Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
UNCLE FRED'S DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 8000925 · DITCH · NORTH FORK SOUTH PLATTE RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 22:09 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 1941-12-07 — 7434th 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: 0805820 (1938-12-31). Immediately behind: 8001015 (1941-12-07).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 46020.33578 | 1941-12-07 | 1976-12-31 | 1.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRRECFIS |
Legal record & documents
3 decreed actions on record across
2 court cases:
W8199, 11CW0253.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
W8199 | 1 | 1976-12-31 | S |
11CW0253 | 2 | 1976-12-31 | 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 19 AF. Its most recent year on record, 1993, came in at 10 AF — 53% of that, and 4th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1975 | 107 | 15th lowest of 15 · 563% of median | 108 | 0.5 |
| 1976 | 57 | 12th lowest of 15 · 300% of median | 59 | 0.5 |
| 1977 | 65 | 13th lowest of 15 · 342% of median | 72 | 1.0 |
| 1978 | 8 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 18 | 0.2 |
| 1979 | 66 | 14th lowest of 15 · 347% of median | 60 | 1.0 |
| 1980 | 23 | 9th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 25 | 0.5 |
| 1981 | 11 | 5th lowest of 15 · 58% of median | 12 | 0.5 |
| 1982 | 8 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 42% of median | 6 | 1.0 |
| 1983 | 48 | 10th lowest of 15 · 253% of median | 27 | 1.0 |
| 1984 | 48 | 10th lowest of 15 · 253% of median | 32 | 1.0 |
| 1988 | 19 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 20 | 0.5 |
| 1990 | 15 | 6th lowest of 15 · 79% of median | 16 | 0.5 |
| 1991 | 17 | 7th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 18 | 0.5 |
| 1992 | 6 | 1st lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 7 | 0.5 |
| 1993 | 10 | 4th lowest of 15 · 53% of median | 6 | 1.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is falling over its last 15 recorded years (-3 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.017).
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 | 486 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 13% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-1993 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.