Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HOME DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7100547 · 1 · DOLORES RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:16 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 1880-05-01 — 9th most senior of the 279 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: DOLORES RV WELL # 1 (1880-04-15). Immediately behind: ITALIAN DITCH AP (1880-05-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11079.0 | 1880-05-01 | 1892-02-01 | 2.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDDOMSTKAUG | D-3 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA0967, CA0473, 11CW0032.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA0967 | 2 | 1963-03-22 | O, S |
CA0473 | 3 | 1892-02-01 | O |
11CW0032 | 6 | 1892-02-01 | 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 150 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2003, came in at 45 AF — 30% of that, and 4th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1989 | 152 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 59 | 3.9 |
| 1990 | 241 | 10th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 81 | 5.5 |
| 1991 | 138 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 47 | 2.8 |
| 1992 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 14 | 0.0 |
| 1993 | 24 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 16% of median | 34 | 0.5 |
| 1994 | 121 | 6th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 86 | 1.3 |
| 1995 | 455 | 13th lowest of 15 · 303% of median | 111 | 4.3 |
| 1996 | 481 | 14th lowest of 15 · 321% of median | 148 | 4.8 |
| 1997 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 14 | 0.0 |
| 1998 | 248 | 11th lowest of 15 · 165% of median | 93 | 2.3 |
| 1999 | 69 | 5th lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 43 | 1.4 |
| 2000 | 150 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 89 | 1.5 |
| 2001 | 534 | 15th lowest of 15 · 356% of median | 211 | 2.4 |
| 2002 | 379 | 12th lowest of 15 · 253% of median | 229 | 2.3 |
| 2003 | 45 | 4th lowest of 15 · 30% of median | 38 | 1.0 |
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 (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 | 3279 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 29% of the irrigation seasons in 1950-2003 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.