Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MORRISON CREEK DITCH 1
Structure dossier · WDID 5800785 · 1 · MORRISON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 03:51 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 1891-06-30 — 288th 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: ZUFFERY BEAR RIVER DITCH (1891-05-01). Immediately behind: MORRISON CREEK DITCH 2 (1891-06-30).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19997.15156 | 1891-06-30 | 1905-09-18 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 110A |
| 19997.18748 | 1901-05-01 | 1905-09-18 | 1.17 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | A159 |
Legal record & documents
2 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
97CW0010, 09/18/1905.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
97CW0010 | 1 | 1905-09-18 | S |
09/18/1905 | 1 | 1905-09-18 | 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 179 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1990, came in at 103 AF — 58% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1976 | 139 | 4th lowest of 15 · 78% of median | 62 | 1.2 |
| 1977 | 211 | 13th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 94 | 1.2 |
| 1978 | 179 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 79 | 1.2 |
| 1979 | 193 | 11th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 86 | 1.2 |
| 1980 | 183 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 80 | 1.2 |
| 1981 | 179 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 78 | 1.2 |
| 1982 | 144 | 5th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 64 | 1.2 |
| 1983 | 162 | 6th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 72 | 1.2 |
| 1984 | 114 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 64% of median | 52 | 1.2 |
| 1985 | 193 | 11th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 84 | 1.2 |
| 1986 | 214 | 14th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 93 | 1.2 |
| 1987 | 228 | 15th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 116 | 1.0 |
| 1988 | 124 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 69% of median | 64 | 1.2 |
| 1989 | 192 | 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 93 | 2.0 |
| 1990 | 103 | 1st lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 53 | 1.0 |
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 | 3843 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 31% of the irrigation seasons in 1933-1990 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.