Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

WILLOW SPRING DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5800938 · 1 · WILLOW SPRING CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:54 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 1890-06-18 — 134th 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: CHARLES & ARTHUR LEIGHTON DITCH (1890-06-15). Immediately behind: F D HUTCHINSON IRRIGATING DITCH (1890-07-15).

Decreed rights (1)

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
14779.01890-06-181892-09-22 0.50.0 CIRR 101

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 59 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2016, came in at 71 AF — 120% of that, and 12th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
2001 27 1st lowest of 15 · 46% of median 56 0.2
2002 84 14th lowest of 15 · 142% of median 140 0.5
2003 68 11th lowest of 15 · 115% of median 137 0.5
2004 59 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 60 0.5
2005 66 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 74 0.5
2006 49 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median 50 0.5
2007 74 13th lowest of 15 · 125% of median 76 0.5
2008 40 2nd lowest of 15 · 68% of median 41 0.5
2009 60 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median 62 0.5
2010 56 6th lowest of 15 · 95% of median 57 0.5
2011 49 3rd lowest of 15 · 83% of median 50 0.5
2012 86 15th lowest of 15 · 146% of median 88 0.5
2013 58 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median 59 0.5
2015 50 5th lowest of 15 · 85% of median 51 0.5
2016 71 12th lowest of 15 · 120% of median 73 0.5

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 5254 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 29% of the irrigation seasons in 1933-2016 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.