Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
MONTEZ DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 7900550 · 1 · HUERFANO RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:21 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — 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 1867-04-25 — 21st most senior of the 930 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: GARCIA DITCH NO 2 (1867-04-25). Immediately behind: MEDINA FELIPA DITCH (1867-06-01).
Decreed rights (3)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6324.0 | 1867-04-25 | 1889-06-12 | 1.14 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 20 |
| 13881.0 | 1888-01-02 | 1889-06-12 | 26.19 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 92 |
| 14004.0 | 1888-05-04 | 1889-06-12 | 1.09 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 97 |
Legal record & documents
6 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
CA1643, CA1523, CA0706, 21CW3078, 06/12/1889.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1643 | 1 | 1889-06-12 | O |
CA1523 | 1 | 1889-06-12 | O |
CA0706 | 2 | 1889-06-12 | O |
21CW3078 | 1 | 1889-06-12 | O |
06/12/1889 | 1 | 1889-06-12 | O |
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 461 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 356 AF — 77% of that, and 7th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 301 | 5th lowest of 15 · 65% of median | 157 | 1.1 |
| 2012 | 144 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 31% of median | 86 | 3.2 |
| 2013 | 94 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 20% of median | 59 | 1.3 |
| 2014 | 461 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 181 | 6.1 |
| 2015 | 723 | 10th lowest of 15 · 157% of median | 260 | 3.0 |
| 2016 | 1,084 | 15th lowest of 15 · 235% of median | 268 | 10.0 |
| 2017 | 1,022 | 14th lowest of 15 · 222% of median | 325 | 6.0 |
| 2018 | 213 | 4th lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 128 | 1.2 |
| 2019 | 749 | 12th lowest of 15 · 162% of median | 225 | 6.7 |
| 2020 | 78 | 1st lowest of 15 · 17% of median | 68 | 1.2 |
| 2021 | 744 | 11th lowest of 15 · 161% of median | 122 | 17.0 |
| 2022 | 805 | 13th lowest of 15 · 175% of median | 227 | 12.0 |
| 2023 | 303 | 6th lowest of 15 · 66% of median | 141 | 1.1 |
| 2024 | 677 | 9th lowest of 15 · 147% of median | 157 | 14.9 |
| 2025 | 356 | 7th lowest of 15 · 77% of median | 124 | 10.0 |
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 (8/10 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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 9751 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | patchy | 40% of the irrigation seasons in 1912-2025 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.