Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KOLL DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5700635 · 1 · TROUT CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:55 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 1894-05-11 — 57th 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: TEMPLE RES (1891-10-16). Immediately behind: SPRUCE HILL DITCH ALT PT (1894-05-11).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16698.16202 | 1894-05-11 | 1896-09-26 | 2.08 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 59 |
| 18885.16202 | 1894-05-11 | 1902-09-15 | 1.82 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 60 |
| 21092.19509 | 1903-06-01 | 1908-09-23 | 2.83 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 75A |
| 39925.3628 | 1949-05-01 | 1962-11-15 | 6.49 | 0.0 | C | IRR | A-16 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA3081, 09/23/1908, 09/15/1902, 09/26/1896.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3081 | 1 | 1962-11-15 | S |
09/23/1908 | 1 | 1908-09-23 | S |
09/15/1902 | 1 | 1902-09-15 | S |
09/26/1896 | 1 | 1896-09-26 | 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 1,065 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 757 AF — 71% 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 | 279 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 26% of median | 33 | 5.0 |
| 2012 | 1,496 | 12th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 115 | 11.6 |
| 2013 | 1,028 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 67 | 10.1 |
| 2014 | 1,065 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 66 | 11.4 |
| 2015 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 2 | 0.0 |
| 2016 | 768 | 6th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 53 | 15.1 |
| 2017 | 2,452 | 15th lowest of 15 · 230% of median | 101 | 18.8 |
| 2018 | 1,779 | 13th lowest of 15 · 167% of median | 114 | 12.4 |
| 2019 | 1,960 | 14th lowest of 15 · 184% of median | 121 | 13.3 |
| 2020 | 1,299 | 10th lowest of 15 · 122% of median | 146 | 12.4 |
| 2021 | 1,187 | 9th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 140 | 12.7 |
| 2022 | 599 | 4th lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 87 | 12.7 |
| 2023 | 1,327 | 11th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 142 | 12.7 |
| 2024 | 550 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 83 | 6.8 |
| 2025 | 757 | 5th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 129 | 6.8 |
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 (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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 9056 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 48% of the irrigation seasons in 1938-2025 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.