Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
FULLER DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7200627 · 1 · PLATEAU CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:40 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 1896-04-01 — 132nd 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: ANDERSON DITCH (1896-04-01). Immediately behind: ATWELL SHORT LINE DITCH (1896-06-01).
Decreed rights (5)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18749.16893 | 1896-04-01 | 1905-10-14 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.24322 | 1916-08-04 | 1941-07-25 | 0.54 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 31105.0 | 1935-03-01 | 1941-07-25 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 32811.0 | 1939-11-01 | 1941-07-25 | 0.24 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 40013.3345 | 1941-08-01 | 1972-04-13 | 2.22 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
CA13368, CA5812, 06CW0050.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA13368 | 1 | 1972-04-13 | S |
CA5812 | 2 | 1941-07-25 | S |
06CW0050 | 3 | 1941-07-25 | 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 613 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2021, came in at 183 AF — 30% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 | 702 | 10th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 119 | 3.0 |
| 2004 | 613 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 105 | 3.0 |
| 2005 | 732 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 124 | 3.0 |
| 2006 | 732 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 124 | 3.0 |
| 2008 | 732 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 124 | 3.0 |
| 2009 | 780 | 14th lowest of 15 · 127% of median | 132 | 3.0 |
| 2010 | 897 | 15th lowest of 15 · 146% of median | 155 | 3.0 |
| 2014 | 364 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 55 | 5.2 |
| 2015 | 679 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 125 | 3.5 |
| 2016 | 558 | 6th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 166 | 3.0 |
| 2017 | 221 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 36% of median | 171 | 1.5 |
| 2018 | 532 | 5th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 121 | 3.5 |
| 2019 | 584 | 7th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | 120 | 3.5 |
| 2020 | 531 | 4th lowest of 15 · 87% of median | 156 | 3.9 |
| 2021 | 183 | 1st lowest of 15 · 30% of median | 58 | 2.6 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-15 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.025).
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
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | complete | name, type, and water source all on file |
| decreed rights | on file | 5 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4516 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 44% of the irrigation seasons in 1973-2021 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.