← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

ISLAND POND DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 6800616 · 1 · COW CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:51 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 1965-04-15402nd most senior of the 1293 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: CLIFF POND DITCH (1965-04-15). Immediately behind: MARTIN & RICE D D NO 1 (1965-04-15).

Decreed rights (1)

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
42108.01965-04-151971-09-13 1.00.0 CIRRFISSTK 108, 109

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 142 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 118 AF — 83% of that, and 4th 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)
2011 127 5th lowest of 15 · 89% of median 65 1.9
2012 80 2nd lowest of 15 · 56% of median 71 1.9
2013 142 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 86 2.4
2014 190 9th lowest of 15 · 134% of median 111 2.6
2015 274 11th lowest of 15 · 193% of median 135 2.0
2016 525 15th lowest of 15 · 370% of median 202 2.4
2017 395 13th lowest of 15 · 278% of median 101 3.2
2018 82 3rd lowest of 15 · 58% of median 94 1.3
2019 132 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median 160 1.0
2020 323 12th lowest of 15 · 228% of median 184 2.3
2021 517 14th lowest of 15 · 364% of median 333 2.2
2022 195 10th lowest of 15 · 137% of median 199 0.8
2023 24 1st lowest of 15 · 17% of median 83 0.3
2024 135 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median 186 0.9
2025 118 4th lowest of 15 · 83% of median 133 1.0

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 2791 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity patchy 67% of the irrigation seasons in 2006-2025 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.