Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
AUSTIN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 6200510 · 1 · WILLOW CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:57 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 1908-07-01 — 206th most senior of the 1980 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: CREEDE TRAIL IRR DITCH (1906-06-15). Immediately behind: CAMPBELL GULCH DITCH (1910-05-15).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23138.21366 | 1908-07-01 | 1925-07-11 | 2.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 154 |
| 23906.0 | 1915-06-15 | 1925-07-11 | 5.21 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 161 |
| 27484.0 | 1925-04-01 | 1925-07-11 | 0.89 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 154 |
| 40266.35184 | 1946-05-01 | 1969-12-02 | 1.81 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 472 |
| 41393.0 | 1963-05-01 | 1969-12-02 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRCOMFISDOM | 485 |
Legal record & documents
10 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
W0125, CA9817, 84CW0028, CA3516, 02CW0058.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W0125 | 1 | 1969-12-02 | S |
CA9817 | 2 | 1969-12-02 | S |
84CW0028 | 1 | 1969-12-02 | S |
CA3516 | 5 | 1925-07-11 | S |
02CW0058 | 1 | 1925-07-11 | 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 1,240 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 1,240 AF — 100% of that, and 8th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 1,050 | 6th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 183 | 4.8 |
| 2008 | 1,709 | 13th lowest of 15 · 138% of median | 100 | 23.2 |
| 2009 | 2,307 | 14th lowest of 15 · 186% of median | 157 | 19.7 |
| 2010 | 905 | 4th lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 146 | 4.0 |
| 2011 | 1,470 | 11th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 158 | 8.0 |
| 2012 | 565 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 132 | 2.3 |
| 2013 | 914 | 5th lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 185 | 3.8 |
| 2014 | 1,470 | 11th lowest of 15 · 118% of median | 193 | 3.8 |
| 2017 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 1 | 0.0 |
| 2018 | 696 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 56% of median | 135 | 2.7 |
| 2019 | 4,163 | 15th lowest of 15 · 336% of median | 181 | 11.7 |
| 2020 | 1,271 | 9th lowest of 15 · 102% of median | 100 | 11.3 |
| 2023 | 1,275 | 10th lowest of 15 · 103% of median | 184 | 3.5 |
| 2024 | 1,137 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 184 | 3.5 |
| 2025 | 1,240 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 184 | 3.8 |
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 | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3986 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 36% of the irrigation seasons in 1974-2025 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.