AF — 3% of that, and 4th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 332 | 14th lowest of 15 · 443% of median | 46 | 5.0 |
| 2005 | 47 | 7th lowest of 15 · 63% of median | 26 | 1.4 |
| 2013 | 277 | 13th lowest of 15 · 369% of median | 102 | 2.2 |
| 2014 | 143 | 10th lowest of 15 · 191% of median | 56 | 1.8 |
| 2015 | 32 | 6th lowest of 15 · 43% of median | 15 | 1.5 |
| 2016 | 423 | 15th lowest of 15 · 564% of median | 102 | 8.3 |
| 2017 | 83 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 58 | 0.8 |
| 2018 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2019 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2020 | 18 | 5th lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 8 | 1.5 |
| 2021 | 75 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 11 | 4.1 |
| 2022 | 209 | 11th lowest of 15 · 279% of median | 34 | 5.4 |
| 2023 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2024 | 245 | 12th lowest of 15 · 327% of median | 50 | 5.4 |
| 2025 | 2 | 4th lowest of 15 · 3% of median | 35 | 0.0 |
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 (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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3292 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 17% of the irrigation seasons in 1936-2025 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.