Hydrohistorian

← My Water  ·  Print / save as PDF

BLOSS DITCH

Structure dossier · WDID 7201425 · 1 · PLATEAU CREEK · DWR record

Where this page's figures come from

Generated 2026-08-27 22:08 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 1917-06-01 — 763rd 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: GROUND HOG SPRING NO 2 (1916-07-01). Immediately behind: CHAPMAN FLASHFLOOD DITCH (1933-06-01).

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
40013.246231917-06-011972-04-13 1.90.0 CIRR 979

Recorded use (last 15 years on record)

In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 213 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2020, came in at 66 AF — 31% of that, and 4th 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)
2000 302 11th lowest of 15 · 142% of median 98 2.0
2001 287 10th lowest of 15 · 135% of median 93 2.0
2002 60 3rd lowest of 15 · 28% of median 25 1.5
2003 136 6th lowest of 15 · 64% of median 47 1.9
2004 21 1st lowest of 15 · 10% of median 54 0.2
2007 41 2nd lowest of 15 · 19% of median 49 0.5
2008 385 14th lowest of 15 · 181% of median 125 2.0
2009 426 15th lowest of 15 · 200% of median 133 2.0
2013 304 12th lowest of 15 · 143% of median 100 1.8
2014 363 13th lowest of 15 · 170% of median 148 1.9
2015 222 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median 114 1.0
2017 213 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median 97 1.5
2018 182 7th lowest of 15 · 85% of median 154 0.8
2019 119 5th lowest of 15 · 56% of median 61 1.0
2020 66 4th lowest of 15 · 31% of median 72 0.8

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 1837 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against)
record continuity sparse 34% of the irrigation seasons in 1995-2020 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.