Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
HICKS CRK FDR D
Structure dossier · WDID 8000862 · DITCH · HICKS CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:49 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (0576005) — 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.
Current administration
● Fully called out — call at LAST CHANCE DITCH 2 (SOUTH PLATTE RIVER, priority 1863-12-30).
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 1921-12-31 — 1503rd most senior of the 21881 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: 2306782 (1921-12-31). Immediately behind: 8005072 (1922-02-23).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26297.0 | 1921-12-31 | 1922-06-21 | 25.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRMUNCOMINDRECFISFIRDOMAUGCUR |
Legal record & documents
20 decreed actions on record across
10 court cases:
CA1839, 95CW0227, 90CW0229, 87CW0107, 15CW3012, 10CW0304, 09CW0144, 05CW0010, 01CW0258, 00CW0202.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
CA1839 | 1 | 1922-06-21 | S |
95CW0227 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
90CW0229 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
87CW0107 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
15CW3012 | 3 | 1922-06-21 | S |
10CW0304 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
09CW0144 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
05CW0010 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
01CW0258 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | S |
00CW0202 | 2 | 1922-06-21 | 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 111 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 176 AF — 159% of that, and 11th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1995 | 120 | 9th lowest of 15 · 108% of median | 15 | 5.3 |
| 2001 | 22 | 4th lowest of 15 · 20% of median | 12 | 1.0 |
| 2005 | 429 | 13th lowest of 15 · 386% of median | 60 | 5.5 |
| 2007 | 163 | 10th lowest of 15 · 147% of median | 51 | 3.1 |
| 2010 | 47 | 7th lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 54 | 0.5 |
| 2013 | 13 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 12% of median | 22 | 1.0 |
| 2014 | 45 | 6th lowest of 15 · 40% of median | 56 | 1.5 |
| 2015 | 507 | 14th lowest of 15 · 457% of median | 74 | 56.5 |
| 2016 | 379 | 12th lowest of 15 · 341% of median | 41 | 8.5 |
| 2017 | 12 | 1st lowest of 15 · 11% of median | 19 | 0.5 |
| 2019 | 27 | 5th lowest of 15 · 24% of median | 27 | 0.9 |
| 2020 | 13 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 12% of median | 13 | 0.9 |
| 2021 | 111 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 31 | 4.6 |
| 2023 | 1,155 | 15th lowest of 15 · 1040% of median | 65 | 15.9 |
| 2024 | 176 | 11th lowest of 15 · 159% of median | 35 | 7.6 |
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 | 1198 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 11% of the irrigation seasons in 1973-2024 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.