Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
KING DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7200731 · 1 · MESA CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 00:58 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 1888-09-05 — 82nd 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: SHOTWELL DITCH (1888-09-01). Immediately behind: PARK VIEW DITCH (1888-09-17).
Decreed rights (9)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14128.0 | 1888-09-05 | 1890-02-07 | 4.41 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 66 |
| 14138.0 | 1888-09-15 | 1890-02-07 | 2.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 18749.16588 | 1895-06-01 | 1905-10-14 | 2.016 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.14892 | 1890-10-09 | 1941-07-25 | 0.0 | 0.0 | C | DOM | |
| 30895.24255 | 1916-05-29 | 1941-07-25 | 1.04 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.24256 | 1916-05-30 | 1941-07-25 | 3.77 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 30895.24262 | 1916-06-05 | 1941-07-25 | 0.52 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 32811.0 | 1939-11-01 | 1941-07-25 | 5.28 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 55152.55139 | 2000-12-18 | 2001-12-31 | 0.25 | 0.0 | C | AUGOTH |
Legal record & documents
24 decreed actions on record across
9 court cases:
16CW3076, 01CW0340, CA5812, 03CW0132, CA2635, CA1222, 84CW0218, W1728, CA0273.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
16CW3076 | 1 | 2001-12-31 | S |
01CW0340 | 1 | 2001-12-31 | S |
CA5812 | 4 | 1941-07-25 | S |
03CW0132 | 9 | 1941-07-25 | O, S |
CA2635 | 2 | 1905-10-14 | O, S |
CA1222 | 2 | 1905-10-14 | S |
84CW0218 | 2 | 1905-10-14 | O, S |
W1728 | 1 | 1890-02-07 | O |
CA0273 | 2 | 1890-02-07 | 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 2,548 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 2,190 AF — 86% of that, and 5th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 3,024 | 12th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 333 | 16.6 |
| 2011 | 3,753 | 13th lowest of 15 · 147% of median | 304 | 15.1 |
| 2012 | 4,444 | 15th lowest of 15 · 174% of median | 366 | 17.6 |
| 2013 | 2,266 | 6th lowest of 15 · 89% of median | 365 | 14.0 |
| 2014 | 2,846 | 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median | 365 | 18.1 |
| 2015 | 2,686 | 9th lowest of 15 · 105% of median | 336 | 13.1 |
| 2016 | 3,023 | 11th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 305 | 15.1 |
| 2017 | 2,526 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 241 | 15.6 |
| 2018 | 1,364 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 340 | 8.1 |
| 2019 | 2,548 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 317 | 14.7 |
| 2020 | 1,345 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 53% of median | 294 | 9.0 |
| 2021 | 701 | 1st lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 236 | 8.9 |
| 2022 | 1,653 | 4th lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 295 | 9.8 |
| 2023 | 3,785 | 14th lowest of 15 · 148% of median | 340 | 14.7 |
| 2024 | 2,190 | 5th lowest of 15 · 86% of median | 263 | 14.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-132 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.038).
How good is our record of it?
Grade A (9/10 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 | 9 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 14160 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1969-2024 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.