Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
COLLIER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 6200567 · 1 · LITTLE CIMARRON RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:21 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 1889-09-01 — 55th 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: COOPER NO 2 D (1887-09-01). Immediately behind: VEO TENANT HOUSE WELL (1890-02-01).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14489.0 | 1889-09-01 | 1904-03-28 | 4.95 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 61 |
| 20393.20175 | 1905-03-28 | 1913-05-08 | 3.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 123 |
| 33348.20179 | 1905-04-01 | 1960-03-30 | 4.6 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 336 |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA6981, CA1745, CA1319.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA6981 | 1 | 1960-03-30 | S |
CA1745 | 1 | 1913-05-08 | S |
CA1319 | 1 | 1904-03-28 | 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 1,533 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 903 AF — 59% of that, and 3rd 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 | 1,938 | 13th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 159 | 9.7 |
| 2012 | 1,685 | 9th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 170 | 15.2 |
| 2013 | 2,097 | 14th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 156 | 15.2 |
| 2014 | 1,792 | 11th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 122 | 16.0 |
| 2015 | 1,693 | 10th lowest of 15 · 110% of median | 166 | 12.2 |
| 2016 | 1,301 | 7th lowest of 15 · 85% of median | 163 | 15.0 |
| 2017 | 2,744 | 15th lowest of 15 · 179% of median | 218 | 18.6 |
| 2018 | 1,174 | 5th lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 174 | 8.3 |
| 2019 | 1,533 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 163 | 12.1 |
| 2020 | 1,798 | 12th lowest of 15 · 117% of median | 180 | 15.0 |
| 2021 | 1,218 | 6th lowest of 15 · 80% of median | 182 | 10.8 |
| 2022 | 525 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 34% of median | 105 | 5.0 |
| 2023 | 1,000 | 4th lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 107 | 14.5 |
| 2024 | 483 | 1st lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 75 | 5.7 |
| 2025 | 903 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 165 | 11.3 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-94 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.003).
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 7767 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 70% 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.