Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
LITTLE RED BUTTE SPRING DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 3801181 · 1 · ROARING FORK RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:15 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 1946-06-01 — 2706th most senior of the 4788 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: DAWN SPRING (1907-08-01). Immediately behind: TOURTELLOTTE WATER SYS (1947-09-01).
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. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 47847.35215 | 1946-06-01 | 1981-12-31 | 1.46 | 1.34 | C | IRRFISDOMSTKAUG |
Legal record & documents
11 decreed actions on record across
6 court cases:
95CW0366, 89CW0204, 86CW0145, 81CW0508, 18CW3088, 11CW0063.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
95CW0366 | 2 | 1981-12-31 | S |
89CW0204 | 1 | 1981-12-31 | S |
86CW0145 | 1 | 1981-12-31 | S |
81CW0508 | 2 | 1981-12-31 | S |
18CW3088 | 2 | 1981-12-31 | S |
11CW0063 | 3 | 1981-12-31 | 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 393 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2018, came in at 83 AF — 21% of that, and 1st 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1983 | 91 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 23% of median | 92 | 0.5 |
| 1986 | 392 | 7th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 123 | 1.6 |
| 1987 | 366 | 6th lowest of 15 · 93% of median | 124 | 1.5 |
| 1991 | 730 | 11th lowest of 15 · 186% of median | 182 | 2.2 |
| 1992 | 497 | 9th lowest of 15 · 126% of median | 225 | 2.6 |
| 1993 | 1,141 | 15th lowest of 15 · 290% of median | 212 | 5.8 |
| 1994 | 393 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 304 | 1.4 |
| 1995 | 179 | 5th lowest of 15 · 46% of median | 132 | 1.1 |
| 1996 | 841 | 12th lowest of 15 · 214% of median | 150 | 4.0 |
| 1997 | 1,027 | 14th lowest of 15 · 261% of median | 148 | 4.8 |
| 1998 | 715 | 10th lowest of 15 · 182% of median | 128 | 4.0 |
| 1999 | 856 | 13th lowest of 15 · 218% of median | 150 | 4.0 |
| 2010 | 124 | 4th lowest of 15 · 32% of median | 99 | 0.6 |
| 2014 | 86 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 22% of median | 69 | 0.6 |
| 2018 | 83 | 1st lowest of 15 · 21% of median | 118 | 0.5 |
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 | 2256 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | sparse | 30% of the irrigation seasons in 1983-2018 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.