Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
DRY CK DITCH ALT PT B
Structure dossier · WDID 5701211 · 1 · DRY CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:10 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 1913-06-07 — 124th 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: DRY CK DITCH ALT PT A (1913-06-07). Immediately behind: DRY CK DITCH ALT PT C (1913-06-07).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24285.23168 | 1913-06-07 | 1916-07-19 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 101 |
| 40368.0 | 1960-07-10 | 1962-11-15 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | A-37 |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
1 court case:
95CW0132.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
95CW0132 | 2 | 1962-11-15 | 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 162 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 24 AF — 15% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 226 | 11th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 81 | 2.0 |
| 2010 | 272 | 14th lowest of 15 · 168% of median | 70 | 3.0 |
| 2012 | 203 | 10th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 56 | 2.5 |
| 2013 | 24 | 1st lowest of 15 · 15% of median | 7 | 3.4 |
| 2014 | 42 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 26% of median | 23 | 1.8 |
| 2016 | 120 | 7th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 24 | 3.1 |
| 2017 | 88 | 5th lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 81 | 4.5 |
| 2018 | 171 | 9th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | 74 | 3.3 |
| 2019 | 162 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 55 | 8.7 |
| 2020 | 268 | 13th lowest of 15 · 165% of median | 57 | 3.4 |
| 2021 | 105 | 6th lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 24 | 6.7 |
| 2022 | 56 | 4th lowest of 15 · 35% of median | 14 | 3.6 |
| 2023 | 229 | 12th lowest of 15 · 141% of median | 43 | 3.2 |
| 2024 | 312 | 15th lowest of 15 · 193% of median | 84 | 2.4 |
| 2025 | 24 | 1st lowest of 15 · 15% of median | 8 | 1.7 |
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 972 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 21% of the irrigation seasons in 2004-2025 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.