Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

SPURLOCK DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 7200889 · 1 · TATE CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-28 02:55 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 1888-08-28 — 185th 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: BOWER DITCH (1888-08-27). Immediately behind: WHARTON NO 1 DITCH (1888-08-28).

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
22995.14121888-08-281916-06-01 2.250.0 CIRR 208C

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 132 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2019, came in at 554 AF — 420% of that, and 15th 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)
1999 132 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 111 0.9
2000 131 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median 107 0.9
2001 67 3rd lowest of 15 · 51% of median 93 0.4
2002 2 2nd lowest of 15 · 2% of median 12 0.1
2003 87 4th lowest of 15 · 66% of median 81 1.2
2004 172 10th lowest of 15 · 130% of median 150 1.2
2007 0 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median 3 0.0
2009 177 11th lowest of 15 · 134% of median 128 0.9
2010 160 9th lowest of 15 · 121% of median 155 0.8
2011 291 14th lowest of 15 · 220% of median 136 1.6
2012 101 5th lowest of 15 · 76% of median 154 0.6
2013 126 6th lowest of 15 · 96% of median 162 0.6
2014 195 12th lowest of 15 · 148% of median 153 0.8
2015 262 13th lowest of 15 · 198% of median 76 1.9
2019 554 15th lowest of 15 · 420% of median 126 2.3

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 2973 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 28% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2019 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.