Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
YOUNG DITCH NO 2
Structure dossier · WDID 6900528 · 1 · MORRISON CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:45 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (f6d7fdc) — 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 1912-04-01 — 13th most senior of the 55 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: YOUNG DITCH (1912-04-01). Immediately behind: YOUNG DITCH NO 2 AP (1912-04-01).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22736.0 | 1912-04-01 | 1937-03-08 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRSTKWLD |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA1528, 99CW0068, 91CW0065.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1528 | 1 | 1937-03-08 | S |
99CW0068 | 2 | 1937-03-08 | S |
91CW0065 | 1 | 1937-03-08 | 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 170 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2009, came in at 75 AF — 44% of that, and 3rd lowest of the 11 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| 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 | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1995 | 362 | 8th lowest of 11 · 213% of median | — | 365 | 0.5 |
| 1996 | 363 | 10th lowest of 11 · 214% of median | — | 366 | 0.5 |
| 1997 | 362 | 8th lowest of 11 · 213% of median | — | 365 | 0.5 |
| 1998 | 301 | 7th lowest of 11 · 177% of median | 60 | 304 | 0.5 |
| 1999 | — | no recorded volume | 362 | 0 | — |
| 2000 | — | no recorded volume | 178 | 0 | — |
| 2001 | — | no recorded volume | 21 | 0 | — |
| 2002 | — | no recorded volume | 21 | 0 | — |
| 2003 | 36 | 1st lowest of 11 · 21% of median | — | 55 | 0.5 |
| 2004 | 81 | 5th lowest of 11 · 48% of median | — | 62 | 1.0 |
| 2005 | 402 | 11th lowest of 11 · 236% of median | — | 98 | 5.0 |
| 2006 | 79 | 4th lowest of 11 · 46% of median | — | 43 | 2.0 |
| 2007 | 54 | 2nd lowest of 11 · 32% of median | — | 71 | 0.5 |
| 2008 | 170 | 6th lowest of 11 · 100% of median | — | 80 | 1.8 |
| 2009 | 75 | 3rd lowest of 11 · 44% of median | — | 84 | 0.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 11 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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 3991 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 36% of the irrigation seasons in 1958-2009 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.