Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
CARY DITCH COMPANY IRRIGATING DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5700510 · 1 · YAMPA RIVER · 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 1887-11-07 — 15th most senior of the 1003 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: R E CLARK DITCH (1887-06-06). Immediately behind: GIBRALTAR DITCH (1888-03-18).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13825.0 | 1887-11-07 | 1892-09-22 | 23.33 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 20 |
| 20350.1671 | 1895-10-01 | 1905-09-26 | 2.66 | 0.0 | C | IRR | A-63 |
| 60996.55304 | 2001-06-01 | 2017-12-31 | 3.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTK |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
17CW0011, CA3589, 18CW0007, 09/22/1892.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
17CW0011 | 1 | 2017-12-31 | S |
CA3589 | 1 | 1905-09-26 | S |
18CW0007 | 4 | 1905-09-26 | O, S |
09/22/1892 | 1 | 1892-09-22 | O |
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 5,909 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 8,068 AF — 136% of that, and 13th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 5,599 | 4th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 176 | 26.0 |
| 2012 | 6,021 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 175 | 33.9 |
| 2013 | 8,584 | 15th lowest of 15 · 145% of median | 171 | 44.2 |
| 2014 | 4,181 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 172 | 21.5 |
| 2015 | 8,120 | 14th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 177 | 35.8 |
| 2016 | 3,874 | 1st lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 131 | 31.4 |
| 2017 | 3,934 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 147 | 33.6 |
| 2018 | 7,010 | 12th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 173 | 45.7 |
| 2019 | 5,909 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 185 | 38.3 |
| 2020 | 5,779 | 6th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 230 | 32.8 |
| 2021 | 6,022 | 10th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 300 | 38.3 |
| 2022 | 6,428 | 11th lowest of 15 · 109% of median | 199 | 44.2 |
| 2023 | 5,867 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 205 | 44.2 |
| 2024 | 5,645 | 5th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 279 | 41.2 |
| 2025 | 8,068 | 13th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 185 | 47.3 |
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 (8/10 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 | 13125 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 67% of the irrigation seasons in 1934-2025 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.