Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RUEDI DITCH NEW PT
Structure dossier · WDID 3801796 · 1 · RUEDI CREEK · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-28 02:55 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 1887-05-15 — 349th 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: RUEDI DITCH (1887-05-15). Immediately behind: POND NO 2 DITCH (1888-05-01).
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22244.13649 | 1887-05-15 | 1911-04-14 | 0.8 | 0.0 | C | IRR | 176B |
| 22244.14366 | 1889-05-01 | 1911-04-14 | 1.46 | 0.0 | C | IRRPWR | 206B |
| 54786.54237 | 1998-06-30 | 2000-12-31 | 2.2 | 0.0 | C | PWR |
Legal record & documents
5 decreed actions on record across
3 court cases:
00CW0042, W2628, 02CW0238.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
00CW0042 | 1 | 2000-12-31 | S |
W2628 | 2 | 1911-04-14 | S |
02CW0238 | 2 | 1911-04-14 | 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 1,375 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2019, came in at 1,392 AF — 101% of that, and 9th 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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 | 820 | 4th lowest of 15 · 60% of median | 304 | 2.2 |
| 2003 | 121 | 1st lowest of 15 · 9% of median | 61 | 1.1 |
| 2004 | 1,233 | 5th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | 366 | 3.2 |
| 2005 | 1,375 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | 365 | 3.2 |
| 2006 | 1,259 | 7th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | 304 | 3.3 |
| 2009 | 364 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 26% of median | 61 | 3.1 |
| 2010 | 2,572 | 15th lowest of 15 · 187% of median | 365 | 5.2 |
| 2011 | 1,885 | 14th lowest of 15 · 137% of median | 365 | 3.8 |
| 2012 | 1,653 | 10th lowest of 15 · 120% of median | 366 | 3.8 |
| 2013 | 1,717 | 12th lowest of 15 · 125% of median | 365 | 3.8 |
| 2014 | 1,768 | 13th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | 365 | 3.8 |
| 2015 | 1,668 | 11th lowest of 15 · 121% of median | 304 | 4.3 |
| 2017 | 148 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 11% of median | 61 | 1.6 |
| 2018 | 1,256 | 6th lowest of 15 · 91% of median | 365 | 3.8 |
| 2019 | 1,392 | 9th lowest of 15 · 101% of median | 304 | 3.9 |
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 | 3 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 4863 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 100% of the irrigation seasons in 2000-2019 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.