Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

PITTS DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 7200833 · 1 · PLATEAU CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:47 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 1893-11-04 — 195th 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: SPRING GRUNDEI DITCH (1893-07-24). Immediately behind: PARKER DITCH (1894-05-01).

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. UnitsUsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on.Case
22995.160141893-11-041916-06-01 0.90.0 CIRR

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 257 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2013, came in at 257 AF — 100% of that, and 8th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.

YearDiverted (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 recordDays recordedPeak (cfs)
1978 703 15th lowest of 15 · 274% of median 304 1.2
1979 427 12th lowest of 15 · 166% of median 185 1.2
1980 427 12th lowest of 15 · 166% of median 184 1.2
1981 462 14th lowest of 15 · 180% of median 200 1.2
1985 422 11th lowest of 15 · 164% of median 183 1.2
1994 286 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median 97 1.5
1996 189 6th lowest of 15 · 74% of median 108 0.9
1997 289 10th lowest of 15 · 112% of median 163 0.9
2003 77 2nd lowest of 15 · 30% of median 40 1.0
2004 222 7th lowest of 15 · 86% of median 140 1.0
2007 162 5th lowest of 15 · 63% of median 92 0.9
2008 59 1st lowest of 15 · 23% of median 51 1.0
2009 130 4th lowest of 15 · 51% of median 87 1.0
2010 89 3rd lowest of 15 · 35% of median 51 0.9
2013 257 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 145 0.9

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
CheckStateDetail
identity complete name, type, and water source all on file
decreed rights on file 1 right(s), seniority decoded
diversion record present 2091 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 27% of the irrigation seasons in 1977-2013 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.