Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
BIG STICK DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3300554 · 1 · LA PLATA RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:22 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (f6d7fdc) — 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 1890-06-02 — 161st most senior of the 364 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: LA PLATA R & CHERRY CR D (1890-06-02). Immediately behind: CRYSTAL SPRINGS (1894-04-12).
Decreed rights (4)
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14763.0 | 1890-06-02 | 1898-01-12 | 4.0 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #10 |
| 16324.0 | 1894-09-10 | 1898-01-12 | 0.75 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #14 |
| 20928.0 | 1907-04-20 | 1915-06-23 | 15.25 | 0.0 | C | IRR | #68 |
| 27908.0 | 1926-05-30 | 1966-03-21 | 20.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRDOM | 65-33 |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
96CW0008, CA0807-C, CA0807-B, CA3445, CA3435, CA3413.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
96CW0008 | 1 | 1996-12-31 | S |
CA0807-C | 1 | 1966-03-21 | S |
CA0807-B | 6 | 1915-06-23 | S |
CA3445 | 1 | 1898-01-12 | O |
CA3435 | 1 | 1898-01-12 | O |
CA3413 | 1 | 1898-01-12 | 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 1,004 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2025, came in at 907 AF — 90% 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | 1,296 | 11th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 176 | 19.4 |
| 2012 | 988 | 7th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 93 | 20.5 |
| 2013 | 699 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 70% of median | 231 | 10.3 |
| 2014 | 1,146 | 10th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | 249 | 11.7 |
| 2015 | 1,375 | 12th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 144 | 23.3 |
| 2016 | 1,113 | 9th lowest of 15 · 111% of median | 114 | 30.7 |
| 2017 | 3,364 | 14th lowest of 15 · 335% of median | 150 | 25.4 |
| 2018 | 518 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 52% of median | 66 | 15.0 |
| 2019 | 3,788 | 15th lowest of 15 · 377% of median | 145 | 41.2 |
| 2020 | 1,004 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 214 | 20.1 |
| 2021 | 284 | 1st lowest of 15 · 28% of median | 365 | 17.9 |
| 2022 | 985 | 6th lowest of 15 · 98% of median | 365 | 5.0 |
| 2023 | 3,075 | 13th lowest of 15 · 306% of median | 365 | 40.5 |
| 2024 | 916 | 5th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 366 | 14.3 |
| 2025 | 907 | 4th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 303 | 8.8 |
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 A (9/10 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 | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 18152 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 1948-2025 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.