← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

SLATER PARK DITCH NO 1

Structure dossier · WDID 5400570 · 1 · SLATER CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:58 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 1899-07-01153rd 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: RICO DITCH (1898-06-01). Immediately behind: BRIGHTON 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
37433.180791899-07-011964-06-23 12.00.0 CIRR 2

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 424 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 464 AF — 109% of that, and 9th 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 661 11th lowest of 15 · 156% of median 86 5.0
2010 424 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 111 5.0
2011 1,367 14th lowest of 15 · 322% of median 138 12.0
2012 1,430 15th lowest of 15 · 337% of median 139 8.0
2013 846 13th lowest of 15 · 200% of median 120 12.0
2014 783 12th lowest of 15 · 185% of median 87 8.0
2015 324 7th lowest of 15 · 76% of median 114 6.0
2016 236 6th lowest of 15 · 56% of median 150 4.0
2017 23 2nd lowest of 15 · 5% of median 28 0.4
2018 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 1 0.0
2019 46 3rd lowest of 15 · 11% of median 18 1.4
2020 179 4th lowest of 15 · 42% of median 144 0.6
2022 202 5th lowest of 15 · 48% of median 130 1.2
2024 481 10th lowest of 15 · 113% of median 36 7.0
2025 464 9th lowest of 15 · 109% of median 36 6.7

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 5509 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 30% of the irrigation seasons in 1940-2025 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.