Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
WHIZZER IRRIGATING DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7200937 · 1 · BRUSH CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:57 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 1904-05-15 — 222nd 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: LINN DITCH (1903-09-15). Immediately behind: RED BLUFF DITCH (1904-08-04).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22995.19858 | 1904-05-15 | 1916-06-01 | 1.53 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 28931.2024 | 1905-06-01 | 1934-08-03 | 0.5 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 28931.21761 | 1909-07-31 | 1934-08-03 | 1.075 | 0.0 | C | IRR | |
| 28931.23999 | 1915-09-16 | 1934-08-03 | 0.625 | 0.0 | C | IRR |
Legal record & documents
10 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
CA5626, 84CW0218, W0158, CA2635.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA5626 | 5 | 1934-08-03 | S |
84CW0218 | 2 | 1934-08-03 | S |
W0158 | 1 | 1916-06-01 | S |
CA2635 | 2 | 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 101 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2022, came in at 74 AF — 73% of that, and 6th 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 | 163 | 12th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 39 | 3.6 |
| 2004 | 120 | 9th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 23 | 4.3 |
| 2005 | 210 | 15th lowest of 15 · 208% of median | 33 | 4.0 |
| 2006 | 152 | 11th lowest of 15 · 150% of median | 22 | 4.5 |
| 2007 | 122 | 10th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 29 | 2.4 |
| 2008 | 171 | 14th lowest of 15 · 169% of median | 33 | 3.7 |
| 2009 | 164 | 13th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 40 | 2.7 |
| 2010 | 100 | 7th lowest of 15 · 99% of median | 20 | 2.7 |
| 2013 | 52 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 30 | 3.8 |
| 2014 | 101 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 20 | 3.0 |
| 2015 | 0 | 1st lowest of 15 · 0% of median | 5 | 0.0 |
| 2017 | 55 | 4th lowest of 15 · 54% of median | 11 | 2.8 |
| 2018 | 43 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 43% of median | 11 | 2.7 |
| 2019 | 58 | 5th lowest of 15 · 57% of median | 15 | 2.2 |
| 2022 | 74 | 6th lowest of 15 · 73% of median | 27 | 1.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-7 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.010).
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 | 1512 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 14% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2022 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.