Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
YT RESERVOIR DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7200951 · 1 · GROVE CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:10 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 1914-08-31 — 396th 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: B F TAYLOR DITCH (1914-08-29). Immediately behind: DAUMAN DITCH (1914-09-01).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30895.23618 | 1914-08-31 | 1941-07-25 | 9.02 | 0.0 | C | IRROTH |
Legal record & documents
7 decreed actions on record across
4 court cases:
24CW3014, 16CW3184, 92CW0271, CA5812.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
24CW3014 | 1 | 2016-12-31 | S |
16CW3184 | 2 | 2016-12-31 | S |
92CW0271 | 2 | 1992-12-31 | S |
CA5812 | 2 | 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 98 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 57 AF — 58% of that, and 3rd 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 | 61 | 5th lowest of 15 · 62% of median | 32 | 1.0 |
| 1997 | 312 | 13th lowest of 15 · 318% of median | 46 | 3.5 |
| 1998 | 179 | 12th lowest of 15 · 183% of median | 46 | 2.0 |
| 1999 | 930 | 15th lowest of 15 · 949% of median | 53 | 9.0 |
| 2002 | 98 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 65 | 0.8 |
| 2004 | 117 | 10th lowest of 15 · 119% of median | 39 | 2.0 |
| 2006 | 79 | 7th lowest of 15 · 81% of median | 17 | 2.5 |
| 2008 | 426 | 14th lowest of 15 · 435% of median | 44 | 5.0 |
| 2016 | 24 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 25 | 0.5 |
| 2017 | 5 | 1st lowest of 15 · 5% of median | 3 | 1.2 |
| 2018 | 70 | 6th lowest of 15 · 71% of median | 35 | 1.1 |
| 2019 | 111 | 9th lowest of 15 · 113% of median | 50 | 1.2 |
| 2020 | 119 | 11th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 18 | 3.5 |
| 2021 | 58 | 4th lowest of 15 · 59% of median | 44 | 0.8 |
| 2024 | 57 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 20 | 1.5 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use shows no clear trend over its last 15 recorded years — which is itself worth knowing.
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 | 1 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 1419 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 12% of the irrigation seasons in 1970-2024 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.