Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
ALMA M BAER FEEDER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5800507 · 1 · FISH CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:51 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 1904-06-01 — 639th most senior of the 3097 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: BAUMFALK DITCH NO. 1 (1895-01-01). Immediately behind: ALMA M BAER RES (1904-06-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33782.19875 | 1904-06-01 | 1946-09-14 | 0.366 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 290 |
| 40329.0 | 1960-06-01 | 1964-03-30 | 1.125 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 46 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA3538, 00CW0049, CA2475.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA3538 | 1 | 1964-03-30 | S |
00CW0049 | 1 | 1964-03-30 | S |
CA2475 | 1 | 1946-09-14 | 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 599 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 444 AF — 74% of that, and 6th 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 | 999 | 15th lowest of 15 · 167% of median | 365 | 1.8 |
| 2012 | 964 | 13th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 366 | 2.0 |
| 2013 | 944 | 12th lowest of 15 · 158% of median | 365 | 1.9 |
| 2014 | 964 | 13th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 365 | 2.6 |
| 2015 | 663 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 304 | 1.2 |
| 2016 | 686 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 137 | 2.8 |
| 2017 | 508 | 7th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 216 | 2.6 |
| 2018 | 426 | 5th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 157 | 1.8 |
| 2019 | 664 | 10th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 195 | 2.2 |
| 2020 | 599 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 305 | 1.0 |
| 2021 | 365 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 61% of median | 262 | 1.4 |
| 2022 | 403 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 335 | 1.0 |
| 2023 | 412 | 4th lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 212 | 2.0 |
| 2024 | 297 | 1st lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 244 | 0.9 |
| 2025 | 444 | 6th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 304 | 1.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-49 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.000).
How good is our record of it?
Grade A (9/10 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 | 17637 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1947-2025 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.