Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MERIDIAN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5900638 · 1 · WASHINGTON GULCH · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:18 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1910-06-17 — 543rd most senior of the 2360 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: POWER DITCH (1908-08-31). Immediately behind: VUDS DITCH (1913-12-13).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26230.22082 | 1910-06-17 | 1924-01-07 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 254 |
| 26230.2301 | 1912-12-31 | 1924-01-07 | 1.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 255 |
| 33356.21726 | 1909-06-26 | 1957-06-20 | 9.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 487 |
| 53845.0 | 1997-06-03 | 1997-12-31 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | STO | |
| 54982.0 | 2000-07-14 | 2000-12-31 | 1.7 | 0.3 | C | STOIRRFISFIRAUGWLD |
Legal record & documents
20 decreed actions on record across
8 court cases:
08CW0118, 01CW0274, 00CW0230, 97CW0092, 08CW0099, CA5289, CA1714, 84CW0138.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
08CW0118 | 1 | 2000-12-31 | S |
01CW0274 | 7 | 2000-12-31 | S |
00CW0230 | 1 | 2000-12-31 | S |
97CW0092 | 3 | 1997-12-31 | S |
08CW0099 | 1 | 1997-12-31 | S |
CA5289 | 1 | 1957-06-20 | S |
CA1714 | 2 | 1924-01-07 | S |
84CW0138 | 4 | 1924-01-07 | 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 147 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 168 AF — 114% of that, and 10th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 318 | 14th lowest of 15 · 216% of median | — | 144 | 2.7 |
| 2012 | 219 | 12th lowest of 15 · 149% of median | — | 160 | 2.7 |
| 2013 | 99 | 5th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | — | 96 | 0.9 |
| 2014 | 249 | 13th lowest of 15 · 169% of median | — | 148 | 2.2 |
| 2015 | 48 | 1st lowest of 15 · 33% of median | — | 64 | 0.6 |
| 2016 | 73 | 4th lowest of 15 · 50% of median | — | 77 | 0.7 |
| 2017 | 57 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 39% of median | — | 95 | 0.4 |
| 2018 | 56 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 38% of median | — | 62 | 0.7 |
| 2019 | 147 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 100 | 1.2 |
| 2020 | 106 | 6th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | — | 107 | 1.2 |
| 2021 | 133 | 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | — | 107 | 0.8 |
| 2022 | 342 | 15th lowest of 15 · 233% of median | 186 | 146 | 1.9 |
| 2023 | 210 | 11th lowest of 15 · 143% of median | — | 112 | 1.9 |
| 2024 | 161 | 9th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | — | 102 | 0.9 |
| 2025 | 168 | 10th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | — | 118 | 1.2 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 6325 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 59% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2025 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.