Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BIG BLUE DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 6200528 · 1 · BIG BLUE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:06 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 1904-06-01 — 177th 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: PINE CREEK DITCH (1904-05-01). Immediately behind: PETERSON & RILEY DITCH (1906-03-31).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20393.19875 | 1904-06-01 | 1913-05-08 | 21.87 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 122 |
| 27585.22858 | 1912-08-01 | 1941-04-21 | 1.53 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 287 |
| 27585.27168 | 1924-05-20 | 1941-04-21 | 18.6 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 311 |
| 37010.0 | 1951-05-01 | 1960-03-30 | 24.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOMSTK | 398 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA6981, 75CW0368, CA4742, CA1745.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA6981 | 2 | 1960-03-30 | S |
75CW0368 | 1 | 1960-03-30 | S |
CA4742 | 2 | 1941-04-21 | S |
CA1745 | 1 | 1913-05-08 | 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 7,015 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 5,155 AF — 74% of that, and 1st 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 | 6,417 | 6th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 121 | 49.3 |
| 2012 | 9,827 | 14th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 155 | 39.7 |
| 2013 | 6,410 | 5th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 163 | 35.6 |
| 2014 | 7,263 | 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | 148 | 36.5 |
| 2015 | 5,242 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 75% of median | 147 | 34.7 |
| 2016 | 6,718 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | 143 | 37.4 |
| 2017 | 7,015 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 182 | 42.0 |
| 2018 | 5,566 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 208 | 36.5 |
| 2019 | 7,579 | 12th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 142 | 41.0 |
| 2020 | 8,180 | 13th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 159 | 51.8 |
| 2021 | 7,519 | 11th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 172 | 39.2 |
| 2022 | 10,553 | 15th lowest of 15 · 150% of median | 169 | 50.8 |
| 2023 | 7,486 | 10th lowest of 15 · 107% of median | 208 | 46.8 |
| 2024 | 6,260 | 4th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 146 | 45.3 |
| 2025 | 5,155 | 1st lowest of 15 · 74% of median | 107 | 54.9 |
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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 8156 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 74% 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.