Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PERKINS IRR DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5400555 · 1 · WILLOW CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:14 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 1897-06-16 — 19th 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: PERKINS FOX DITCH (1889-05-12). Immediately behind: THREE FORKS RANCH AUG PL (1889-10-01).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19250.17334 | 1897-06-16 | 1902-09-17 | 1.66 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 26 |
| 20722.20683 | 1906-08-18 | 1906-11-12 | 5.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 26? |
| 27542.24806 | 1917-12-01 | 1925-05-31 | 1.6 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 125 |
| 27544.25834 | 1920-09-24 | 1925-12-14 | 2.17 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 127 |
| 27741.24727 | 1917-09-13 | 1926-07-31 | 1.1 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 124A |
| 27741.25352 | 1919-05-31 | 1926-07-31 | 0.55 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 125A |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
W1171-77, 12/14/1925, 05/31/1925, 11/12/1906, 09/17/1902.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W1171-77 | 2 | 1926-07-31 | S |
12/14/1925 | 1 | 1925-12-14 | S |
05/31/1925 | 1 | 1925-05-31 | S |
11/12/1906 | 1 | 1906-11-12 | S |
09/17/1902 | 1 | 1902-09-17 | 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 565 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 71 AF — 13% of that, and 5th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 1,278 | 11th lowest of 15 · 226% of median | 36 | 20.0 |
| 2012 | 537 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 31 | 12.4 |
| 2013 | 1,233 | 10th lowest of 15 · 218% of median | 62 | 14.1 |
| 2014 | 1,186 | 9th lowest of 15 · 210% of median | 67 | 10.2 |
| 2015 | 526 | 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 87 | 9.5 |
| 2016 | 565 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 33 | 9.8 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 3 | 0.0 |
| 2018 | 1,347 | 12th lowest of 15 · 238% of median | 88 | 11.6 |
| 2019 | 1,672 | 14th lowest of 15 · 296% of median | 99 | 12.0 |
| 2020 | 2,702 | 15th lowest of 15 · 478% of median | 113 | 15.9 |
| 2021 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2022 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2023 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2024 | 1,471 | 13th lowest of 15 · 260% of median | 60 | 12.6 |
| 2025 | 71 | 5th lowest of 15 · 13% of median | 45 | 0.8 |
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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 5145 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 28% of the irrigation seasons in 1939-2025 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.