← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

PASS CREEK DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 5900649 · 1 · PASS CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:59 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 1883-04-10690th 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: CASTLE CREEK NO 2 DITCH (1883-04-10). Immediately behind: ISLAND WELL NO 4A (1884-06-01).

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
30667.121531883-04-101941-04-29 14.00.0 CIRR 305

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 368 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 1,137 AF — 309% of that, and 15th 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)
2011 411 9th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 123 5.1
2012 261 5th lowest of 15 · 71% of median 80 2.4
2013 493 10th lowest of 15 · 134% of median 90 5.1
2014 47 1st lowest of 15 · 13% of median 66 0.5
2015 368 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 100 5.0
2016 336 6th lowest of 15 · 91% of median 128 3.8
2017 177 3rd lowest of 15 · 48% of median 99 1.9
2018 231 4th lowest of 15 · 63% of median 113 3.4
2019 497 11th lowest of 15 · 135% of median 63 7.2
2020 359 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median 122 4.3
2021 146 2nd lowest of 15 · 40% of median 135 0.8
2022 605 12th lowest of 15 · 164% of median 96 6.6
2023 695 14th lowest of 15 · 189% of median 82 7.1
2024 686 13th lowest of 15 · 186% of median 104 6.8
2025 1,137 15th lowest of 15 · 309% of median 137 7.1

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 3480 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 34% of the irrigation seasons in 1978-2025 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.