Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
AMITY CANAL (BIG BEND)
Structure dossier · WDID 6700575 · 1 · WILEY DRAINAGE DITCH · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:32 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 1893-04-01 — 107th most senior of the 2116 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: AMITY CANAL (GOULDS DR) (1893-04-01). Immediately behind: AMITY CANAL (BIG SANDY) (1893-04-01).
Decreed rights (2)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21857.15797 | 1893-04-01 | 1918-10-14 | 700.0 | 0.0 | C | STOIRRCOMINDFIRDOMAUGPWRRCH | 1918-3B |
| 57555.0 | 2007-07-31 | 2007-12-31 | 0.0 | 500.0 | C | STOIRRCOMINDFIRDOMAUGPWRRCH |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
07CW0074, 10/14/1918.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
07CW0074 | 3 | 2007-12-31 | S |
10/14/1918 | 1 | 1918-10-14 | 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 13 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 8,760 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 11,793 AF — 135% of that, and 9th lowest of the 13 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1970 | 0 | 1st lowest of 13 · 0% of median | 4 | 0.0 |
| 1971 | 2,005 | 2nd lowest of 13 · 23% of median | 134 | 400.0 |
| 2015 | 2,456 | 3rd lowest of 13 · 28% of median | 123 | 21.8 |
| 2016 | 4,753 | 4th lowest of 13 · 54% of median | 178 | 28.8 |
| 2017 | 10,042 | 8th lowest of 13 · 115% of median | 285 | 24.6 |
| 2018 | 7,767 | 5th lowest of 13 · 89% of median | 260 | 37.7 |
| 2019 | 17,336 | 13th lowest of 13 · 198% of median | 365 | 123.9 |
| 2020 | 16,740 | 12th lowest of 13 · 191% of median | 366 | 41.3 |
| 2021 | 8,760 | 7th lowest of 13 · 100% of median | 334 | 33.6 |
| 2022 | 8,538 | 6th lowest of 13 · 98% of median | 365 | 44.6 |
| 2023 | 14,916 | 11th lowest of 13 · 170% of median | 365 | 88.4 |
| 2024 | 12,663 | 10th lowest of 13 · 145% of median | 366 | 49.2 |
| 2025 | 11,793 | 9th lowest of 13 · 135% of median | 304 | 46.6 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 13 recorded years (+310 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.012).
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 | 2 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3449 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 29% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2025 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.