Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

MORELAND DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 6000700 · 1 · MAVERICK DRAW · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 00:06 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 1889-10-03 — 92nd most senior of the 2893 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: LANDSBURY DITCH (1889-10-03). Immediately behind: SMUGGLER DITCH (1889-10-03).

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
14521.01889-10-031897-06-11 0.080.0 CIRR 34
14914.01890-10-311897-06-11 0.080.0 CIRR 441/2
15645.01892-10-311897-06-11 0.180.0 CIRR 59
16010.01893-10-311897-06-11 0.080.0 CIRR 63
16375.01894-10-311897-06-11 0.230.0 CIRR 68

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 167 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2001, came in at 145 AF — 87% of that, and 2nd 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)
1987 166 6th lowest of 15 · 99% of median 158 0.8
1988 106 1st lowest of 15 · 64% of median 108 0.5
1989 209 14th lowest of 15 · 125% of median 167 0.8
1990 175 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median 169 0.8
1991 207 13th lowest of 15 · 124% of median 184 0.8
1992 161 5th lowest of 15 · 96% of median 178 0.5
1993 166 6th lowest of 15 · 99% of median 200 0.5
1994 156 3rd lowest of 15 · 93% of median 176 0.5
1995 167 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 182 0.5
1996 156 3rd lowest of 15 · 93% of median 181 0.5
1997 193 11th lowest of 15 · 116% of median 192 0.6
1998 253 15th lowest of 15 · 152% of median 214 0.6
1999 202 12th lowest of 15 · 121% of median 167 0.6
2000 187 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 201 0.5
2001 145 2nd lowest of 15 · 87% of median 157 0.6

How good is our record of it?

Grade A (9/10 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 5 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 4454 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity continuous 76% of the irrigation seasons in 1974-2001 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.