Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
PURRIER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 5900655 · 1 · OHIO CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:45 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 1877-08-15 — 9th 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: LONE PINE DITCH (1877-08-15). Immediately behind: WILT WASTE WATER DITCH 1 (1877-08-15).
Decreed rights (6)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10089.0 | 1877-08-15 | 1906-09-14 | 2.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 7 |
| 11474.0 | 1881-05-31 | 1906-09-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | AUG | 28 |
| 11839.0 | 1882-05-31 | 1906-09-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | AUG | 33 |
| 14451.0 | 1889-07-25 | 1906-09-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | AUG | 77 |
| 30667.10089 | 1877-08-15 | 1941-04-29 | 7.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 279 |
| 57343.5713 | 2006-06-01 | 2007-12-31 | 0.4 | 0.0 | C | FISFIR |
Legal record & documents
13 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
18CW3022, 07CW0133, CA2021, CA1325.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
18CW3022 | 1 | 2007-12-31 | S |
07CW0133 | 10 | 2007-12-31 | O, S |
CA2021 | 1 | 1941-04-29 | S |
CA1325 | 1 | 1906-09-14 | O |
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 454 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 359 AF — 79% 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 | 1,232 | 13th lowest of 15 · 271% of median | 79 | 10.5 |
| 2012 | 306 | 5th lowest of 15 · 67% of median | 59 | 3.5 |
| 2013 | 239 | 4th lowest of 15 · 53% of median | 99 | 2.5 |
| 2014 | 423 | 7th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 55 | 5.5 |
| 2015 | 969 | 12th lowest of 15 · 213% of median | 74 | 10.0 |
| 2016 | 181 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 40% of median | 39 | 2.8 |
| 2017 | 592 | 10th lowest of 15 · 130% of median | 37 | 10.6 |
| 2018 | 201 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 44% of median | 96 | 1.9 |
| 2019 | 1,422 | 15th lowest of 15 · 313% of median | 59 | 16.3 |
| 2020 | 576 | 9th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 66 | 8.5 |
| 2021 | 153 | 1st lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 39 | 2.3 |
| 2022 | 454 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 36 | 7.4 |
| 2023 | 1,277 | 14th lowest of 15 · 281% of median | 71 | 10.6 |
| 2024 | 615 | 11th lowest of 15 · 136% of median | 79 | 7.8 |
| 2025 | 359 | 6th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 37 | 5.7 |
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 | 6 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3466 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 32% 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.