Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
ALFALFA DITCH LATERAL
Structure dossier · WDID 7200503 · 1 · COLLIER CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:44 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (a1c9146) — 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 1902-04-15 — 219th most senior of the 2166 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: ADVENT DITCH (1901-04-11). Immediately behind: MAMM MOUNTAIN DITCH (1902-06-15).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22995.19097 | 1902-04-15 | 1916-06-01 | 0.45 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 34419.27528 | 1925-05-15 | 1959-07-21 | 0.2 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 34419.33311 | 1941-03-15 | 1959-07-21 | 0.19 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 40013.34463 | 1944-05-10 | 1972-04-13 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 995 |
Legal record & documents
4 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
19CW0006, CA8303, CA2635.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
19CW0006 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | S |
CA8303 | 2 | 1959-07-21 | S |
CA2635 | 1 | 1916-06-01 | 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 238 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 878 AF — 369% of that, and 15th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 108 | 5th lowest of 15 · 45% of median | 77 | 1.0 |
| 2007 | 25 | 1st lowest of 15 · 10% of median | 18 | 0.8 |
| 2008 | 534 | 12th lowest of 15 · 224% of median | 96 | 3.0 |
| 2009 | 119 | 6th lowest of 15 · 50% of median | 73 | 1.0 |
| 2011 | 98 | 4th lowest of 15 · 41% of median | 59 | 1.0 |
| 2012 | 61 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 26% of median | 48 | 0.8 |
| 2013 | 238 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 84 | 2.5 |
| 2014 | 567 | 13th lowest of 15 · 238% of median | 84 | 4.0 |
| 2015 | 576 | 14th lowest of 15 · 242% of median | 93 | 5.0 |
| 2016 | 362 | 10th lowest of 15 · 152% of median | 82 | 2.5 |
| 2017 | 494 | 11th lowest of 15 · 208% of median | 84 | 3.0 |
| 2019 | 256 | 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 91 | 4.5 |
| 2020 | 60 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 25% of median | 41 | 1.0 |
| 2021 | 171 | 7th lowest of 15 · 72% of median | 54 | 1.8 |
| 2024 | 878 | 15th lowest of 15 · 369% of median | 116 | 3.8 |
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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 2434 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 29% of the irrigation seasons in 1985-2024 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.